... AWD passat wagon. not a high performance car indeed not a Porsche, but far more practical than the SRT.

my favorite car is a motorcycle

ANY vehicle can be modified to toss in a bigger engine and Brembo brakes. Big deal. Come on, a 4500+ pound, live-axle rear suspension vehicle with good handling? You must be joking!!! This is the wrong platform for the SRT group to be wasting their time trying to improve.

If total vehicle performance is the goal, then a G. Cherokee is simply not going to cut the mustard -- it is not the best of both worlds, but a prime demonstration of how a high horsepower engine can blind drivers into believing that they have a more capable machine. At best, this is a gas-guzzling all-weather touring sedan that might surprise Mustang drivers at stoplights. This vehicle has no off-road capability, nor is it equipped to handle twisty roads, let alone an occasional track day. It's based on a chassis that is not renowned for lateral stiffness, its rear suspension is not capable of putting down the power on a tight road course, and it is more expensive to own and operate than many wagons that deliver the same utility. Want a sporty all-rounder? What's wrong with Dodge's own Magnum SRT, an Allroad, or a turbo Subaru wagon? Or if depreciation is so bad on a Touraeg, Cayenne or X5, why wouldn't you seek out a gently used one? It will keep up with the SRT in almost all real-world conditions, and they are vastly superior in ameneties and build quality.

@jjj7088: My friend's Grand Cherokee must not be a good example of DCX's finest work. When it's not in the shop with transmission issues, the driver information center display is flashing some electrical error message, and the squeaks and rattles are as bad as any vehicle i've experienced. He finally replaced it with an AWD PassNo, it is indeed not a Porsche.

my favorite car is a motorcycle

Yes, it's 4800 pounds, but how much did a 1964 Lemans weigh? And did it have AWD, power everything, airbags, etc? Hell, nowadays an S2000 weighs almost 3,000 pounds, so I'm surprised this weighs so *little*..

Anyway, I like it, any vehicle that so clearly puts performance before any concern for "making sense" makes me smile.

dculberson

A Cayenne is a polished turd, yes, but a Caliber is just a turd.

brandegee

Jimboz

JayP71

racerx

Of course its not for auto-snobs, thats why i like it.

Go ahead and pay premium prices for a 'premium' brand. Ill take bang for the buck.

I couldnt care less about how the dash pad feels or if the buttons 'look' cheap. In fact, you could throw the whole interior away, and it would make the car better. and faster

danio3834

The one thing about the Super Cherokee is that it's supposed to be the fastest vehicle Chrysler sells with the 6.1, just because it's actually able to get the power to the ground, unlike the LX cars.

As for comparing this to the Trailblazer SS, the Jeep has the better looking interior, and a bit of a performance edge, but I'd lean towards the Trailblazer being the better one to live with (it makes some nice burbly noises, I know that much).

Maymar is convinced M.C. Escher engineered his car

@Unregular: No, it's not and that's dumb to say. It's for the same people that admired the Syclone and the Typhoon, which is a group that includes me.

Jimboz

jdepould

I never meant to make an argument about how this is actually a practical vehicle, but if you're going take the auto-snob position that this is for "ugly fat people" or take some auto-snobbish position about how a Porsche is way better, I may take issue.

This is certainly not a rational choice to make, but most sports cars would be far less rational. You pay more for incrementally more performance that you'll never use (unless you spend a lot of time on the track), while sacrificing people/cargo capacity (among other things).

Would I buy one? Probably not (although I'd consider it if it could tow), but I'd rather have 2 of these than any Porsche. I'd be all over an SRT 300 or Magnum if they would put a proper 6 speed in there (again over a Porsche). I've never met a Porsche owner that I liked.

Mad_Science

drewheyman

JJ7088 - it's Porsche, not Porch

and this "car" is for fat, ugly people.

Unregular

jjj7088

the general has not done performance right since the '87 Grand National/GNX ... those were real cars done right. with real upgrades, that translated into real value and resale.

and BTW, a full blown grand cherokee (non SRT) lists for almost $46k ... the SRT version starts at $39,900 ... yep, its less expensive.

jjj7088

there are tons of vehicles that give more utility than any srt, but thats not what we are talking about here. performance for the buck. the srt line delivers.

and one last thing, take any srt with 40k on the odo, and a cayenne with the same ... see which one squeeks and rattles more. my money is with the Porche ...

also, we do make a srt version of the magnum ...

jjj7088

SwatLax

Of course, SRT rides aren't about being rational to begin with. As far as off-track performance goes, you'll get a lot more utility and bang/buck along with your performance with something like this over typical sportscar.

Mad_Science

Really, $40k is getting into the range where you can get a jeep if you need one and a small sports car, and do the speed, style, passenger thing more competently -- maybe not quite there, but pretty close. Kind of odd too, because a V8 Grand Cherokee is fast enough for daily driving as it is...

drewheyman

casualrdt

powerglide

Comrade Teargaskov

Raddy21

Saboth

HDC

Mad_Science

There are plenty of us that would rather have crappy plastic and another $15-30k in the pocket. A jeep with a gonzo engine was never meant to be a premium vehicle.

This is a 1 pound hamburger with a cheap beer, and you're complaining that it's not a steak dinner with a $30 glass of wine.

Mad_Science

That said, I kinda want an SRT8. Any model.

Mike, how bad was the fuel mileage?

Seth L

[www.youtube.com]

ZeGerman

It's not that Chrysler products aren't exciting, it's just that ... well, you said it yourself: they're CHEAP! Offering inexpensive high-performance engines only takes place when the rest of the car has been whittled down to save pennies on every cheap piece of plastic. It shows. If you use a vehicle on a daily basis, liveability and durability is more important than 0-60 acceleration time.

This SRT adds excellent suspension and brake upgrades, and the gas-guzzler engine has more than enough go-power, but some of us require more refinement. This is not a Porsche -- not even close. Fit an finish, not to mention resale value, keep Chrysler from commanding a premium market position. And it's not inexpensive -- a Yukon gives the family more practicality for the same amount of money.

Performance? A 4800 pound vehicle that is a tight fit for 5 people makes me wonder why Chrysler bothered. Wouldn't a Magnum wagon be a better option for someone who cares about performance?

This is one more reason why Chrysler continues to flounder -- it makes "exciting" products that not enough people are willing to buy. And yes, for those who prefer overkill vehicles, the Cayenne Turbo will put this thing to shame -- without the creaks and rattles or having to submit oneself to substandard treatment at the local DCX dealer (although, JJJ7088, I'm sure you're a dealer far above average).

my favorite car is a motorcycle

jdepould

jjj7088

2trips