Talk:Jeep Grand Cherokee

NPOV

Whereas someone put a NPOV mark on the article without substantiating said accusations on the talk page, I am removing the NPOV mark. It didn't seem reasonable to me anyway... --Mrcolj 22:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Copyright violation — and ugly, too

The image [[Image:Tech data for 5.jpg]], added in August 2006 by Auniqueid (Talk | contribs), evidently taken from Motor Trend magazine, appears to use the wrong license and may be a copyright violation. In addition, the large format of the image disrupts tables and text flow in the article, and is completely unnecessary, anyway. It's a poorly scanned, over-compressed JPEG image, not up to Wikipedia's graphics standards. The data in the table should be abstracted into a wikitable, making it much more readable and compatible with text in the article. —Quicksilver^{T @} 20:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

orvis edition section incomplete

the section about the 95-97 orvis edition seems to suggest that the only exterior color was hunter green. this is incorrect. there was a 1997 orvis edition that used the exterior color of "Light Driftwood Satin Glow". at a distance this color appears gray, but up close reveals a brownish tint to it. the factory striping on this model is two-tone, gold and violet. the internal colors are listed as "Spice/Moss Green", which is likely the same as the original author suggested. these additional color names come directly from the manufacturer window tag of a vehicle i still own.

Ewhite20 18:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Diesel engine available on 1993-1998 Grand Cherokee (ZG)

Don't forget the 2.5 liter 4 cyl diesel engine (manufactured by VM Motori S.p.A.) was also available (export only) on 1993-1998 Grand Cherokees 198.208.251.21 08:25, 11 February 2007 (UTC) type9602

And also, where are the 3.1 TD WJ Grand Cherokees? I own one, a Laredo version, but they are not mentioned in the engines list, just the 2.7 Mercedes engine that replaced the 3.1 one.Velimir85 16:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Orvis Edition: cleanup

I cleaned up "Orvis Editions", as it was a little messy. I added Light Driftwood in the list of available colours, but noted that they were less common (because, after all, they were). I left the interior colours alone, because they do a good job of describing them to the reader. It's a nice article over all...solid. 04:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)jon the dodgeboy

Grand Cherokee...leaving us?

I really hope they keep making this now Iconic Jeep. The Grand Cherokee has become a symbol of luxury and capability all rolled up into one. Very few come close to it. I've had a lot of SUVs..and these ones always come out on top as the best I've had. Jeep has being doing some weird this to the brand..including front wheel drive cars (the compas). I understand that the brand is trying to break ground in new segments, but they shouldn't forget loyal Jeep owners, who value the tradition and heritage associated with the brand.

Wrong width?

The WK is listed in this article as being 84.2 inches wide, but that seems wrong. The WJ, a similar size vehicle, is 72.3 inches wide, per this article. And, a Ford Explorer is a larger vehicle and listed on Wiki as being 73.7 inches wide. The Chevy Trailblazer is also a bigger vehicle, and Wiki shows that as being 74.7 inches wide. Could this 84.2 WK width figure possibly be 74.2 inches wide and a sleepy finger typed 84.2 instead of 74.2?207.69.139.145 06:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Incorrect picture caption

The picture of the silver Grand Cherokee that is captioned as "a 2008 Grand Cherokee" is incorrect. This is a 2005-2007 model, the 2008s have an updated front facia.199.76.182.110 17:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

This has since been fixed.199.76.182.18 (talk) 16:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Mid size? Full size?

Hi! I went to de Jeep dealerships and they all told me that Grand Cherokee is a Full size. They said that Liberty, Compass, Patriot and Commander are mid size, and Wrangler is a compact. Is this correct?--207.96.174.66 13:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

- would'nt think so. I would call the G. Cherokee mid sized, the Commander full sized (though still smaller than other full sizes like the Tahoe or Expedition, but it has a third row, G. Cherokee does not.), the Compass and the Patriot compacts, and the Liberty somewhere in its own league.128.163.7.129 (talk) 16:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

So you're saying that any 3-rowed seating SUV is a full-size?-- Vintei  talk  00:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, um, the Hummer H2 is indeed, a full-size, but is not capable of 3-row seating.--207.96.174.66 (talk) 18:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and the Chinese production website link is no more good. They are already building 2007 models. Check the pictures here. --207.96.174.66 14:38, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

It should be considered more of a full-size crossover in 2011. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.54.237.68 (talk) 06:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

WJ Chinese production

WJ is no longer built in China. I personally think that the section about it is no longer needed.-- Vintei  talk  13:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to disagree, but just because a certain model is no longer built in a particular place does not mean that describing this fact of history should be completely erased. In other words, Wikipedia is full of information about automobiles, things, people, ideas, etc. that no longer exist. That does mean all mention of these facts are "no longer needed" as a reference. Even this article contains data on vehicles, models, and engines that are no longer made. Please do not delete this material from the article, even though you may think it is not needed. Thanks — CZmarlin (talk) 17:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks.-- Vintei  talk  17:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

2004 facelift - image caption wrong?

Both of these WJ's have the clear blinker lights... either the "older" model has new headlights or the caption is wrong.

The facelift was the grille and bumper. notice the one on the left has round foglights, and the one on the right would have the almost-rectangular fogs (if it had any). I don't see anything wrong with the caption. Disturbed286 (talk) 17:53, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

WJ (1999–2004)

Someone needs to validate, but i dont think the Quadra-Drive II comes with three clutch pack (gerotors). That would be the Quadra-Drive itself. So the following paragraph is incorrect where it referenes Quadra-Drive II

"A notable feature available in this generation was the automatic four wheel drive option called Quadra-Drive II. With three viscous clutches, it was one of only a few four wheel drive systems at the time with triple locking differentals, joining the contemporary Mercedes Gelandewagen, Mercedes Unimog and Magna Steyr Pinzgauer, and the only one of the four with fully automatic operation, although the axle differentials could not be manually locked like in the other three vehicles." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.198.211 (talk) 05:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Native American Protest to Name

I believe that this article should include a section on how the Native American population has decried the use of the name Cherokee. It would provide a balanced article that does not only favor the white man. This is a reference I would like to cite. [1] ShamenWeb (talk) 20:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't mean to be negative or anything, but does one person's personal website necessarily mean that an entire population has decried the use of a name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.146.141 (talk) 05:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

so how come I see so many American Indians driving cherokees?

LOL, that's pretty funny! However it seems that guy's problem has little to do with Jeep using the Cherokee name as it does his own complete inability or laziness to properly utilize search engine keywords. He wants to see one thing come up before far many more popular references when he simply enters one major keyword. It's like saying I want my name, JOHN Smith, to come up first when entering the word Smith into a search engine. Not as if logic or reason dominate his thought processes, his favorite interest seems to be bashing the white man for perverting "his peoples'" history. History only available in the form of a few cave paintings and campfire stories before the white man (and his utilization of the written word)came along and helped him record it. On topic, Native Americans have rightfully protested the use of Indian names and terminology mainly on the basis of reinforcing or perpetuating negative stereotypes. (the "Tomahawk Chop" of the Washington Redskins football team a glaring example) The Grand Cherokee has no such offensive connotation and this is why the complaint seems so isolated. As said many Indians own them and since the Cherokee nation is held in high regard in their culture for their history, I'm sure you'd have more supporters than detractors of its use. As for "balancing the article" (from its bias toward the)"white man" well when Indians start producing their own SUV's we'll talk about equal time here. The Jeep Grand Cherokee and this article are not required to present an NPOV of the Cherokee people's history. Batvette (talk) 04:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

SUV status

I changed the class to crossover SUV because the Grand Cherokee has allways had unibody construction, but mainly because it was listed by the US back in 1994 as a crossover SUV. FeralLynX (talk) 00:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 Pictures

We have a need to upload some pictures of the new (2012) Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT-8 . 188.249.95.43 (talk) 18:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Fixed incorrect claim

Edited SRT8 information claiming to be the second fastest in the SRT lineup to third fastest as the SRT6 has proven to be consistently quicker (ranging between 12.8 and 13.1 stock) than all SRT vehicles other than the Dodge Viper. There is however a review from Car and Driver showing slower performance numbers. These were due to traction control being on during testing which greatly effected performance. (Anthony955 (talk) 21:36, 12 June 2011 (UTC))

2011 picture

I replaced the picture of the 2011 Grand Cherokee by one with a cleaner background. It has a "Jeëp" flag in the background and "Grand Cherokee" on the license plate. It's also a high quality picture. I thought these were some nice touches. --Rderijcke (talk) 23:00, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Fire Investigations

This section originally said that only 15 deaths resulted from instances where a Grand Cherokee crashed & caught on fire, but it was uncited, & I found a source that said there were 157 deaths reported, so I replaced the info. Also the cite for 93-01 models & 02-07 Libertys being affected was dead, so I put the same source for both. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abejorro97 (talk • contribs) 04:24, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Article Split

Since this article has exceeded 100K in size I propose that it is split due to size into four small articles Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ), Jeep Grand Cherokee (WJ), Jeep Grand Cherokee (WK), Jeep Grand Cherokee (WK2).VX1NG (talk) 15:19, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

• Semi-Support – I agree that it's time to split it up. However, I'm not so sure that four separate articles – one for each model – is the way to go just yet. Starting off with one secondary article to cover all models in detail will significantly reduce the main article. There's probably a lot of prose that can be taken out in the process and/or condensed into a model comparison chart. --GoneIn60 (talk) 12:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• Support - this article is getting too big and the separate generations will allow for inclusion of more details. Thanks! CZmarlin (talk) 22:20, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

• Support --Dana60Cummins (talk) 17:51, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Instead of just listing your support or opposition, please clarify how you believe the article should be split up. I think most will agree some sort of split needs to occur, but there may be a variety of opinions on how to do it. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:14, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I support any split that separates the IFS Jeeps from the solid axled Jeeps.--Dana60Cummins (talk) 18:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

How to resolve generation borderlines with model years and mfg. years

Okay, I'm having an issue correcting model years to only one generation or the other, because of manufacturing years. For example, the prose here says that one model was made through 1999, and the generation heading that's under says it ended in 1999. But then the next generation says that it started with the 1999 model (which would have started getting manufactured in 1998). Well, it's my understanding that generations are based on model years. But my confusion is that if they kept making the old style through 1999, then the 1999s belong in that old generation. Right? But then the next generation thing says that it started with the change in styles with the 1999 model! How does that work?

174.23.100.137 (talk) 09:52, 11 December 2015 (UTC)