bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

(eating popcorn)...

Reaper21 - i have a '15 JGC Summit and love it. near 7k mi. so far and all good.

it's very luxurious and also quiet and smooth. even has built in noise cancellation.

jeep is not a luxury brand but the jgc is DEFINITELY luxurious. the new lx570 refresh will finally catch up to the features on my jgc.

about the 4runner, was just in a client's new one. it rides nice but the interior looks like something made of lego or something else out of toys r' us. fugly and cheap looking.

SW17LS

I agree...shockingly bad.

The big win for the Jeep is value. I drove EVERYTHING remotely comparable, because after the annoying issues with my 2011 I wanted to buy something else but I came to the conclusion that nothing offers the style, package, quality interior, ride and drive, and capability of the Jeep for even remotely similar money. If you drive a 4 Runner, or an Explorer, or an RX, or an RDX, or a Pathfinder, or even a Land Rover LR4, QX60 or a GX...they are just nowhere near as polished and as solid as the Jeep, nor do they have the same feature set. You have to go to say a ML, or an X5, or a Cayenne (or I assume a Macan, haven't seen one) to get something thats as solid, well finished inside, capable, and well equipped as an Overland or Summit Jeep, and you're at a price point of $70k+, while I paid $42.5k for my $49k sticker Overland.

So, I rolled the dice and got another one, and that was was really a joy. Like I said, I miss it.

My0gr81

or as tronald dump would say "brand *****s".

OK, the profanity filters kicked in, but it rhymes with wares.

Reaper21

iTrader: (1)

It's not so much the aesthetics and what the Jeep offers that I'm concerned with (it's an A+ to me in those departments), it's the long-term reliability that concerns me. This car will more than likely exceed 100k miles and the only brands I am truly comfortable with doing that are Toyota and Honda (Lexus/Acura).

Right now I'm cross-shopping a 2014 CPO JGC with a 2012 CPO Acura MDX Tech. Same price/mileage but obviously the JGC has more amenities and is sportier. But the MDX is ahead in terms of reliability piece of mind. And I do like the MDX, just not quite as much as the JGC.

SW17LS

If the most important thing to you is long term reliability, and thats more important than the other benefits of the Jeep, without a doubt get the Acura. Thats a given with the Acura, and its a ? for the Jeep, as nice as the Jeep is.

Jeep does offer a lifetime warranty just FYI, its not terribly expensive either.

Aron9000

I'd buy the Jeep still, 100k miles isn't a ton. Now if you were going to roll it over to 200k, then definitely the Acura.

Toys4RJill

Have you looked at a limited Highlander? IMO, the IRS of the Jeep and the size lines up nicely with the HL limited. Not sure if the Jeep is RWD based as I don't pay too much attention to the Jeep brand. I would argue that the Highlander has a nicer interior I would not pay the asking price of most Jeeps.

SW17LS

The Jeep is a RWD based vehicle.

Interior on the Highlander is nowhere near as nice as even a Limited GC, definitely not an Overland or Summit. I drove several new Highlanders. Nice vehicle, but very different.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

Highlander has a (small) third row if it matters, and certainly drives nice but otherwise isn't close. Doesn't have led tail lights even or hid's or front parking sensors or many other features.

pbm317

Highlander, while nice, simply cannot match the level of luxury provided by the top Grand Cherokee trims.

With seemingly such little exposure to actual vehicle evaluation, I don't know how you can "argue" that one is better than the other.

LexBob2

I guess some people just like to argue...About anything.

Fizzboy7

I've tracked SUV reliability in depth for several decades and the JGC is almost always scoring low. Specifically, major safety recalls seem to be a chronic habit. I'd say if you are okay with that, have a warranty, and do not plan to keep it after, you'd probably weather ownership well. I personally would not choose one due to the safety concerns, but it does score highly in everything else.

mmarshall

One thing, though, on both the Highlander and JGC is that they have enough ground clearance that front parking-sensors shouldn't be much of an issue. They sit high enough that you are not as likely to scrape the lower front bodywork on parking-lot curbs as with some other types of vehicles.

As far as LED and HID lights go, I'm not sure that they are really worth the added cost they add to vehicle production. My Verano, for instance, has projector-beam halogens up front (that classic blue ring you see on many Buick headlights), and I've never had any night-vision problems with them. Xenons or HIDs would have just added to the price.

TangoRed

I've never thought front park sensors to have that as their main purpose. There's been many, many other situations where they've helped out in a manner that's independent of vehicle height.

I think it'd be hard to argue that any vehicle for sale today would cause night-vision problems due to poor headlight design (Jeep Wrangler excepted, woof). For me, it's a matter of being spoiled once you repeatedly own cars with good HIDs/LED's. I love it when the active HID/LED (depending on the car) headlights and cornering lights on my cars work together to give me more output than I truly need.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

but front parking sensors aren't really about curbs as much as they are walls, posts, other cars, etc. high clearance won't help there.

spoken like a toyota bean counter. it's 2015, they should at least be an option or included in the highest level trim on a highlander which is not exactly a cheap vehicle.