Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Jeep Commander

1235713

Comments

  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Justin, believe me, I am very concerned about the problems that will come with the Land Rover or the Jeep. My 1999 Grand Cherokee Limited had to have the drivetrain replaced, not once, but twice and the air never was strong enough. Both the '96 and '99 Jeeps had to be towed during ownership. So far, my Mercedes has never left me stranded and has started perfectly every time.

    My brother has a 2003 Land Rover Discovery II with about 38,000 miles and has had not one problem but a nail in the tire (twice). He loves it.

    Sometimes, these forums tend to attract people who tell horror stories and sometimes it's hard to tell if they are totally true or not.

    Also, I will not buy the Commander or the Land Rover without a nice discount.

    Mark (a kid at 47) ;)
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Dear Take.....

    I think it is funny when people say they "Smoked" another SUV...and the point? They are SUV's, not race cars. A friend of mine bought a new RR Phantom with a V12 engine, I don't think he will be using it to smoke anybody although he probably could.

    I am still in the comparison stage of the Commander and LR3... also the Volvo XC90. All of these vehicles are competitive in their own way.

    But, when you say that the ergonomics are ridiculous for the LR3, I don't quite see it that way. The window switches are in the top ledge of the driver's door, that doesn't seem like a problem to me. I have not driven the vehicle yet and will after Thanksgiving.

    Also, the LR3 completely loaded was $55,000 and the Commander is $44,000, that is not "wildly" overpriced. The LR3 is larger and has better thought out interior and use of space. The discount would narrow that margin because I would think that the discount might be larger on the LR3. The wood for the dash is an option and looks nice from the picture that I saw in the brochure.

    And please, don't compare a Ford to anything. :sick:

    If I buy the Commander, I know I will enjoy it but I'm just trying to compare all of the SUV's in that class.

    Just my dollars worth of an opinion (.02 adjusted for inflation)... Mark :)
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    Be careful about using the word "smoked". I got pinched by HOST earlier today when replying to your post. The Range Rover Sport is a waste of time. What they callit is the Cayenne fighter or the Bimmer AMG challenger. It doesn't even compare to none of them. The Benz,Bimmer,Porsche and even my Commander will out pace it, and yes that is in Supercharged mode. With regular 4.4L motor, it takes 8.9 seconds to get to 60, way to slow.

    I do agree that the LR3 is hugely overpriced for what you get. Adjustable air-suspension? Big deal. High seat postion? Wasn't that much higher than my Commander. Off-Road? I'll be fair and say they'll each break each others axles, it's just that Commander gets done much simpler and with much less aggrivation, much the same on-road.
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    I wouldn't hold my breath on a "nice" discount on a V-8 LR3. Just today I was talking to a guy who works for Land Rover North America and he says that you could get about $3-4k off of a V-6 but expect to pay about $1K over invoice on a V-8, especially fully loaded HSE models. I wanted to get a second opinion, so I drove to a local Land Rover dealer and the best deal that was being offered was $500 above invoice.

    At last check(2-weeks ago), Buerge Jeep in SoCal had a Commander on the lot that listed for $45K(dealer added Satellite TV, a useful tool, I got it on mine from DC) They were willing to let it go for about $36.5k after DC and dealer discounts. So if you're only going to buy if you get a sizeable discount, then Commander is your choice.

    As for the Volvo, just 2 days ago(Friday), Volvo issued another recall for it's V-8 models because of ECM and powertrain failures. This comes after the brake failure recall about 2 weeks ago. You sure you wanna go this route?

    You're a big Merc fan. You mentioned that you don't understand why SUV's would be "smoking" each other. Then why has Merc in the past built ML55 AMG's? And now in the first quater of next year they'll be rolling out the new ML6.3's that are supposed to give the Cayenne Turbo S a run for the money. Jeep is jumping on the wagon with its soon to be released SRT-8 JGC that will run neck and neck with the ML.

    This is a huge market now. Every manufacture has to get on board or get left in the dust.

    Just 10-years ago, everyone thought Ford was crazy for inventing the Lightnin'. Now Dodge owns that segment in pick-ups. There will always be a performance niche in the American car market.
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Blkhemi..(Justin), I won't be paying over MSRP or even near it for a Land Rover for my next vehicle... so, count me in on the Commander!!!!

    I'm not "into" racing my SUV so I wouldn't buy the Mercedes AMG's or any other brand that is high performance for the purpose of racing. It's fine if you or "take" likes them, it's not what I am looking for. The only reason I considered the 5.7 HEMI was that it got the same gas mileage as the 4.7. So, I thought why not get the bigger engine of the same gas mileage?

    I like reading everyone's experience, so keep writing!

    Mark
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • taketheoffertaketheoffer Member Posts: 26
    Thank's for the head's up. I woke up this morning to an email to find out about my message getting the "pinch". My appologies. Perhaps, that just a little too much enthusiasm. In fairness, New York driving requires a level of "confidence" to merge... quickly. I appoligize for any other unintentional reference.

    Speaking of enthusiasm, in the end that's what its all about. Passion. Otherwise we would all be driving a Prius.

    Buy what you like. But test them all. The Volvo could be a good choice. The MDX would probably be worth a look too.
    I would recommend to test drive everything you can get your hands on. I would even recommend you drive the ML. By driving all vehicles across a class (even gasp... "crossovers") you can truly appreciate all the features offered at all levels.

    In the end the Commander was my choice. I felt it offered the most useful options, performance and power (at most price ranges) and is unwavering and unapologetic. It offered confidence and wasn't quirky. It may not be for everyone. And that's OK.
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    I live in both SoCal and in Long Island(Oyster Bay), so I know what "confidence" it takes to merge on the L.I.E. or the F.D.R. or the B.Q.E. You do need the HEMI to get the job done.

    NO apologies needed for the term you used. We New Yorkers get very excited when expressing ourselves. I know what you meant when you said sm****.

    All in all , the Commander is just fine by me.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,250
    about power and off road capability, then the comander may be for you.
    if you care about anyone in the 2nd or 3rd row, forget it, unless they are all under 5 feet max. even my kid said just get the gjc if you want to seat 5 normal sized people. i guess that not yet finished high school education is paying off. lr3, not much better (3rd row). '06 explorer off my list too (3rd row). :surprise:
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Explorerx4, I noticed how tight the Jeep Commanders second and third row. My Mercedes ML500 is very roomy in the 2nd and 3rd row compared to the Commander.

    I'm almost thinking of waiting for the 2007 Cadillac Escalade that will come out in March. The look of the interior is very nice looking and completely changed. This is a "slight" consideration. I figure if I'm looking at a vehicle with 14 city MPG... that the full size SUV is right there with the Jeep, Volvo and Land Rover.

    Mark :)
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    most owners and auto journalist who tested the Explorer and ML found the 3rd row seat "insufficient" for adults, right along with the Commander.I've sat in all and no way was this 6'3 frame "comfortable" back there, especially the rock hard bench in the Explorer and the leather-look but vinyl-covered Merc. Only full size SUV's and most minivans can "comfortably" haul adults in the 3rd row.

    I'll give credit where credit is due. The LR3 comes very close to duplicating the room of full size models, give or take a couple of inches. But the Dodge Durango bests ALL midsizers(wonder why they call the Durango "mid-size"?) and even some full-size, the Sequoia/Land Cruiser and Armada/QX 56. So if the sole purpose of buying any of these vehicles is for 3rd seat room, then yes I'd cross shop the full size models.

    GM has promised that not only will the Escalade beat all domestic makes in interior fit/finish and quality, but Infiniti, Land Rover,Merc, and Toyota/Lexus will fall behind in build quality, powertrain, and interior materials. It all remains to be seen. The interior is of very good quality and the 400hp 6.2L V-8 with 6-speed automatic is sure to leave a print.
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Justin, you are wrong about the ML... the third row is comfortable for a full size adult... I've had mine for almost four years and adults are just about the only people that have sat back there (accept my young nephews/nieces on occasion). The second row will slide forward for additional leg room for the third row. The ML has a foot well where the Commander does not. Of course, that doesn't mean beans since the new ML doesn't offer a third row anymore.

    I rented a Dodge Durango this summer to take my nieces and nephews to Six Flags at St. Louis. I didn't need the third row and let me tell you, it's not for adults. My ML has a much better third seat offering. The DVD entertainment was nice in the Durango.. didn't expect that.
    The Durango needs rear bumper sensor indicators badly.

    Mark
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • sbyrumsbyrum Member Posts: 7
    Has anyone seen the Jeep commercial offering 2 yrs. maintenance and gas plus a 100,000 mile warranty on the Commander? When I mentioned the $1500 cash off, the dealer acted like he didn't know about it - wanted to know where I got that info. I'll be purchasing soon and I want to have all my 'ducks in a row' before I buy. Everything in writing. The dealership here in Jacksonville,FL does not seen to be giving the same deals I have been reading about in this forum. Maybe I should wait another couple of weeks.
  • melvinpmelvinp Member Posts: 10
    RE: The $1500, Jeep itself is giving this.... see website

    Jeep Web Site for incentives
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    That $1500 rebate is good until the end-of-the-year. That along with the scheduled maintanence and free gas for 2 years.

    Moreover, I wouldn't buy any SUV-especially domestic, without a sizeable discount. This is the last of the year and I've heard of three different Commander buyer's in three different sections of the country(one down your- South FLA.) and they've gotten some serious deals. So shop around.

    FYI, that rebate is posted on Jeeps website.
  • taketheoffertaketheoffer Member Posts: 26
    The new Chrysler Freedom Plan. This may be offered in leiu of a deal but should be a great negotiating tool. Let us know how it goes...

    http://www.jeep.com/freedom/
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    The Merc's 3rd seat has 37.7" of rear legroom(despite the foot well) and 38.4 inches of headroom.

    The LR3's 3rd-seat has 39.6" of rear legroom and 40.2" of inches of headroom(despite the elevated roof)

    The Durango's 3rd-seat has 41.6" of rear legroom and 40.7" of headroom.

    So, no, I wasn't wrong or mistaken about the ML. The Durango Limited I looked at before I bought my Commander was exceptionally roomy. Didn't have a problem getting back there, no squeezing or grunting, or contortionist acts needed, unlike some of the others. I would've bought it but couldn't warm up to the looks.

    This is what just one of the automotive mags said about the 2004 ML500 2nd and 3rd-row seats:

    "Tall supportive cushion. Leg and foot room goes from good to tight as front seats slide rearward. OK access via low sills and adequately wide doors, Available 3rd-row seat strictly for tykes, and even they might feel squeezed getting into or out of its tight confines."
    CR-March 2004

    I happen to agree with them. Maybe yours was one of the few that are easy to access, but the ML500 my wife had in '02 was extremely tight back there, hence we had to get rid of it.

    P.S.- Don't get your Undies in a bunch. The Commander's review was worst than that.
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Justin, I stand corrected (looking for a new pair of undies). :P I didn't get in the third row of the Durango but the seat looked tiny and was a "one piece" seat.

    I'm surprised that you thought the ML seat was "extremely tight", it's not like a Yukon XL for sure, but considering the size of the ML, two adults do fine back there.

    The tightness of the third row of the Commander does have me concerned because when I do need it, I want my passengers to be comfortable.

    Mark :)
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • wlbrown9wlbrown9 Member Posts: 867
    If you're looking at 6-7 passenger SUV's don't forget to consider the Envoy XL types. The 3rd row seat will handle 2 - 6'1 adults. I would not want to ride 500 miles back there, but it is confortable enough for a couple of hours. We have the I6, 2WD...don't off-road. I would imagine the upper-end (was the SLT trim in 2004) model with V8 and 4wd would be competive with the Commander pricing. Personally I would spend $1200-$1500 and get extended factory warranty (5y/90-100K mile) on either of them.

    Just my opinion :-).
  • sbyrumsbyrum Member Posts: 7
    Just saw a commercial where a dealership here is offering employee pricing on all vehicles - including the Commander. Ballpark, what can I expect this amount to be?
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,250
    don't let the stats fool you. i had my kids try out all the 3rd rows. only 1 was better, the navigator. kids wanted the escalade, until i had them try out the 3rd row.
    i do love those front row caddy seats, though.
    in the commander, 2nd and 3rd rows were cramped for my kid, who is about 5'7". lr3 was a bit better in 3rd row, no complaints from 3nd row.
    don't me wrong, the jeep has great mechanicals, it just isn't passenger friendly.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    Depends on what model you're getting.
    Here's an example:

    A fully loaded Commander Limited 5.7L HEMI 4X4 is roughly $44K. With employee pricing, it should come in at about $40K. However, even then I wouldn't purchase it for that price. Try to get somewhere around $36-$38K before making the plunge.
  • cportercporter Member Posts: 2
    Here's a little more detail on real 'employee' pricing these days at DCX, based on my recent purchase experience. Note that I am not an employee nor am I a relative of the guy who got me my employee discount number. Blkhemi's example sounds right-on.

    If you have a friend/relative who will get you a control number, you can get true employee pricing, PLUS whatever incentives are out there currently. With number in hand, your salesperson can simply print out an invoice and find the employe price listed at the bottom for the particular vehicle. I'm sure there's plenty of smoke/mirror action even at that level, so anyone who can shed more light on how this works I'd appreciate it.

    Be aware that employees have access to two kinds of numbers. One is a 'friends' sort of number that only gets you about 1% below invoice. The good number is the 'Employee Choice' number and gets you 4-5% below invoice. The retiree who helped me said he only gets two EC numbers each year.

    Again, both are in addition to whatever incentives are out there for the general public, so I'm assuming you'd also get the currently-offered debit card for around 2400 for gas, etc. (Of course, you could go buy a TV with it instead...)

    In my case, my Commander's MSRP + 6% MI tax was just over $36K, and with the good-guy EC number and the then-offered $1500 incentive (that ended 10/30/05) I got the truck for just over $30K OTD, a deal I was happy with. Of course, with the discount based on the MSRP, the higher the MSRP the higher the discount.

    Even if you don't have the EC number, it may help to calculate out what an employee would pay and see how close you could get to that number. I see truckful after truckful of Commanders and JGCs leaving Detroit as I drive downtown to work each day, so I think they must be motivated to get some out there on the streets for people to see and want...

    Craig
    Dearborn, MI
  • kausekause Member Posts: 1
    Wow thats a good deal any idea how I could get a hold of one of those extra EC numbers. I have been researching a purchase and I thought I was doing good with the "friends" prefered pricing but with EC is the way to go. I just read too on the employees website that the deadline has been extended till the end of the year and that it extends to family and friends.
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    DC also rolled out an additional $1000 November Cash today.
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    my local dealer to pick up a Commander brochure, with the intent of driving one after T-day...reading the catalog, I see 3 types of drive trains, Quadra-Trac I, Quadra Drive I and II...reading the catalog descriptions, they are all basically AWD, with some having the choice of a low range...I remember my Dad's CJ5 (yes, I know this is not a CJ5) with a 4WD chassis, but it ran in 2WD until you wanted to engage the 4WD, and then you had the choice of hi or lo range...later, my friend's GM Blazer had a "4WD switch on the fly", meaning you could just engage 4WD with a dashboard switch, rather than jumping out and engaging the Warn hubs...

    I want a vehicle with 4WD on the fly, but designed to ride normally in 2WD...I just do not want an AWD vehicle, and the Commander and JGC only offer AWD with their Quadra-whatevers...

    Can anybody list for me some of the SUVs that have the type of 4WD I want???...this is frustrating...even the Mountaineer has AWD, not 2/4WD...what gives???...if I wanted AWD I would get an Audi A6... :confuse: :cry: :confuse:
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Bob.... just an opinion.... but, I like AWD because you just might be driving on a cold winter night and before you know it you might be driving on solid ice that you didn't expect to be there (maybe a water main broke?). AWD will make you feel totally in control.

    A long time ago... this was hilarious.... my twin brother and I (age 17 at the time) were driving a hand-me-down 1966 Mercury Comet, 2dr, automatic, on an icy night home from work (restaurant). As we drove over some railroad tracks near our house, the Mercury bounced over the tracks making a complete 360 degree turn and then straighten itself out and we proceeded forward.... at first, I'm sure we had expressions on our faces like "deer in headlights", :surprise: we then burst out laughing because we couldn't believe we didn't run off the two lane icy road.

    I LIKE AWD!

    Mark
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    Thanks for the opinion...somehow, I find myself in a quandary...I cannot argue with your reasons for AWD, as they are valid, esp for the reasons you gave...yet, I find myself still wanting what I described...

    Howeve, your post has given me pause (not paws, as in a dog or cat, but pause, as in a reason to reconsider my logic)...in fact, I am beginning to appreciate your post the more I think about it...

    You may change my mind...I just assumed that vehicle in constant AWD will use more gas as you are driving more wheels, and I also wonder if you can still drive 70 or 80 on the freeway with an AWD vehicle...

    But, the possibility of ice does exist here in GA, esp in Jan or Feb, where the temps do go below freezing, and sometimes below zero...

    Again, thanks for that thoughtful post...my steadfastness for my type of 4WD is wavering... :surprise: :surprise:
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Bob, also, AWD is good for when it is raining on wet oil covered Georgia roads.... if you run into heavy surface water, AWD will help with hydro-planing.

    Mark :) Just my dollars worth (.02 adjusted for inflation)

    PS. My AWD Mercdes ML500 has no problem going well over 100 and, yes, AWD probably does use a couple of drops of gas more but it's well worth it to me.
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    articles on economics, and, nowhere does it state that the dollar has depreciated 98% since 1971, when we went off the gold standard...I believe 65% is more like it...so, you do not have to offer your dollar's worth, but a little over a half a buck would be reasonable... ;) :shades:

    Thanks again...I just hate it when I enter a topic with well-formed, highly-thought-out opinions that are solid as a rock, and then are blown away by someone else's thoughts...how will I ever impress everyone that I know everything when this happens to me...I thought I was immortal...oh, wait...it was Apollo who was immortal in Star Trek, not me... ;););)

    P.S. Mark, don't you have anything better to do than sit up this late and post on an Internet forum?..:):):)
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Bob, I'm in a hotel room with the fastest internet connection.... I use dial-up at home and this is amazing.

    Getting together with a bunch of friends for a good Thanksgiving dinner tomorrow. I'm just being lazy tonight reading here on Edmunds and watching TV... I'm on Pacific time so it's not too late.

    Happy Thanksgiving to all! Mark
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    I hope you have a good T-day, along with the rest of Edmunds posters...

    But, assuming you have convinced me of the advantage of the AWD, I now need help...a Commander, if I was to get one (or a JGC for that matter) with V8 can come with either Quadra Trac II or Quadra Drive II, with Quadra Drive II being the "higher option"...I read the descriptions of both, but still do not understand the difference between them... :confuse: :confuse:

    Can anyone explain the difference between them to me???

    Thanks.

    Bob
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Bob, I'm going to take a stab at what I think the differences that are between the Quadra track II vs. Quadra drive II.

    After reading the explanations on the Jeep website, both systems are AWD. Quadra Track II has the ability to transfer power from side to side. In other words, you will have traction on at least two wheels at all times during slippery situations.

    With Quadra drive II, the system has the ability to send power to just one wheel (the wheel that has traction).

    That's the way I understand it. Maybe someone else will chime in to give their opinion.

    Mark :shades:
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    If you are correct, I wish I had your abilities at English comprehension... :D :shades: ...reading the catalog, I just could not figure out what you have so eloquently explained...power to one wheel, or power to one side...

    (You know there had to be a followup)...now, do they both have hi and lo range, or only one of them???

    Lastly, and now I am getting nitpicky (no, I am ALWAYS nitpicky)...is Quadra Drive II, which transfers power to just one wheel, a reliable system, or do its electronics and its complexity make it just "one more thing to break"...in other words, is it worth having, or more headache than Q-Trac II, because of the electronics???...this may be the same system on the JGC, so I am sure folks have had experience with it...
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Bob, to answer your first question, it appears that they both have low range for the Quadra Track II and Quadra Drive II. The Quadra Track I with the 3.7 engine does not have low range from what I read on the website.

    I had a 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited with Quadra Drive. I think this was the first year for Quadra Drive and I had the same concerns as you. I didn't want a new system without the bugs being worked out. At the time, I was looking for a certain color combination (grey metallic/agate leather) and this unit had everything including Quadra Drive vs. Quadra Track , so I went for it.

    The system on the '99 had low range and was AWD at all times. Quadra Drive would send power to the wheel/wheels that had traction. In the early years, ESP, LMNOP ??? LOL! ...were not in the Jeep line that year.

    The Quadra Drive worked great but the drive train had to be replaced twice. The rear axle mechanism would bind up which made it vibrate severely when in reverse. Everything was repaired under warranty but I still could hear a slight whine at highway speeds (not really a problem).

    I would hope to think that after 6 years of using this system that Jeep has perfected Quarda Drive and it's suppliers to have a 4x4 system that works flawlessly (lets hope). Maybe that's why they call it "Quadra Drive II". Hopefully, the "II" means something!

    Mark :D
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    Again, thanks...since we are sitting here on T-day, I believe we need to get a life!!!

    Actually, I am killing time until early afternoon, when we have been invited to my brother's home in Marietta, GA for turkey...

    I believe you said you were currently on the west coast, so it is only 8:45 where you are...

    My SUV thoughts seem to be narrowed to Commander, Grand Cherokee, Explorer/Mnteer, and upcoming 2007 Santa Fe...I want to do this right, since if I buy one, I do not want another car for 250K miles, or about 10 years worth of driving...my wife has her 04 Ram 1500 Hemi, and, at 10K miles yearly, I am expecting it to last a decade...I want the same for me, if possible...oh, did I remember to say that I want my SUV to get 25 city/35 highway???..:):):)

    I will now sign off until later...
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,250
    the local word from hemi ram owners in ct is 9 mpg.
    maybe the commander is twice as good.
    i have exceeded the epa highway mileage in every vehicle i have owned. i do have to make an exception. my old mustang is listed at 26 on the highway, but the best i have done is a bit under 25.
    i guess the gadget discussion is over since no new ones have been posted. too bad, i have a bunch more. ;)
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • gearjammer62gearjammer62 Member Posts: 108
    read this in a review today re the 3rd row seat...

    "...Because the Commander is built with the same distance between the axles as the Grand Cherokee, and is a scant two inches longer over all, the truck's solid rear axle intrudes on passenger space in the way-back.

    Even with the third-row seat set so high, the Commander has less legroom than a kindergarten desk. Children's friends can pile into the back for a trip to the mall, but forget any notions of third-row cross-country treks. The ride over dips and potholes is bouncy even in the driver's seat; in the back, it feels like a school bus on speed bumps...Prices start at $27,985 for the basic rear-drive model but rise to $38,900 for the Commander Limited with four-wheel drive. That's $6,000 more than a similarly equipped Explorer Limited.

    It is also almost the same as an existing Chrysler S.U.V., the Dodge Durango Limited, that has a real third row and a less ungainly appearance.

    If the Commander proves anything, it is the depths of desperation the division felt to get a model with two extra seats. Jeep wanted a third row in the worst possible way, and it pretty much got one. Almost."


    No thanks!
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    Do you care to specify the the person(s) for writing such a untrue review? Which mag was it?

    BTW, what type of SUV do you drive if you own one?

    The Dodge Durango with "a less ungainly appearance"? Well that alone loses crediablility. The Durango is more polorizing than the Commander, despite its blocky shape.

    And you said the Commander is a full $6K more than a fully loaded Explorer Limited. Was this before or after Ford incentives? Because at last check, the fully loaded '06 Explorer's $43,801.89 price tag is not something to boast about. That's a far cry from $6k, at the most a couple hundred bucks.

    We all know that Jeep could've done a better job with the 3rd-row seat. So could Ford. So could Acura. So could Volvo. SO could Toyota and so on.

    If all you have on the Commander is the skimpish 3rd-row, then you have nothing at all. Next time, quote a more crediable source.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Here's the link:

    2006 Jeep Commander: A Looming Case of Hummer Envy (NY Times)

    Steve, Host
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    I read the review, and my question is why didn't you type it in whole and just not all the negative parts? Have you read Edmunds own review of the Commander? It's more in line with what's real and what's someone vendetta against one of the most capable SUV's on the marketplace today, 3rd-row seat not withstanding.
  • gearjammer62gearjammer62 Member Posts: 108
    If you would have taken the time to notice before knee-jerk reacting, the very first line in my post said is was specifically only going to be about the 3rd row seat - in reply to post # 220 titled "At last Check..." which specifically commented on the issue of the 3rd row seat. Take a look at it.

    The excerpt I copied was verbatim from the article as it regarded the 3rd row seat. There are no positive comments re: the 3rd row in my post, because there were no positive comments about the 3rd row in the entire NYT article.

    No vendetta - ( that word's a tad paranoid, don't you think?) - just passing along a reviewer's comments - specifically regarding the 3rd row seat - exactly as I stated it was.

    Too bad you didn't like it.
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    Paranoid? That is what's happening in the SUV business right now because Jeep is currently selling more Commanders at more demand than supplies, despite it's "lacking" 3rd-row seat. Wish the same could be said about the Explorer, which has a 120 day supply, despite it's freshening for '06. Maybe that's why they're having to fire so many people at their SUV plants.

    Just wondering...... Why did you feel compelled to post half of a review and not all?

    I can remember when Ford redesigned the Explorer/Mountaineer for '02 specifically for it's 3rd-row capability. Well they boasted it to be very comfortable and versatile for adults. NOT. So what's different for the Commander?

    One thing is for sure. You can't carry adults comfortably for long distances in a 3rd row seat in a midsize SUV, no matter what the brand name is.

    I'll be waiting for you to post a review that's more whole-hearted and not some last ditch effort to slam what is otherwise a very good SUV

    (One that I do like preferably)
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The review paragraph was posted in direct response to a thread about the third row.

    The thing about having a discussion about a vehicle is that people get to comment on the good and bad points. If you don't agree with a post, you can certainly offer a counter opinion, but there's no need to make it personal.

    Steve, Host
  • mark156mark156 Member Posts: 1,915
    Hey Folks, I attended the San Francisco auto show yesterday and it was awesome. It gave me a chance to compare, yet once again, the Jeep Commander Limited, Volvo XC90 and the Land Rover LR3.

    Probably in about a week and a half, I'll be able to test drive my next potential SUV.

    When I was looking at the Commander, a gentleman that was also looking, flipped the second row seat and climbed into the third row. I looked in and said, "how does it feel back there? He said, "It's perfect if you are five years old". He was kidding of course because he was taller than me and was fitting in just fine (I'm 5'7"). I asked him how did he like the stadium seating and he said he didn't notice it until he sat back there and that it had a nice view and that he could see everything.

    I'm surely in agreement with Justin in that any mid-sized SUV is not going to have the largest third seat. I would say most people use them just on occasion as I would.

    After the Jeep I went to look at the Volvo and it's nice, the third seat seems a little more comfortable but I can't seem to get the second seat mechanism to work right; the opening seems awfully narrow trying to get in the third row. It seems easier to get in the Jeep. Also, the Volvo has very short sun visors.

    Lastly, I checked out the Land Rover LR3. The third seat has the most room as the previous 2 SUV's and is priced about the same as the Volvo but $10,000 more MSRP than the Commander. But, it does offer a few more items like second row heated seats, heated windshield (part of a package), adjustable suspension, etc.

    Like I said in many posts, I like to compare things fully before I jump on it. At this point, I'm leaning towards the LR3. The final decision will come at the test drive.

    Funny thing, I've not seen one Jeep Commander on the road yet (and I'm looking!) I am currently on a 1,000 mile road trip and keeping my eyes peeled to see all three of my choices driving on the road. I've seen more Bentley Continental Flying Spurs than Commanders. And getting a Bentley is rare as hens teeth! :P

    Mark :)
    2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
  • gearjammer62gearjammer62 Member Posts: 108
    And while we're on the subject of 3rd row seating, here is Car and Driver's capsule assessment of the Jeep Commander - word-for-word, no edting, no bias, no paranoia (bold emphasis mine):

    "Highs: Hemi power, near-perfect driving position, retro styling.

    Lows: Gun-slit windshield, dismal mileage, cramped third-row seat, numb steering.

    The Verdict: A 5263-pound Jeep Grand Cherokee with theater seating."

    And from Autoweek's review of 10/03/05:

    "...The interior is quite roomy (I really like the seats), though the seats in the way back are for kids only."

    and last , but certainly not least, from our good friends at Edmunds:

    "Pros: Three available engines, excellent off-road ability, balanced handling, simple controls
    Cons: Low-grade interior materials, minimal legroom for third-row seat, mediocre cargo capacity, poor gas mileage with the big V8s"

    Jeep built the Commander to offer a 3rd row seat - something no Jeep ever has offered. Unfortunately, the unanimous opinion from at least 4 professional automotive reviewers (so far) is that it is a basically a kids-only accomplishment. If someone can find a positive professional review commenting on the 3rd row seat, fine. I'd love to read it.

    I have no desire to water-down and cloud the shortcomings of the 3rd row seat with how nice the leather is, or shiny the paint looks. My issue is with the 3rd row and it's inferiority. Period. If you can't stand the criticisms of those who professionaly rate and review cars for a living, that's your problem.

    If an entity such as Edmund's writes a negative comment regarding a specific feature with a car, and other similar comments have been made by other professional sources, than I'm going to open-minded enough to ascertain that it truly should be an issue for me to consider, not get defensive, narrow-minded and lash out because they insulted my point of view (or a car that I just bought). And that's MY problem.
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    Car and Driver in that November issue picked the Commander OVER the Explorer, yet despite it's so called "shortcomings". Hmm.... let's see why?

    The Explorer
    Highs: Silent cabin, cushy ride, refined drivetrain, can tow 7300 pounds.

    Lows: Invisible styling, dilatory transmission kickdowns, misplaced throttle pedal, odd driving position.

    Verdict: Hugely improved but still the most cautious and mainstream of domestic SUV's.

    In other words, it's still such a bore. And as for the Explorer 2nd/3rd seat, here's something from one of the most respected reports in the U.S.(Consumer Reports):

    "Three adults can squeeze across in 2nd-row, where there's generous head room and better knee and foot room than in most midsize SUV's. However, seat divided into three segments, and each can feel narrow and confining. Third row seat cushion low to floor and pacncake flat, but headroom expansive. Leg space surprisingly scant in spite of it's large rear bay. Second -row seats tip foward in single, easy motion, but access to 3rd-row still for the YOUNG AND/OR LIMBER."
    CR-NOV. 2005

    As I've stated before, these SUV's intended purpose is being served well. The 3rd-seat is not meant for long travel in any midsize SUV's.

    This is a personal assessment and certainly not being inferior. This is the "opinion" of myself and all of the related "professional" sources who have taken the time to examine all of the issues at hand on these particular vehicles. This is not some slanted view about any SUV, unlike some that have been written as of late.

    This isn't meant to be taken personal or to be derogatory of ones "views". It is a forum, right?

    P.S.- The '06 Explorer Eddie Bauer 4X4 weighs 5,063 pounds WITHOUT theater seating, so the weight difference is an insignificant explanation for the Explorer's middling performance, 3rd row seat not withstanding(again).
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    of those reviews personally, but, as I consider a possible future purchase of an SUV, I appreciate quotes by the various readers here...as far as the Explorer being boring, I would disregard that remark...I really do not expect my SUV to be dashing and exciting, like a DTS or an A6...while it should look decent, I harldy consider the Commander exciting, altho I was very interested in it and still am so...however, aside from theater seating and extra sunroof panels, it does not seem noticeably different from the Grand Cherokee...I was hoping it would be noticeably larger, not just 2-3 inches...I do not need 3rd row seating, but I like the thought of cargo space for stuff and traveling pets...

    As far as the Explorer being boring, outside styling may be, but the floor shifter, IRS, and 292 HP V8 are major improvements to me...yes, I also know that the Jeeps have floor shifters, and their hemis are much more than Ford's 292 HP...but it now brings Explorer back into the competition, whereas without floor shifter and decent V8, I really could not consider it...also thinking of 2007 Santa Fe, when it is released...
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    Never said the Commander was "exciting". Exciting and SUV is the biggest oxymoron if there has every been one, no matter what type of SUV it is or how fast it goes, it is still a box on wheels(Yes this goes for the fast but undynamic Porsche, the overpriced Bimmer X5 and Range Rover Sport). The Commander is less claustrophobic than the JGC. That said, the glass panels and the theatre seating add to the airy feeling that the Commander imparts.

    About the Explorer being a bored and tired SUV, let's agree to disagree on that subject. The 292-hp V-8 that now resides under the hood of the Explorer is more than adequate to meet its needs. And it is a more cleaner, fuel efficient design due to it's trick 3-valve design that was trickled down from the 5.4L modular V-8 F-150.

    The Commander is a well executed design, being that it is based off the awesome JGC. I agree with all that the 3rd row is lacking, right along with most midsize SUV's. However, beyond that, few 3 row SUV's can touch it's performance on and off road in it's price range, regardless to what some auto journalist and comsumers say.
  • thusrtonpthusrtonp Member Posts: 23
    Puh-lease...if the only way you can attempt to showcase the Commander is to dredge up the Explorer, then you must be getting desperate. Fact is, C&D didn't like EITHER the Explorer or Commander very much. And what they did like about the Commander was more in the line of back-handed compliments:

    Quote" Overall, the Commander felt more connected to terra firma and was slightly more gratifying to drive than the Explorer — a little like saying one of the Bush twins parties slightly less than the other....Unless you're conducting some "difficulty eight" off-roading, neither of these SUVs is much fun."

    They liked the fact the Jeep had more horsepower than the Ford, then said " The downside is slightly jarring step-off and observed fuel economy of—whoa!—13 mpg. Stupid, dude. Marry a fat lady and you gotta buy her groceries."

    And..."Off-road, the unibody Commander proved an eager climber, mostly by dint of 375 pound-feet of "git 'er done. But its chassis evinced an unseemly number of shivers, wonks, clomps, and grunts as the suspension worked through its considerable travel. The Commander always complained that it was working harder than it was—including plenty of pushrod engine roar—while the Explorer just kept its mouth shut....At idle, at full whack, and at a 70-mph cruise, the Explorer proved less vocal than our Commander, a blessing on the boring freeway slog to the dunes...

    ...The Explorer's cargo capacity and rear seating also proved superior...In fact, the Explorer's ride surpassed the Commander's on every surface we sampled..."

    So, if you're trying to use the C&D Ford vs. Jeep article to prove the Jeep's superiority, you made a bad choice. Yea- it beat the Ford, but it's still a fat, thirsty, clunking truck, with less cargo space, a smaller 3rd seat, and a noisier, less-smooth ride than the Explorer -with real nice seats.

    Nice try!

    You all can read for yourselves:

    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=10115&page_number=1
  • rooskierooskie Member Posts: 26
    OK -so I read the articles gearjammer cited above. Here is my take.

    If you need off-roading capability, tow or haul big heavy loads and need sheer horespower, the Commander has the edge over the Explorer.

    If you occasionally need those things, but are also more concerned with better gas milege, a quiter interior, more cargo space, a roomier third row seat, a smoother ride, then the Explorer has the edge.

    THe Commander is more like a truck, the Explorer, while still a truck, is more car-like - kind of the way Ford made the F150 tough, yet more comfortable inside and with big improvements in the area of NVH.

    BTW, noone who has reviewed the'06 Explorer has said it is "tired", indeed, quite the opposite, at least in everything I have read.

    I'll be driving them both this week (hopefully) - and will come back with my opinions later.

    blkhemi wrote:

    However, beyond that, few 3 row SUV's can touch it's performance on and off road in it's price range, regardless to what some auto journalist and comsumers say.

    So, you have tested hundred of cars and trucks, just like Car and Driver, Edmunds, et.al., and can make the grand prononcement that they don't know what they're talking about, such as when it comes to the Explorer having better handling both on and off road? Just what qualifies you for such a grandiose opinion of your car testing capabilites - far superior to professional car reviewer? Please enlighten us!

    ...regardless to what some auto journalist and comsumers say...

    Indeed?!? Hey Edmunds - we have someone who says to disregard your writer's and all the rest of us consumers opinions ( or "some" - at least the ones who disagree with him, huh?) because HE knows better. Maybe you can get him a job interview?
Sign In or Register to comment.