thetruthaboutcars.com road test review

Black_Dog · **Posted:** Wed Sep 26, 2007 9:40 am

Okay guys, my review of the KK is finally up. As discussed, this road test review isn't exactly glowing.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=5445

skrracing · **Posted:** Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:00 pm

They are just mad because they did not get to come out and drive them off-road in Indy. Looks like they just stole pictures from the internet to do the report. I would bet they have never even driven one. The new KK rocks for dang sure. Later...Clint

DarbyWalters · **Posted:** Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:27 pm

The problem with most "Car Reviews" is that the writer does not get to spend enough time in the vehicle to get a true view of the vehicles attributes and faults. You get the cursory, "The Styling is more masculine" or "The ride was subpar compared to other vehicles in its class". Unless you spend some substantial time in a vehicle and compare it "side by side", you get a very superficial opinion without much merit. Even judgements on MPG are bogus unless you get to go thru a few tanks of fuel.

Lately all you seem to hear is that the "Original Liberty" was a "Chic Jeep" and the new "KK Liberty" will attract a more "masculine buyer". The percentages are about even for the Liberty (within a few percentage points)...and... Oh yeah, females make up about 52% of the US population. Who cares if Girls are buying more than Guys? The 2002-2007 Jeep Liberty were the best selling Midsize SUV in the US. Just because the Jeep KJ was considered "cute", I don't think that is a bad thing...that is how I like my girlfriends too. Why is "cute" a bad thing if it works...onroad and offroad. Anyway, the percentages for most Jeeps is 50%/50% +/_ 5% most likely and so what if it isn't...the more Jeeps the better.

Reflex · **Joined:** Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:48 pm **Posts:** 567

Wow. Just...wow. I do not think I have read a worse review of a product pretty much...ever. I can see now why some on this site refuse to talk to you, its extremely obvious that you have a problem with this vehicle long before you actually test it. That review was just bad, from the preconcieved notions going in to the attempts at 'flowery' language to make the review appear far more sophisticated than it was, to the of the word 'blingery' which I'm fairly certain does not exist. Of course you used the term 'dimensionality' in your 4Runner review, so I guess you just make them up as you go along.

Its ok, we get that you hate Jeeps. My advice is to just not drive them and go find yourself a nice little Pilot or 4Runner. And in the future, please avoid reviewing US vehicles, the reviews I'm seeing looking around are just plain bad. I won't even call them biased, that would give them too much credit.

Black_Dog · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:15 am

skrracing wrote:

They are just mad because they did not get to come out and drive them off-road in Indy. Looks like they just stole pictures from the internet to do the report. I would bet they have never even driven one. The new KK rocks for dang sure. Later...Clint

With 4x4 vehicles, TTAC normally publishes separate road and off-road tests reviews. For example, see the two reviews of the ’07 Wrangler published last year. When the opportunity arises, we’ll publish an off-road test of the Liberty, too.

As for the photos, I snapped off the first, second and sixth photo, which are of the actual vehicle tested. The site editor sourced the other three photos, which he probably did download from Chrysler’s media/PR site.

I have not, nor am I aware of any other author, publishing a review of a car without subjecting it to a test drive.

Black_Dog · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:32 am

DarbyWalters wrote:

Lately all you seem to hear is that the "Original Liberty" was a "Chic Jeep" and the new "KK Liberty" will attract a more "masculine buyer". The percentages are about even for the Liberty (within a few percentage points)...and... Oh yeah, females make up about 52% of the US population. Who cares if Girls are buying more than Guys? The 2002-2007 Jeep Liberty were the best selling Midsize SUV in the US. Just because the Jeep KJ was considered "cute", I don't think that is a bad thing...that is how I like my girlfriends too. Why is "cute" a bad thing if it works...onroad and offroad. Anyway, the percentages for most Jeeps is 50%/50% +/_ 5% most likely and so what if it isn't...the more Jeeps the better.

I am ambivalent on the ‘cute’ thing. On the one hand, I wanted an off-road ready SUV. On the other, my wife didn’t want to be seen in a monster 4x4. The KJ’s styling made it possible for us to get something we could mutually agree on.

Overall, I think the KK is handsome. The point of my observations about it no longer being cute is that many people regarded the KJ as being a chick car (whether we liked it or not). The KJ undoubtedly achieved segment-leading sales success over the last few years because it appealed strongly to men and women alike. My concern is that I don’t think the KK will have the same draw, which will hurt sales on a comparative basis.

recon · **Joined:** Wed Mar 08, 2006 1:28 pm **Posts:** 90

Who Cares what these " critics" think and write odds the critic drives his hybrid to work every day snacks on tofu and loves to talk about his dogs as if they are his kids. We can all bash everything that is out there for sale. Wheel what you got...The KJ proved a lot of these critics wrong lets let the KK do the same. It will. As far as the KJ being a chick Jeep. I used to think that untill I went wheeling with ARB Seth. ( Seth I was the white KJ bone stock 4 bangger 6 speed) Truth be told the KJ will out wheel my Commander any day. Can I have fun out there in my Commander heck yeah. Will I look at a KK you bet but I hope the extreme folks like ARBSeth get their hands on one first. My rant is over I am out

recon · **Joined:** Wed Mar 08, 2006 1:28 pm **Posts:** 90

Black_Dog · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:04 am

Reflex wrote:

...its extremely obvious that you have a problem with this vehicle long before you actually test it. That review was just bad, from the preconcieved notions going in to the attempts at 'flowery' language to make the review appear far more sophisticated than it was, to the of the word 'blingery' which I'm fairly certain does not exist. Of course you used the term 'dimensionality' in your 4Runner review, so I guess you just make them up as you go along.

In your critique of my critique, you bring up a couple of good insights. First, I did walk into my review with some strong preconceptions. Unless you live in a black hole and don’t know anything about the car you are about to test, you are always going to have expectations. My preconceptions of the KK were framed by my ownership of the KJ, test drives of other SUV, and of my test drive of the Nitro last year.

Overall, I have loved the KJ but like anybody else I have a list of things that I would like Jeep to improve. For instance, I'd like the driver’s seat to have better lumbar support, more room in the back seat, better gas mileage, an additional 6” of storage space behind the back seat, better ride quality, etc. So I judged whether KK hit on any of these improvements.

Also, everything I observe about the KK gets compared to the dozen or so other SUVs & CUVs I have tested in the last year. Many attributes are not a matter of good versus bad but is the KK better or worse than the rest of the market

Test driving the Nitro last year got me worried. There were things I liked about the truck but compared to its competitors, it really has much to be desired – its cheap (not in a good way) and inefficient. I still can’t figure out why the world needs the Nitro. But most of all I was concerned that Dodge engineers had ruined the handling of this pseudo-Jeep in an effort to improve ride quality. Until I finally got behind the wheel of the KK, I kept a silent prayer in my heart that the Jeep guys would retune the suspension. They did not, and you have certainly read what I think of the end result.

Secondly, all publications have a definite house style that is defined by unique lexicon, tone, rhythm, structure and length. As you can probably see from my the way I write on my own on L.O.S.T., my normal writing (and speaking) style is quite different than when I write for TTAC. TTAC’s style is no-hold-barred brutal honesty, death-by-a-thousand-cuts sarcasm, and peppered with made up words such as ‘spizzarkle.’ Some people really dig the wit and others don’t. Every review or editorial is exactly 800 words long. With some reviews, it’s hard to come up with 800 words. On others, you can barely scratch the surface in so few words. But that’s the world of freelance writing.

Black_Dog · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:10 am

Reflex wrote:

Wow. Just...wow. I do not think I have read a worse review of a product pretty much...ever. I can see now why some on this site refuse to talk to you…

Its ok, we get that you hate Jeeps. My advice is to just not drive them and go find yourself a nice little Pilot or 4Runner. And in the future, please avoid reviewing US vehicles, the reviews I'm seeing looking around are just plain bad. I won't even call them biased, that would give them too much credit.

When you put your neck on the line and tell the world what you think about their favorite cars in a very public form such as TTAC, you open yourself up to this kind of feedback. You can never please everyone – especially the hardcore fans of any given vehicle. To the faithful, any honest negative observation is as bad as if I had said their baby was ugly. So you either grow thick skin or quit.

Reflex, if you have driven the KK and found that anything I have written factually or substantively incorrect please let me know and I will have my review revised.

Or, if you have the inclination, talent and guts, you can put together your own 800-word review and submit it for publication to robert.farago@thetruthaboutcars.com. The editor loves a good counterpoint article. But let me warn you, not everybody will like what you write.

Dutchy · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:30 am

BLACK_DOG,

That's a good review, and I agree with you.

I have not driven it yet so I can't comment on the driving part, but bigger, fatter/boxier/softer and more thirsty does not go well in my book.

They turned the nippy and fun to drive (and look at) KJ into a fat old yank tank.

Guest · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:30 am

Black_Dog wrote:

Reflex wrote:

Overall, I have loved the KJ but like anybody else I have a list of things that I would like Jeep to improve. For instance, I'd like the driver’s seat to have better lumbar support, more room in the back seat, better gas mileage, an additional 6” of storage space behind the back seat, better ride quality, etc. So I judged whether KK hit on any of these improvements.

It hit all those improvements aside from the gas mileage, and I saw that from lookin at it in the showroom. the rear cargo room appears more usable...however, I've yet to use it, so I'll reserve judgement.

That being said, I liked the article. Now I just have to test drive it even though I'm not gonna buy one.

Reflex · **Joined:** Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:48 pm **Posts:** 567

Quote:

Secondly, all publications have a definite house style that is defined by unique lexicon, tone, rhythm, structure and length. As you can probably see from my the way I write on my own on L.O.S.T., my normal writing (and speaking) style is quite different than when I write for TTAC. TTAC’s style is no-hold-barred brutal honesty, death-by-a-thousand-cuts sarcasm, and peppered with made up words such as ‘spizzarkle.’

Perhaps its different in the automotive world than it is in the tech world, but I have yet to ever read a computer review that simply invented new english words. That is not only ridiculous, but from a technical perspective it is imprecise. Since a review is an attempt to convey information on a product to a reader, using words that have no true meaning defeats the purpose of a review in the first place. But hey, I guess TTAB is just funny that way(or perhaps its fans are simply brain dead and make those words mean whatever they wish them to).

Quote:

Reflex, if you have driven the KK and found that anything I have written factually or substantively incorrect please let me know and I will have my review revised.

Aside from quoting published specifications, there are no 'facts' to address, merely opinions. Its an opinion piece and as such cannot be judged as 'right' or 'wrong'. It does, however, play to its audience rather than attempt any form of impartiality.

Quote:

The editor loves a good counterpoint article.

Having read several other articles on that website and noting just how divorced their observations and conclusions are from the mainstream reviewers I'd have to decline this offer. I have no desire to boost the revenue stream of what is essentially a propoganda(and possibly astro-turfed) website. I prefer to work with more honest individuals and organizations.

And before you think I'm some mindless supporter of Chrysler, read some of the other threads where I've taken them to task. The difference is that I don't pretend that issues of personal preference and wishes that a vehicle were something it was never designed or marketed to be and use that strawman as a punching bag to push competing products.

Gris · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:08 am

What do you expect? For the first time ever The big brains that owned or currently own (not sure which decided on the current product line) Chrysler Corp. decided to combine Jeep with the standard Chrysler lines to save money.

First they make Jeep cars (compass), and after the resounding success (10 sold worldwide?) they decide it's a good idea to market a Dodge "thing" as a jeep by getting rid of the highest-selling SUV of all time.

I give it 2 more years before the GC is really a Durango and they have a Jeep version of a Magnum for the crazy people who want to feel like they're off-roading when they go up their gravel driveway.

I guess the moral of the rant is that you can't expect good reviews when the past 4 years have involved a Indentity-destroying decision at every turn.

Lucas718 · **Joined:** Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:41 am **Posts:** 11

They're doing what they think will sell the most vehicles. Can't say I blame them.

sleeve84028 · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:11 am

There is nothing wrong with Platform sharing.

First the Nitro is built off a modified version of the KJ chasis. Thus the KK is an evolution of the same chasis we have right now. No big deal
The Truck is newer and does respond to the "too cute" world that we live in. We here on this board are blinded by our love for the KJ
The Compass has sold more than 10. That's not a very accurate count. The Patriot is a pretty nice basic Jeep

Geez guys you're going to scare off anyone that doesn't own a KJ.. [doesn't that sound familiar?]

Black_Dog · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:47 am

Reflex wrote:

Having read several other articles on that website and noting just how divorced their observations and conclusions are from the mainstream reviewers…

“Mainstream reviewers” typically test cars on press junkets. I’ve been on a few. A PR firm flies you at manufacturer expense to an exotic location, they wine and dine you at the finest restaurants, the bed you in the finest hotel in town, and give you access to specially prepared cars to drive on carefully chosen courses designed to reflect the car’s best attributes. I can tell you that many writers won’t publish or say anything negative in a review because they don’t want to get kicked-off this gravy train.

Additionally, the mainstream buff magazines take millions in advertising dollars from the car companies they presume to critique. Stephen Wilkenson, who was the editor of Car and Driver magazine from ’74-’76 has written that he was fired because he criticized a car (the Chevy Monza, if I recall correctly) during a month that GM had more than $100K in ads in the issue (a lot of money back then). The publisher warned him to edit out his negative comments prior to press. He did not. The article ran and he was given his walking papers shortly thereafter.

TTAC doesn’t pull its punches or accept ads from manufacturers. The consequence is that our authors aren’t invited to as many press junkets and it’s harder for us to get long-term press vehicles. That’s okay. We still manage to get cars… eventually. For the most part, our readers appreciate reading independent reviews that don’t come off like they were written by auto industry PR firms.

I’ve met writers from all of the notable US car magazines at various junkets. Several have told me that TTAC is the site they read because we get to call it the way we see it.

Guest · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:53 am

Reflex wrote:

Quote:

Secondly, all publications have a definite house style that is defined by unique lexicon, tone, rhythm, structure and length. As you can probably see from my the way I write on my own on L.O.S.T., my normal writing (and speaking) style is quite different than when I write for TTAC. TTAC’s style is no-hold-barred brutal honesty, death-by-a-thousand-cuts sarcasm, and peppered with made up words such as ‘spizzarkle.’

Perhaps its different in the automotive world than it is in the tech world, but I have yet to ever read a computer review that simply invented new english words. That is not only ridiculous, but from a technical perspective it is imprecise. Since a review is an attempt to convey information on a product to a reader, using words that have no true meaning defeats the purpose of a review in the first place. But hey, I guess TTAB is just funny that way(or perhaps its fans are simply brain dead and make those words mean whatever they wish them to).

Quote:

Reflex, if you have driven the KK and found that anything I have written factually or substantively incorrect please let me know and I will have my review revised.

Aside from quoting published specifications, there are no 'facts' to address, merely opinions. Its an opinion piece and as such cannot be judged as 'right' or 'wrong'. It does, however, play to its audience rather than attempt any form of impartiality.

Quote:

The editor loves a good counterpoint article.

Having read several other articles on that website and noting just how divorced their observations and conclusions are from the mainstream reviewers I'd have to decline this offer. I have no desire to boost the revenue stream of what is essentially a propoganda(and possibly astro-turfed) website. I prefer to work with more honest individuals and organizations.

And before you think I'm some mindless supporter of Chrysler, read some of the other threads where I've taken them to task. The difference is that I don't pretend that issues of personal preference and wishes that a vehicle were something it was never designed or marketed to be and use that strawman as a punching bag to push competing products.

Real car magazines have advertisers money to think about when they review a car. They won't come right out and say the car is just flat out BAD until the next model comes out, but they don't even say the old one is bad...they just talk about how HUGE of an improvement the new one is.

Computer gear articles are boring, whereas articles written by car guys with senses of humor and a bit of knowledge are not. This is why I read Car and Driver and not Road&Track.

I don't understand how giving one's opinion about a vehicle is dishonest. I think Hondas are crap, and I don't like Mitsubishis either. Am I a liar now? I personally have yet to DRIVE the KK, and if it is indeed more squishy and rolly (OH NO, I made up a word!) than the KJ, I'll look elsewhere for a new car in '09...perhaps Toyota, maybe Nissan...but probably Dodge.

The bottom line is, with real car magazines, advertising money lines the pockets of too many, and thus they're afraid to give a bad review...it's the same way with any magazine that reviews products, aside from Consumer Reports...of course...you probably think any time they call something crap it's also unprofessional.

Black_Dog · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:20 am

Reflex wrote:

I have no desire to boost the revenue stream of what is essentially a propoganda(and possibly astro-turfed) website. I prefer to work with more honest individuals and organizations.

Accusing TTAC of propaganda implies that we are the mouthpiece for some organization. So who could be possibly be shilling for? Certainly not Chrysler. Our GM and Ford Deathwatch editorials preclude us from being on their payroll. By extension we certainly can’t be accused of supporting the UAW or any of the domestic suppliers.

So what about the Japanese? You don’t have to look too far to see that we give Honda, Toyota, Nissan and Mazda their knocks when they’ve deserve it. The Koreans? Hardly. The Chinese? Please.

And about the Germans or other Euros? The biggest rap against C&D is that they are so in love with BMW. Well, BMW has banned TTAC from junkets and refuses to supply us with press vehicles (including Cooper). Ironically, this ban is not the result of anything we’ve written about their cars directly – they didn’t like what we had to say about the Subaru Tribeca (I know, it boggles the mind – and we still get cars from Subaru).

Are we the pawns of environmentalists? Or big oil? If you’ve read some of the editorial barbs we have stuck those groups with with, you wouldn’t be able to make a case for that either.

The bottom line is that there really isn’t any group or organization that would possibly benefit from the things we write other than car loving buyers we cater to who appreciate edgy, cynical, and (hopefully) entertaining presentation. When we see half-baked products we make it known. By the same token, we are effusive when we see something great.

So if you are going to accuse TTAC of spreading propaganda or being a faux grass-roots front organization, you’ve got to do better than that.

EDIT: I couldn't argue if you want to say that TTAC is over the top, heaps on too many cultural references, or tries too hard to be evocative. The site certainly doesn't appeal to everybody. But we’re definitely not an agent for some hidden organization.

Gris · **Posted:** Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:04 pm

sleeve84028 wrote:

There is nothing wrong with Platform sharing.

First the Nitro is built off a modified version of the KJ chasis. Thus the KK is an evolution of the same chasis we have right now. No big deal
The Truck is newer and does respond to the "too cute" world that we live in. We here on this board are blinded by our love for the KJ
The Compass has sold more than 10. That's not a very accurate count. The Patriot is a pretty nice basic Jeep

Geez guys you're going to scare off anyone that doesn't own a KJ.. [doesn't that sound familiar?]

Point is Jeep was always Jeep, now Jeep is not Jeep anymore.

Jeep filled 3 niches, and did it very well.

There was the Wrangler, that pretty much no other company had a similar vehicle to.
There was the Cherokee, which was an inexpensive base-line CAPABLE SUV. No other SUV was really as capable as a Cherokee could be.
There was a Grand Cherokee, that was still very capable as compared to any other mfgr's SUVs, except with a luxury twist.

Even before this, the wagoneers followed the same theme. CAPABLE SUV in base and luxury trims. Throw in the odd comanche that was still based on one of the other chassis and you had a completely off-road ready line of vehicles.

What is Jeep now and as a result, Is it why Chrysler has sucked so bad recently?

Jeep has a single vehicle that is off-road capable without extensive mods.

Wranglers keep getting better. YAY JEEP!
The Cherokee was stripped of it articulation and replaced by the Liberty.
The Grand Cherokee was neutered by giving it a WORSE IFS than the Liberty.
Now the Liberty is sharing a platform with a "performance" SUV that is even less capable than the 1st gen Liberty that we all know and love.

Throw in the Commander (should be a Ford "E" vehicle imo) as unneeded competition against Jeep's own GC. wtf? It has all the off-road presence of the rocks other Jeeps climb over.

And then there is the Compass...
Honestly. wouldn't the Compass be better suited as a Dodge? What purpose does it have in the Jeep line other than to make people feel special because they own a "Jeep" (that has nothing to do with Jeep principles or history). It's not at all off-road capable, it's not even 4x4. A Jeep vehicle that's not available in 4x4? Yeah, that's smart business practice.

Overall, Chrysler is still Luxury, Dodge is still mean, and Jeep now has absolutely nothing to do with Off-road other than the Wrangler and the Jeep Name.

Maybe if C,D,J wanted better reviews for the Jeep line, they'd keep the Jeep line the way it's supposed to be. A truly capable off-road vehicle will never be able to compete with an on-road look-alike when it comes to performance, comfort, etc... So why try?

Who was it that had their vehicle next to the Land Rover and the Rover had more cup-holders? Nissan I think? Sure, it can out-slalom and out- 0/60 a Land Rover, Yay! The Land rover could drive over the other SUV while still maintaining contact with all 4 tires and the other gets air going over a speed bump at an angle.

Turn Jeep back into Jeep. If I wanted a comfortable SUV with no chance of making it through a Paragon Blue, I'll go buy a Ford.

*****EDIT TO ADD*****

Look at this Thread...
http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/vie ... sc&start=0

Why is the FJ Cruiser so Popular? BECAUSE THEY (re)FILLED A SPOT JEEP DECIDED TO ABANDON! It is a mid-size SUV that if off-road capable.

thetruthaboutcars.com road test review

Who is online