New Three-row Jeep Probably Won't Carry the Grand Cherokee Name

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

In its big February plant and product announcement, Fiat Chrysler said its Mack Avenue engine facility will give way to SUV production, describing the first vehicle to emerge from the repurposed plant as a “three-row, full-size Jeep SUV.” Given that the next-generation Grand Cherokee will also call the plant home, and that the two models will almost certainly share underpinnings, one would assume the three-row Jeep would carry a modified GC nameplate. Think Hyundai Santa Fe XL.

That’s been the assumption, anyway. However, the automaker’s CEO suggests a wholly new nameplate is in the works.

Speaking to Britain’s Auto Express, Mike Manley said the upcoming three-row Jeep is referred to in vague terms for a reason. He also admits the Grand Cherokee, in its current form, has limitations.

The new model “will technically play in the same segment as Grand Cherokee,” Manley said, adding that, “Roughly 60% of that segment is three row, so Grand Cherokee has really only played in 40%. That will open up that part of the segment for us.”

Why not just add a size-related suffix to the Grand Cherokee name? It could still happen, Manley suggests, though he’ll be pushing for an alternative.

“We’ll have the choice of Grand Cherokee or a different model,” he said. “For me, the Grand Cherokee is such an icon, so that’s why I talk about [the new model] as a three row Jeep. It’s like if I dramatically changed what Wrangler looked like – I’d be crucified! Grand Cherokee, interestingly, has a customer base that loves it because it’s got rear-wheel drive, well-positioned stance, and dimensionally it’s perfect.”

It remains to be seen just how much the new model differs, style-wise, from the Grand Cherokee. By the sounds of it, the new model will not simply be a carbon copy of the Grand Cherokee from the C-pillar forward, though the two models are expected to share the same architecture. It’s believed that an updated and beefed-up version of the Giorgio platform, found beneath the Alfa Romeo Giulia and Stelvio, will serve as the models’ starting point.

Whatever name FCA decides to bestow on the new model, customers will see the first units roll out of Mack Avenue in late 2020, with the next-gen Grand Cherokee coming along in the first half of 2021. (FCA’s Jefferson North facility will also build the GC.) In creating the new model, FCA will fill a lucrative white space between the two-row GC and the upcoming, big-bucks Wagoneer and Grand Wagoneer. Those brutes go into production at Warren Truck in early 2021.

[Image: Fiat Chrysler Automobiles]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
9 of 39 comments
  • Turbosasquatch Turbosasquatch on Mar 11, 2019

    I thought it was confirmed that it will be the Grand Commander. Same thing they sell in China https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeep_Grand_Commander

    • See 1 previous
    • Turbosasquatch Turbosasquatch on Mar 12, 2019

      @Steve203 Ah, I couldn't remember if it was Cherokee or Grand Cherokee based. The three row definitely needs a new name as another "Cherokee" would confuse some people, especially if they do bring over the 3 row Cherokee as well. I vote Comanche and Grand Comanche. Stays in the same vein as Cherokee but represents the 3 rows. They already named the truck the Gladiator anyways

  • Steve203 Steve203 on Mar 12, 2019

    I pondered their dilemma a while back. The Chrysler nomenclature for minivans was the short wheelbase version was the Caravan/Voyager while the long wheelbase version was the "Grand" Caravan/Voyager. They messed that up with the non-grand Cherokee an entirely different vehicle than the Grand Cherokee. So what to call a grander Grand Cherokee? It occurred to me to have a different family name for 3 row SUVs, so a 3 row non-grand Cherokee could be the Commander, without the Chinese market "grand", so then the 3 row Grand Cherokee could be the Grand Commander. But that starts to fall apart when a 2 row Wagoneer is a non-grand Wagoneer while the 3 row is the Grand Wagoneer. I considered making the 3 row Grand Cherokee the Wagoneer, and the BoF 3 row monster the Grand Wagoneer, but the sales volume of a car that pushes $100K is going to be so small they would struggle to amortize the investment in it. So, the Waggy and Grand Waggy sort of need to be variations on the same platform. There are plenty of other names in the Jeep archives: Patriot, Liberty, Chief, Comanche, Laredo. Make the 3 row Compass the Patriot, the 3 row non-grand Cherokee the Liberty, make the 3 row Grand Cherokee the Cherokee Chief?

    • See 4 previous
    • Steve203 Steve203 on Mar 12, 2019

      @danio3834 "We’re going to find out. Grand Cherokee and Durango sales are limited by the capacity of the plant they share, " I remember Marchionne complaining, several years ago, that he wanted to introduce the GC to more markets, but he couldn't get enough of them out of JNAP. The conversion of Mack Engine to a second assembly plant will address that issue. There is one nagging thought in the back of my mind: if they bless us with the 3 row non-grand Cherokee, whatever they call it, below the GC and the Waggy and Grand Waggy above the GC, will these additional models cannibalize the GC enough to make Mack Assembly redundant? Of course, the Grand Commander is exactly the right size to replace the Journey. Dropping the Journey would free production capacity at Toluca to build more Compasses and the upcoming 3 row Compass derivative. I added up US Compass and Journey sales, plus European sales of the Compass, which is also built in Toluca, and got well over 300,000 units last year. Toluca is a small plant. They must be losing their mind building that many. FCA was going to add the Compass for Europe to the production slate at the plant in Italy that already builds the Renegade and 500X, which would reduce the load on Toluca, but Manley started to walk that plan back several weeks ago.

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh A prelude is a bad idea. There is already Acura with all the weird sport trims. This will not make back it's R&D money.
  • Analoggrotto I don't see a red car here, how blazing stupid are you people?
  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
Next