"Commander: A Looming Case Of Hummer Envy"

The New York Times
November 20, 2005 Sunday

SECTION: Section 12; Column 1; Automobiles; Monumental Expansion for
the Empire of Jeep; Pg. 1

Commander: A Looming Case Of Hummer Envy

LIKE a youngster debating the relative merits of careers --
firefighter, astronaut, pop star? -- Jeep is trying to figure out what
it wants to be when it grows up.

The key question has been this: Should the DaimlerChrysler division hew
to tradition by continuing to build only uncompromising vehicles
capable of legendary off-road feats, or should it broaden its lineup
with some of the carlike quasi-S.U.V.'s that are becoming ever more
popular?

The answer seems to be a strategy that tries to have it both ways,
offering full-bodied Jeeps and Jeep Lites, too. Less rugged models are
coming; a production vehicle based on the Compass concept car (which is
based on the Dodge Caliber that replaces the Neon) will be unveiled at
the Detroit auto show in January. But even the hard-core off-roading
trucks are getting the kinds of family-friendly amenities that have
attracted families to the likes of the Ford Explorer and Honda Pilot.

For instance, the biggest Jeep yet, the 2006 Commander, can carry seven
occupants in three rows of seats. Based on the Grand Cherokee, this
high and hulking vehicle aims to confer Rubicon Trail credibility on
suburban parents whose primary driving adventures involve shuttling
little Emma and Jacob to their endless practices.

The Commander performs such chores with an undeniable presence, like it
or not, and one with overtones of the Hummer. There is a blunt
seven-slot grille, a bunkerlike greenhouse and squarish windows. While
the Commander doesn't compete directly with any of the three existing
Hummers, it could be seen as a retort to a brand that has stolen some
of the rough-and-ready image that Jeep used to claim exclusively. (The
chicken-or-egg debate doesn't end there, given that several of Hummer's
styling cues seem to have been borrowed from Jeep in the first place.)

True, the angular panels of this supersize Jeep are meant to evoke the
long-running but defunct Cherokee, but the geometry seems awkward on
such a large canvas. The result is undeniably rugged, but the
proportions seem off -- like a gawky teenager after a spurt of
hormone-driven growth.

The blocky lines do maximize interior space; there is plenty of elbow
and shoulder room in the first two rows of seats. One impressively
executed stylistic detail is the way designers camouflaged the stepped
roofline, which juts up behind the driver to add headroom for the rear
seats.

On the top-of-the-line Commander Limited, the roof rack extends down
the back of the truck a couple of feet on each side of the liftgate
window, providing a grab handle for hoisting cargo onto the high roof.
It is such an obviously useful accessory that the company is thinking
of making it available on base models.

That elevated roof -- 3.2 inches taller than the Grand Cherokee's --
creates substantial headroom, and each row is higher than the one
ahead, providing megaplex theater seating without the sticky floors.
With ''CommandView'' skylights overhead, the middle row is a pleasant
place to spend some travel time.

But Jeep's deep questions of self-identity have compromised the comfort
of the third row. 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.

The second-row seat does flip easily out of the way, offering a
convenient means of escape. But a consequence of the stadium-seat
arrangement is that the third-row seatbacks and head restraints utterly
obscure the view out the back window. Fortunately, parking assist
sensors are standard on all versions, minimizing the risk that the
vehicle will back over something (or someone).

The front row comes closer to first-class accommodations, with cushy
multiadjustable seats and an attractive instrument panel that pays
homage to older models with exposed Allen-head bolts. As in other
recent DaimlerChrysler products, good design and decent assembly are
let down modestly by shiny, cheap-looking dashboard materials.

Jeep had a solid rationale for keeping the Commander so compact: long,
bulky trucks cannot navigate the rocky trails where four-wheel-drive
Jeeps earned their ''Trail Rated'' badges.

This is a part of Jeep's image that it will surrender only when it
must. So the Commander is, despite its appearance, only minimally
larger than a Grand Cherokee -- and nearly as capable at scrabbling up
rock faces outside Moab, Utah.

On the drive home from work in a few inches of fresh snow, the
Commander will be just as capable as any other Jeep.

The powertrains are shared with the Grand Cherokee. The base 3.7-liter
V-6 cranks out an adequate 210 horsepower. While on par with the Ford
Explorer's base engine, that falls short of the Toyota 4Runner (236
horses) and the Nissan Pathfinder (270). The five-speed automatic
transmission shifts smoothly.

The optional 4.7-liter V-8 has more grunt, with 235 horsepower, but the
star is the 5.7-liter Hemi V-8, with 330. Four of the Hemi's cylinders
shut down at cruising speed, improving highway mileage considerably.
Indeed, at 19 m.p.g. the Hemi's federal highway rating is only one less
than that of the smaller V-8.

Even while posing in its free-spirited attire, the Commander clearly
aspires for the upper middle class. 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.

INSIDE TRACK: A macho Jeep image now available for parties of seven.

> The result is undeniably rugged, but the
> proportions seem off -- like a gawky teenager after a spurt of
> hormone-driven growth.

Ugly as sin. A Hummer at least looks like utility drove it's appearance.
The commander just looks stupid.

> The second-row seat does flip easily out of the way, offering a
> convenient means of escape. But a consequence of the stadium-seat
> arrangement is that the third-row seatbacks and head restraints utterly
> obscure the view out the back window.

I found the available interior space to be quite limited. The layout of
everything just isn't "right". Even a libby has better interior space.

> that pays homage to older models with exposed Allen-head bolts.

Homage? That crap just looks terrible. Made even worse by using ****ty
materials.

> Jeep had a solid rationale for keeping the Commander so compact: long,
> bulky trucks cannot navigate the rocky trails where four-wheel-drive
> Jeeps earned their ''Trail Rated'' badges.

True, but compact doesn't have to mean ugly.

> Even while posing in its free-spirited attire, the Commander clearly
> aspires for the upper middle class.

I believe the term 'poseur' applies.

> 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.

Yeah, the commander is just so all-around poorly thought out that it's
really not worth buying.

Wow, thats quiet a report on the Commander. I'd hate to sell you any
used vehicle of mine.
I like the looks of the Commaner from a distance - it appeared
'commanding
A few months ago when leaving the parts department I saw one in the
dealer showroom. I hopped in to check it out. The driver seat and
front row cab seem near luxury for its class. I do not recall what I
would have changed but there were a few minor (but not deal-breakers) I
would have done differently. This inspection of the front row only
took a few minutes.
I next checked out the area behind the front row. The second row of
seats did fold down but not the entire row. The 2nd row center counsel
remains in place and higher than the folded seats. This design would
interfer when a needed level cargo area is required (like when one is
shipping their Van Gogh collection).
I continued to explore and it began to become a puzzle. I did not want
a $ales Stealer to assist me - I was in this solo - mono an mono. I
finally gave up on try to make sense of the large, awkward, nearly
useless cargo area. I think DC would have better off making it a two
seater wagon type and offer boxes as an option for additional
passengers. And more boxes as a 'special option' for cargo.
When I finally got around to the third row seating I could not believe
that someone would buy this vehicle. The elevated seating for each row
is a cleaver idea but I do not believe I would EVER want to sit behind
the rear wheels. At only 5' 9" my head was brushing the overhead. I
would have insisted on some kind of helmet (possibly another option).
this third row can only be designed for children so they can have a
clear corridor to holler "I gotta pee"
Hope any Coughmander owners who reada this do not get upset and only
plan are driving from the front and do not want to really attempt to
utilize the cargo area - hire a moving company.