Remember how we told you that Jeep had finally decided that their naming conventions for the Wagoneer and Grand Wagoneer were too damn confusing, and all their fancy SUVs would be Grand Wagoneers from now on? That was a good choice. Now it also seems that Jeep will stop trying to make the Wagoneer brand name happen, and go back to badging them as Jeeps, just like everyone called them, anyway. Jeep has also revealed some pricing and other details of their refreshed Grand Wagoneers, and I suppose I may as well tell you all about it.
The most interesting development out of these refreshed Wagoneers, now so Grand, is that they will feature “America’s first range-extended electric vehicle (REEV or EREV) application,” which the press release also notes will be “late availability.” That will be a big deal, beating Scout to the range-extended EV game, and I think it is one of the most promising types of drivetrains for near-future cars. This must mean that it’ll slot in before the delayed Ram Ramcharger.
There will also be a twin-turbo 3-liter Hurricane inline-six engine available as well, making 420 horsepower at 5,200 RPM, and 468 pound-feet of torque at 3,500 RPM. Do you want to know the compression ratio? It’s 10.4:1. It’ll take 7.5 quarts of oil, too!
Oh, and here’s what the likely slightly squishy engine cover will look like:
More interesting is the EREV version, which will use a 3.6-liter V6 coupled to a 130 kW generator. Electric motors will drive the wheels, powered by the V6, batteries, or both; this combination will provide 647 hp and 620 lb-ft of torque, which can shove the Grand Wagoneer from parked to 60 mph in 5 seconds. The range for this setup is estimated at 500 miles, quite impressive for a vehicle of this size.
Design-wise, the big change is an all-new face, which is a bit taller and more squared-off, and now eliminates chrome. In place of chrome for bling is light, as the traditional Jeep seven-slot grille (which doesn’t actually seem to be a real grille; all the air intake looks to come from the actual, large trapezoidal grille below) is now illuminated. The upper part of the seven slots extends into some DRLs, which are combined with some rotated-T-shaped lamps below, which I suspect house the indicators as well.
The slots read more toothy than slots, really, but the overall look isn’t bad, and I suppose an improvement over the outgoing Wagoneer, which had a face like this:
Jeep seems to be really proud to get rid of chrome; the press release gives this absence a whole paragraph:
“One of the most significant design shifts is the introduction of a chrome-free exterior, a first for Grand Wagoneer. The new Grand Wagoneer embraces a more refined and modern palette. As the design team embraced more sustainable materials and processes, the shift to ”no chrome” marks a bold move toward a cleaner, more responsible and modern expression of luxury.”
There’s also no brass on the SUV, but I don’t see them making a big deal of that.
The rear now has full-width taillights as well, since we’re well into the Era of The Universal Heckblende, and the overall look does seem a bit cleaner and more refined. I think I like the contrasting color roof as well.
Interiors seem quite premium and well-appointed, with “Nappa leather with Axis II perforation,” whatever the hell that is. There are enhanced interior packages that include
“For those seeking elevated appointments, the Limited Reserve features more amenities, including a 19-speaker McIntosh audio system, tri-pane sunroof, power steps and HUD”
and, if 19 speakers just isn’t enough for your discerning ear-palates, then you want the Summit trim with
“a state-of-the-art 23-speaker McIntosh audio system, ventilated rear seating, an integrated front console cooler, a front passenger display and a sophisticated black appearance.”
You can get three rows in the Grand Wagoneer, should you need to haul around seven or eight people, and cargo space looks pretty cavernous with all the seats folded down:
By the numbers, the cargo space breaks down like this:
Cargo volume behind first-row seats, cu. ft. (cu. m) 116.7 (3.3)
Cargo volume behind second-row seats cu. ft. (cu. m) 70.8 (2.0)
Cargo volume behind third-row seats cu. ft. (cu. m) 27.9 (0.8) Grand Wagoneer / 42.6 (1.2) Grand Wagoneer L
While there are plenty of screens (even one on the passenger side) and a nice big HUD and all that, there seems to be plenty of physical controls, which is nice. Also, there’s a generous number of USB ports (A and C) and even an HDMI port there? I guess to plug in your Wii U or Blu-Ray player?
If you want to tow with a Grand Wagoneer, you’re in luck! These can pull pretty massive trailers: the shorter 123″ wheelbase ones with 2WD can tow 6,210 pounds, and 4WD ones can tow 6,030 pounds with the 3.55 axle ratio or a massive 10,000 pounds with the 3.92 ratio axle.
The 130″ wheelbase 2WD models can pull 5,960 pounds, and the 4WD ones can tow 5,770 pounds with the 3.55 axle ratio or 9,860 pounds with the 3.92 ratio axle.
Are you planning to off-road a Grand Wagoneer? Really? Okay, if you say so. Here’s some relevant information about that:
Approach Angle (degrees)
21.4 — standard suspension
25.2 — air suspension (Off Road 2)
Ramp Breakover Angle (degrees)
18.7 — standard suspension
22.1 — air suspension (Off Road 2)
Departure Angle (degrees)
21.2 — standard suspension
23.9 — air suspension (Off Road 2)
Be careful with the fancy paint and all that expensive-looking lighting if you do that, though.
These new Grand Wagoneers will start at $62,145 for the base 4×2, $65,145 for the 4×4, and the long wheelbase ones start at $65,145 and $68,145 for the 4×4.
The “Limited Altitude” trim is 4×4 only and is $71,140, $74,140 for the longer one. The Summit Obsidian trim is $93,390, and $96,390 if you want the extra length.
Top photo: Jeep
Given the recent reliability issues with Stellantis, prospective owners recommended to lease not purchase and have a suitable backup vehicle available for extended warranty repair downtime.
I always thought that EREV makes the most sense in vehicles of this class, and that still holds true. Jeep making ALL of them Grand is going to backfire hugely for them when they try and sell their 120k versions next to their 65k versions. The 65k should honestly just be named something different because you’re devaluing the entire line by naming them the same thing!
Ford, GM and to a lesser extent Ram, have no problem selling luxed out $100k+ pickups along side of $50k fleet versions.
There is a HUGE difference between those who want a high trim pick up truck and people buying BOF people movers.
Small difference yes, HUGE difference no as the Suburban/Tahoe also proves, since once again they have no problem selling the luxxed out versions even though fleets/police buy the strippo versions.
But the tahurban isn’t the luxury version. It has a higher end version but the lux version of that vehicle is the escalade.
Wasn’t the Karma Fisker technically the first EREV in the US? It failed miserably obviously (thanks Matt!) but I’m pretty sure is was a EREV by today’s standards.
Yes the Fisker Karma was the first EREV and the erasure is egregious.
Isn’t that one version of the i3 also an EREV?
Yep. Sure is. Jeep is not spending much effort to verify their claims here are they?
That red interior looks absolutely sensational.
It’s fine I guess, but I can’t fathom why anyone would pay money for an electrified Stellantis product after the fiasco that was the Charger EV and the recent update that bricked a bunch of PHEV Wranglers.
Yeah, no. The old Wagoneer looked like a Jeep. One of the last to honor their heritage and traditional look instead of going insectoid. The new face is not an improvement. And what they hell is an EREV? Are we talking hybrid? This whole electrification bandwagon is excessive as is, don’t start trying to cram new anagrams down our throats. Shut up with the no chrome bit. Silver highlights top and bottom of the grille, silver badges, and what appears to be highlights along the roof still count as bric-a-brac. As does the needless gray cladding. And there’s considerable chrome inside.
So Jeep patted themselves on the back for getting rid of chrome on the Wagoneer?
Why stop there? Put some damn fake wood panels on the body like back in the day…. that’s what we want, dammit!
I am fine with every chrome on earth being gone. The chroming of metal is AWFUL stuff for the people that work it and the environment.
and fake plastic chrome is nearly as bad. Our entire fleet has no chrome.
Are those towing numbers for the EREV or the Hurricane model? I assume they would be different.
In some ways this is like GM’s first use of FWD being in the Oldsmobile Toronado, a vehicle that only marginally benefitted from such a setup.
At least here we can infer that the high profit margins of the GW will serve as a testbed for later EREV applications where it will be more useful.
No MPG info? How about V2X capability for the EREV, can it power your campsite.or trailer?
They’re not putting out any info on the EREV yet. Hopefully it can function as a beefy backup generator, and has a hefty tow rating rating to boot. Leaked photos from awhile back show 8-lug wheels, so it’s gonna be chonky, just like all the rest.
“They’re not putting out any info on the EREV yet”
But they did:
“More interesting is the EREV version, which will use a 3.6-liter V6 coupled to a 130 kW generator. Electric motors will drive the wheels, powered by the V6, batteries, or both; this combination will provide 647 hp and 620 lb-ft of torque, which can shove the Grand Wagoneer from parked to 60 mph in 5 seconds. The range for this setup is estimated at 500 miles, quite impressive for a vehicle of this size.”
It wouldn’t have cost them anything to put out the battery capacity, fuel tank volume and energy economy too.
That’s all just copy-over stuff that’s been out about the Ramcharger for, what, a year at this point?
Bit much for me in terms of car. Something smaller would be more up my alley.
Hopefully there will be an EREV Jeep Recon…
I am hopeful for an EREV Wrangler. To assuage the fears of some they can use diesel electric locomotives in the advertising.
Frankly that’s what the 4xe should have been from the beginning, then maybe we could have got a 2 door variant.
Very cool. We needed this technology yesterday.
So, they dropped both the Wagoneer and the H.O. Hurricane I take it?
Seems kinda short sighted, unless the market for the H.O. in the half tons has been bigger than expected.
I would’ve thought it’d be the top engine choice for the Summit trim.
I’m sure I’m in the minority, but I have a preference for the front end of the outgoing Wagoneer versus the new Grand Wagoneer mug.
I was reading the description while looking at the photo just below it, then was disappointed that they are getting rid of that look. There’s not a clear close up of the new look, but from what I see above, I don’t like it. No sir.
This would have been the perfect vehicle for me about 5-8 years ago. 90% of my trips are under 50 miles with usually 4 trips towing 8000Lb 250-1000 miles. Most importantly it looks like it will fit inside a garage. Hate to admit it, but it looks pretty good too.
I’d love to see a review when these are available that includes towing a sizable load from Jason to Mercedes or vice versa. Once you’re out of e-juice can you perpetually tow using dino-juice? Does the 175hp it can generate feel adequate?
There was lots of discussion with the Ramcharger that the 130kW was ‘continuous’ output, but that it would be able to ‘peak’ closer to the 286hp (or whatever the Atkinson 3.6 can do) for shorter amounts of time. Really hoping they put a lot of time into the software for range management – does it monitor your navigation input for elevation change, and make sure there’s plenty of battery for any big hills? Does it turn the engine on earlier in tow/haul mode? Can you command the engine on yourself? Agree that how they handle towing is going to be a big deal for this, and especially the pickup version.
No the 130kw generator is the limit, doesn’t matter how much the engine can put out if all it can do is power the generator. Yes if there is enough charge left in the battery it can assist as long as it has enough charge. How they program it is key. Based on the 4xe models you will be hosed as you don’t have a proper selection of modes on those like you do on good PHEVs. Mine has Auto where it will use the most effecient power for the current conditions, EV Now where it won’t turn on the engine, EV Later where it will maintain existing SOC +/-, and Charge Now where it will keep the engine running and use power that exceeds demand to charge the battery.
Not according to Car & Driver. It wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense to put in a generator that could only use a little over half of the power the engine could develop. I’m sure more details will be given closer to launch (not sure if the SUV or pickup is going to launch first), but, it sounds like you’ll be able to put most of the engine power to the wheels.
“Those 145 miles of battery range will likely drop to less than half that when towing, but the generator keeps the rig rolling after that. The generator in question is rated at 174 horsepower of continuous output. That doesn’t sound like any way to keep up while towing 14,000 pounds, but a Ram powertrain engineer we spoke to says this is plenty. On generator power, you can cruise a flat interstate at 65 mph with a max load trailer until the fuel tank needs to be refilled. Tow something like 7000 pounds, and it only gets better.
The ups and downs of rolling terrain are covered by dipping into the unused portion of the battery on the upslope, then shuffling some power back into the battery when easing off and regenerating on the downslope. If the load gets more intense, the system can run the generator up to its peak output of 255 horsepower. But there’s always battery power standing behind that, so the occasional short bursts that need more power than that should always be possible.”
It’s probably wise to debut this new technology in an already unpopular GW than in an “existential to the company” Ram.
It is somewhat odd to me that they used the Pentastar rather than the Hurricane in the EREV setup. Has it been explained before why that decision was made? It would have seemed easier to me to design a new engine family capable of being used in this application, rather than using a design from over a decade ago, but maybe there are reasons.
It could be packaging, it the Pentastar shorter? It can also be transverse and longitudinally mounted for packaging choices so it may mate to the generator better. It has also been proven to be reliable.
I was thinking the same thing, has to be packaging, but since these were in design at the same time it seems surprising that this is the solution they chose…
I’m guessing a combo of 3 things, 1 is packaging, pentastar is much shorter than the hurricane, and I bet the generator motor takes up some length. 2, is probably cost or complexity, its a legacy and fully amortized powertrain without turbos, and is probably far cheaper to build. 3 is power, the pentastar doesn’t make as much power as the Hurricane, but the generator motor is topped out at 130 kW or ~170hp, so the extra power of the hurricane has no benefit. I also bet that there’s a power-efficiency sweet spot the pentastar has been tuned to hit, so it’s maximally thermally efficient at that 170hp output, despite the pentastar being capable of about double that peak.
I believe the 3.6 here is similar to the one in the Pacifica Hybrid, running on the Atkinson cycle. Don’t believe the Hurricane was built with that in mind, but even if it’s a simple conversion, who really wants a turbo generator? Makes more sense cost effectively to do this.
What you believe:
should’ve been the logic behind the new Cherokee hybrid.
I’d second this.
Although Kubota has done well with turbo generators for a while – I don’t think the 4xe systems have enjoyed that level of Japanese reliability.
Best to take an existing powertrain like the 3.6 and refine it.
Who really wants a turbo generator? Lots of people:
https://www.prattwhitney.com/en/products/auxiliary-power-units
These things are ALL turbo!
I imagine the advantage is relative simplicity and reliability because but sure isn’t efficiency. IIRC APUs have the thermal efficiency of a lawnmower.
I mean, for airplanes it’s understandable. How many passenger cars are there with turbo hybrids? Hyundai, I think is the only one who does it, but those are hybrids where the gas engine can power the wheels. Not the case in this generator set-up for the GW/Ram 1500.
Come to think of it turbos and turbines also compensate for varying air pressure which is another good reason for use in aircraft. If the vehicle is intended to be used as a generator from mountaintops to the sea perhaps a Miller cycle* RE makes sense for more consistent power output.
*IIRC the Miller cycle is basically the Atkinson cycle with a blower.
Cost and packaging would be my first guesses.
I also agree, especially considering the pentastar has been going boom a lot more lately. At this point I’d trust a hurricane over any new pentastar, but the hurricane is still new, so time will tell.
Jeeps can’t keep ONE powertrain going for an extended period of time in their vehicles, and now we have to contend with TWO powertrains?!
If you thought Jeep quality was shit before, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
Those interiors do look damn nice though. You’ll be sitting in luxury as you wait for your tow truck to arrive.
The 3.6 has been one of the better more reliable engine for jeep but that is not saying much.
Just one computer module can stop an entire car even if the motor and tranny are fine. Jeep (Mopar) ain’t known for their reliable electronics.
I was going to say does that 500 mile range include the range when it is being flat bedded to the dealer for what ever software or electrical problem it has?
Its sad because they do make some very pretty vehicles. Easily the nicest interiors in their class, usually. And the cars and trucks have charisma with great colors and fun logos. It makes me mad that they just don’t take quality and durability seriously to the point where they’re cars are totally a no-buy for so many people.
They need to hyper focus on quality on everyone of these that leaves the factory. I want EREVs to work and recent (or forever) jeep quality make this scream Olds Diesel cars fiasco all over again.
I mean they clearly don’t have the budget for a real redesign, because the ugliest portion of it still remains in the weird rising belt line and horrible D-Pillar treatment with the shittastic “floating roof”
“America’s first EREV”
I remain calm. I allow this to wash over me. My nostrils are definitely not imitating the prow of a late model BMW.
Screams internally in Chevy Volt
The Volt was a Series / Parallel PHEV. The engine was physically connected to the wheels in some drive modes.
The phyical connection was because it is more efficient to directly couple the driveshaft to the wheels during steady-state highway operation. The Volt was engineered as a day to day EV that could also make the hyperspace jump to a city 8hrs away with little issue. GM came up with the term EREV, even.
I’m aware of all that. Still hard to claim a vehicle with a 38 mile electric range as an EV and anything with a gas engine on board is a hybrid.
(GM’s EREV marketing also caused a lot of confusion and helped lead to poor sales of the Volt. I know quite a few people that thought the Volt was an electric car with a tiny range for $40K)
GM’s marketing and a lot of bad-faith misrepresentation by pundits anxiously clawing for an excuse to attack then-President Obama by linking him to the car. (His own words about “driving across the country on electricity [the Volt] produces) didn’t help things either.)
Our differing opinions highlight the subjective nature of this whole taxonomy anyways. I see it as an EREV (a term I feel places EV operation first) whereas you see it as a PHEV (a term which I feel places EV operation secondary). But those are just my definitions based on my interpretation of the engineering choices made. I understand why you feel PHEV fits better as a descriptor.
(You want to see some really fun taxonomical fistfights, though, go talk to some evolutionary biologists. Put five of them in a room and you’ll have 5^2 arguments. 😉 )
Like 90% of the time, it was a genset.
This. Heck, 90% of the time it was a paperweight, as intended. It was the “RE” in the EREV, even if it could couple to the wheels on extremely specific occasions.
This man, this archduke, he gets it.
I think we’re all trying to forget that the Fisker Karma existed.
To be fair, when I was writing that I forgot the Karma and its goofy Guy Fawkes face existed too.
I didn’t! Just commented that Fisker was a EREV in 2011 haha
I must not get defensive online.
Defensiveness online is the soul-killer.
Defensiveness online is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my defensiveness.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past, I will turn the inner keyboard to see its path.
When the defensiveness has gone there will be nothing. Only sanity will remain.
I place my hand in the GM-jabbar as a test of my mental fortitude
NISSAN AL-GAIB!
PERFECTION
They’ve added a lot of cheese, for the Jeep Royale Wagoneer.
But, perhaps, I should just be thankful for the de-chroming of American vehicles.
America used Jeeps beat the Axis I powers, but based on the current trajectory of the US, Axis II perforating our systems and our Jeeps seems about right.
I love the idea of the extended range setup, just wish it came in something other than the bloated POS form factor.
I still don’t see the point of three row SUVs. Can’t wait for minivans to start getting the same treatment trucks and SUVs have gotten the past decade. Fancy seats, special editions, glass roofs, wraparound touch screen, wood and diamond stitched leather on every surface, 1000hp, sliding door.
Edit: I forgot puddle lamps
I’ve not once had my ingress and egress into the third row of an SUV be as easy as it was in a Caravan. Yes, I was younger and smaller then, but I think it was still a better design for it.
I agree. It is like that “I may need it in the future” spending like may “need to tow 10K pounds, go rock crawling, race a circuit, haul tons in the bed”, crap people never do with their vehicles but HAVE to have. The third row is keeping up with the Joneses. I did have a 3rd row commander for a wile when my wife was a Girl Scout leader and it did get a lot of use but that was a not the norm. A minivan is better.
Minivans can’t tow 10,000 lb.
I can just barely see this argument for large crossovers that are mostly minivans without sliding doors, but truck-based SUVs have their place.
When was the last time 8 people needed to be in the tow vehicle at exactly the time 10,000lb needed to be towed somewhere?
That one Ford Excursion commercial doesn’t count.
It doesn’t need to occur at the same time to make sense, unless you think everyone with a large family and a boat or camper should own multiple vehicles instead. Most of the time my minivan is in use, there aren’t 5+ people in it, but sometimes there are, so it was worth it to buy the capacity.
Also, many people buy these and leave the 3rd row folded down for secure, locked cargo space. If they offered a 2 row, 5 seat large SUV, that would probably sell too, but wouldn’t make the complainers any happier.
“unless you think everyone with a large family and a boat or camper should own multiple vehicles instead”
Multiple cars for a family like that makes a lot more sense than having one car that can’t be in multiple places at the same time. God help them if that one car were to get wrecked, break down, or just go into the shop for a couple of days.
LMAO. If you can afford to own a second (or third) vehicle for each fringe use case then you can afford to rent a vehicle while your primary is in the shop. That’s what everyone around here believes everyone should do when they need to haul a trailer anyways.
Its one thing to rent a truck to haul mulch once in a blue moon when you know you need to haul that mulch days in advance. It’s another to go outside, turn the key and find someone left the dome light on and that new 12V battery is stone dead on the morning of your performance review.
We are also talking about a family big enough to justify an 8 seat vehicle so its not a stretch to imagine 3-4 licenced drivers in that family. If so I doubt its a fringe use case when mom AND dad need to get to work on opposite sides of town while not so little Billy needs to get himself to school in yet a completely different direction. Not everyone of those drivers needs a mobile mountain; a used Civic, maybe even an EV could do just fine.
I don’t think he was trying to argue they would only have one vehicle. I grew up in and still am surrounded by large families and tons of outdoor activities. So I see daily people using a heavily loaded Suburban to pull the boat to the lake or the trailer to the hills, using both needs at once. But I also see people with 3 kids taking a friend for each kid to go do something. And pulling trailers to race weekend. But that doesn’t mean owning a single cab truck and a mid size crossover is the better solution for that family at all. Usually it means they have commuter car that dad drives to work, and the SUV does ALL the other things.
The commentariat here is dead set in their belief that every household should own a dozen vehicles, each with their own niche use case. Purchase, maintenance, insurance, storage costs be damned.
Whatever it takes to tell SUV buyers that they are WRONG.
I think it may happen more than you think.
Large families or other parties that travel with 8 people often find that the cargo space in a minivan or SUV is very insufficient for the quantity of people in the vehicle.
If travel extends for more than 2 nights I’ve known many families that had a trailer for luggage.
My Mini has 4 seats, but it sure can’t fit the pack ‘n play and diaper bag and luggage for more than one night away with 2 kids.
Multiply by 6 kids of various ages and the situation is pretty dire regardless of vehicle.
“Large families or other parties that travel with 8 people often find that the cargo space in a minivan or SUV is very insufficient for the quantity of people in the vehicle.”
That’s what MegaVans are for.
Oh, wait….
You know you add a couple infants, some pack n plays, and extend the trip to a week or more – things can get tight even in a big van.
Wouldn’t trade it for anything though.
roof racks and cargo boxes work wonders. I grew up in a family of 7 and we had full sized vans.
For many boat owners, that’s just a normal weekend. We do that all the time with our Suburban.
Whenever my family goes on a trip (my parents, sister, bil, their two kids, me, wife and our kid) we always rent a big suv because we need the people capacity and cargo. So much so that when I got a new vehicle this time I decided on an escalade esv V even though 90% of the time it’ll just be me in there.
My gripe is mostly the lack of sliding door. Make a slider Escalade you cowards.
The new Kia Carnival’s top trim is a poor man’s Genesis, and the Pacifica Pinnacle comes with leather lumbar pillows, so we’re basically already there.
For the price of a Grand Wagoneer you could afford to deck out a cargo van like the Transit or ProMaster with some really nice stuff. Bonus points if you do a mural on the sides.
and it’ll be worth exactly 0 dollars compared to a bof suv when it comes time to sell and move on
then don’t sell or move on
As someone who recently sold his E63S wagon to get an Escalade ESV-V, there is just something cool about it that I can’t put my finger on.
Except the crazy gattling gun exhaust, yeah that’s probably the reason for me lol
Boy I tell you what we really needed in this economy was another $100,000+ oversized, over-stuffed SUV….
I mean, it already existed, though. Now it just has more range. Would be nice if they put that tech in smaller vehicles. But it’s still a Stellantis product, so… pass.
clearly you don’t understand the american dream… looking rich while being poor.
Per Moody’s Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi the top 10% of US households are responsible for 49% of all consumer spending.
Manufacturers are following the money.
Because the other 90% have nothing to buy and no money to buy it with.
Which would make sense if things like the Grand Cherokee was selling well- which it isn’t…