They used to say that anything posted online lives forever. Of course, we now know this isn’t true, but perhaps the statement should be amended to say that you can’t unpublish stuff from the internet, only the forces of the universe can. Case in point: AÂ sprinkling of intel hit the new Jeep Cherokee’s consumer web page sooner than it probably should have, and while it’s been taken down now, archiving is a beautiful thing. So, here’s everything Jeep’s leaked about the new Cherokee before the big official announcement.
Under the hood of the new Cherokee sits a 1.6-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine with a hybrid system, good for a claimed 38 MPG combined. While Jeep hasn’t divulged the power output, 38 MPG combined beats the Subaru Forester Hybrid and Hyundai Tucson Hybrid by three MPG, and squeezes perfectly in between the 37 MPG combined of the all-wheel-drive Honda CR-V Hybrid and the 39 MPG combined of the current Toyota RAV4 Hybrid AWD. Granted, a new RAV4 is on its way soon, and it may post efficiency gains, but it seems that the powertrain of the new Cherokee is competitive on efficiency with the rest of the segment.
Come to think of it, Stellantis does offer a 1.6-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine with hybrid assistance, just not in North America, and not without a plug. It’s an evolved version of the Prince engine used in the R56 Mini Cooper S, and in the Opel Grandland Hybrid, it kicks out 148 horsepower and 220 lb.-ft. of torque on its own. It’s likely the new Cherokee will use a different state of tune, but it probably doesn’t have a clean-sheet engine up front.
As you probably expected, the new Jeep Cherokee will be all-wheel-drive, fitted with what Jeep calls its Active Drive I system. If the nomenclature holds from the previous Cherokee, this isn’t a particularly special all-wheel-drive setup, but rather a simple full-time system with drive modes and open differentials. No crawl ratio, and likely no locking mode for the power transfer unit. On the plus side, a purported towing capacity of 3,500 pounds isn’t anything to sneeze at, good enough for a small camper or a decent utility trailer.
We also know from this leak that the new Jeep Cherokee will be available in five different trim levels. There’s the base trim, the mid-range Laredo, the traditionally well-appointed Limited, the posh Overland, and the ruggedized Trailhawk. Oh, and it’ll also come in some great colors. Beyond the expected greyscale tones, the bright Hydro Blue Pearl from the Wrangler makes an appearance, as does Red Hot and an olive shade called ’41.
Top graphic image: Jeep
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
Leaky Jeep? That’s hardly unexpected.
One to consider if you’re leasing anyway, I expect they’ll have to offer deals to move the metal given Stellantis’ reputation and I’d still call long-term ownership risky.
Define “Accidentally”
This also uses an evolution of the Prince from the Mini but resourced for North American production…the same and really quite more STLA than PSA due to the resourcing
Well, if Jeep follows their current pricing, this should MSRP at (does math) elevnty bazillion dollars.
Oh look, the thing they should have built 3 years ago!
Earlier this week, the Jeep site showed 210 HP and 230 lb.ft. for the 1.6 hybrid. Seems like pretty stout power output for the class. Bravo, Jeep.
Also, the code guide has been available internally for a while. Interestingly, Trailhawk is not mentioned. Base, Laredo, Limited and Overland are offered. Maybe Trailhawk is late availability? Color choices look fun as well with optional two tone.
38 MPG from an SUV with full time AWD? That is very impressive if true
Looks better than the reptilian last gen. Lots of glass, that’s a plus. On the other hand, if they’re not licensing the hybrid system from Toyota, the T.R.A.A. (Towing and Recovery Association of America) is celebrating at this very moment.
4xe redux
The base Tucson Hybrid Blue trim is rated at 38/38/38 with 17″ wheels and AWD so no the Jeep isn’t 3 mpg better than the Tucson, except for the higher trims with the 19″ wheels and AWD (35/35/35) and we don’t know that all trims of the alleged Cherokee hybrid have the same fuel economy combined as the best case advertisement.
The FWD Sportage LX is rated at 41/44/42 vs the AWD S and above for 2026 at 35/36/35.
The Escape is rated at 42/36/39 for mechanical AWD.
So no 38 mpg combined on the EPA cycle isn’t particularly hard in the class, but most of the competition are better built than Stellantis products.
Only the base Tucson and Sportage are available 17″ wheels and FWD, every single other trim (including the ones with heated seats) has 19″ wheels and AWD, making it effectively a 35mpg combined vehicle since those base models only exist for advertising and are never in stock.
The Escape is relatively carlike and sacrifices looks and power output for its efficiency, I think a better comparison is the Forester hybrid that has proper mechanical AWD and gets 35mpg combined. Given the boxy looks and turbo engine (N/A Atkinson cycle is ideal for this use case), I’m impressed (for Stellantis) with 38mpg combined even if it’s on base model aero wheels, as it’s perfectly competitive in class with even more carlike CUVs like the CR-V. The kind of hybrid transmission/architecture they use will be key to reliability.
“engine shared with a mini”?! How did this happen? I’m sure there’s a long complicated tale of two Carlos’s, a grand piano, and a cargo plane.
The European automotive landscape is very weird.
Don’t forget, the first modern-Mini’s used Chrysler-based 4 cylinders.
The companies that work together just turn heads, at least to me.
I think that tow rating is a miss for them.
I know it’s competitive (maybe even better than the other hybrids) with what’s out there, but the old v6 had a ton more (literally more than a ton more) and I know a few people that have stuck with Jeeps because of their towing capabilities.
How is 3,500 lbs. not impressive for a 1.6 that gets 38 mpg combined? People who tow bigger trailers have p!entry of other choices from Jeep and Ram.
Not saying it’s not OK. But the old v6 towed 6,000lbs. The tow rating was a reason people went with a Cherokee instead of a Forester.
Still at the top of it’s class (you don’t need to add some expensive option package like you do on the Subaru) but far less capable.
Not sure where you got 6K lbs from – V6 KL Cherokees with factory tow group were, afaik, 4500 max (I should know, I have one) – without the factory package they were only rated for 2K lbs
Most or all hybrids in this class have a maximum tow rating of 1,500lb, so 3,500lb blows them out of the water. Honda specifically went out of their way to add a 2nd gear to their series hybrid for tow rating purposes and still only achieved 1,500lb. Even pure ICE cars in this class (compact CUVs) only achieve around 3,500 max; you need to go up to mid-sizers to get more.
Definitely the bike and probably the kayak are AI generated
Probably the junk in the cargo area too. Gotta look active lifestyle!
Water bottle on the top tube, some sort of funky tri spoke rear wheel, DH (loooooong travel and dual triple crown) in a fork mount bike rack (which fell out of favor with the introduction of thru axles)…definitely CGI.
There’s a bite taken out of the wheel and the fork stanchions go clear to the handle bar and the rear suspension is a mess.
Plus the kayak J-hooks look to be about 50% the size they should be and the straps don’t loop around them. The whole thing is a mess.
Come on, Stellantis, if you’re claiming to be some kind of offroad lifestyle vehicle you could have spent $5k at the local REI to put on your $750,000 preproduction prototype…
To be fair, triple clamp stems are fairly common for hardcore DH bikes:
https://www.jensonusa.com/deity-intake-direct-mount-stem-35mm-10?loc=usa&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=18444120634&gbraid=0AAAAAo8ahOx269wFTKGZUPTM6i9Z1aPb5&gclid=CjwKCAjwkvbEBhApEiwAKUz6-_bkFpQLw4O5pFvFkuaIjgwdR1o3JFlg-kWzGbxhEg_bk9EaXnwkHhoCqx0QAvD_BwE
The Kayak is doing the Tesla hot dog thing! Its not even touching the rack.
The first image is some extremely lazy photoshop work, too. “Guys you have to make it look like we took this in the woods! And mud! But you only have fifteen minutes, I’m late for my tee time!”
Hopefully this hybrid system works better than the 4XE PHEVs.
Turbocharged, direct injected, and hybrid, produced by Stellantis? What could go wrong?
I’ll take my CR-V Hybrid in blue, instead of the Jeep in Blew.
big ol bag of “meh” with the wrong name.
Funny how accidental leaks favor the positive and rarely contain negative information. Like supermarket price scanning errors that are almost always overcharges vs undercharges.
Visually, I like the front and sides. But the rear is very bland and almost somehow anti Jeep looking. I really hope this somehow (pie in the sky) proves a reasonably reliable drivetrain and this thing does well though.
That’s funny, I like the rear view because it’s bland instead of senselessly overdone.
I distinguish between simple and bland. Bland doesn’t ever appeal to me because it is uninteresting. Simple can still be interesting, but avoid the senselessly overdone feeling. But for me, the back isn’t just simple, it is uninteresting.
So, now I am supposed to buy 2 propulsion systems from Stellantis?
At least these work together sometimes, unlike the mortal enemies under the hood of the 4xe series.
Aaah, my PTSD.
You can already get lightly used GC and Wrangler 4Xes in low 20s. Holy shit has that powertrain proven to be a disaster…
Yep, the 4xe prices dropped like a rock and the market isn’t stupid. The Wrangler especially has traditionally been as depreciation-proof as any car without a Honda or Toyota badge.
Such a great idea and it should have been like printing their own money. Might have even been the concept that saved the broader company, but execution is everything.
They are committed to making Jeep the best offroad vehicles, or at least side of the road.
Whoever heard of a Jeep leak?
Since my jeep is currently leaking R-1234yf, every jeep owner?
My GMC Acadia’s R-1234yf system that required a full recharge over a single winter would like to challenge you to a duel
*Looks at oil drops under Wrangler in garage*
*Raises hand*
No oil drops for me, but the freedom tops have leaked twice while driving in torrential rains.
My YJ is 30 years old. If the drivetrain isn’t leaking a little, it means it’s out of fluids. I’ve gotten the worst of the leaks tackled, like the rear main seal, valve cover gasket, and the transmission pan gasket. I can live with the rest.
Scientists call this a Rorschach.
Jeepers call it “marking their territory”
But the CR-V looks better, whoever has been designing the new Jeeps should seek another profession.
I wish Jeep would go a tad retro on their designs. They would pair nicely with Wrangler.
Nah, it’s an homage to Detroit.
Endless hood.
Sorry.
That’s kind of inappropriate but I loled.
The current CR-V has fortunately solved the previous generation’s problem of having the ugliest butt ever on a car due to its taillights. And those I-wish-I-was-a-1976-caddy-tailfin almost-blade-things.
This is great, can’t wait to see how they completely screw it up!
I’m sure they will be able to recall how to.
“offering an incredible 38 combined MPG*”
*Based on 30 mpg – city, 27 mpg – highway, and infinite MPG while non-operational awaiting dealer service using standard Stellantis metrics of average use
Frankly I’d eat a few MPG lost to avoid a Direct Injection Turbocharged gas engine made by Stellantis, or anyone for that matter.
Coming here to post exactly that, I think Honda and Toyota were smart to make relatively simple NA engines to pair with the electric powertrains.
However, if this comes out at least $3-4k cheaper than the comparable RAV, then it’s going on the list. That what I call the Stellantis Tax. It’s like the Toyota Tax, but in reverse for the hassles and disappointment that are more likely to strike our household if anything happens, especially for the first year of a new setup 🙂
The N14 engine from the R56 Mini was the main reason I bought a “bloated” F56 Mini with the B48 engine which has a much better reputation for reliability and has not caused any problems for me so far (knocking furiously on wood).
It’s 2025 not 1985. Neither turbocharging nor direct injection are anything to live in fear of anymore. Concerns about Stellantis QC, however, are as valid as ever…
For gas engines they certainly are, they have all sorts of issues with longevity and oil dilution via blowby.
For Diesel engines it has never really been an issue.
EPA Tier 4 means that turbocharged DI gas engines are getting particulate filters just like diesels. (Ford Maverick ecoboost already got one for 2025)
Pretty sure the Ford Escape has the only non-DI engine in a hybrid. I think the Stellantis group lacks an up-to-date larger N/A 4 cylinder amongst their European dominated engine families.
Every e-CVT Toyota has port injection to my knowledge. The ones with autos are turbocharged with direct injection though.
Also the Ford Maverick Hybrid is port injection and naturally aspirated.
Those Toyotas are both port and direct injected, which could count as either depending on the purpose (has the increased complexity and cost, lacks the carbon buildup issues). The Maverick has the exact same system as the Escape, but I forgot to mention ‘in-class’ as a modifier
Damn, it’s good they kept the port injection, but damn nonetheless.
At least I was able to get a BEV I mostly like before that nonsense became standard.
I love coming to this site to read news I found other places on the internet days ago 🙂 I legitimately say that with affection, I don’t come here for breaking automotive news, I come here for the weird.
But anyway, there’s a lot to like here compared to its competition. As far as I can tell it sure seems more attractive, now we know the hybrid fuel economy will be competitive, and if the name holds true it has a mechanical full time all wheel drive system.
Is that enough for Jeep diehards? Of course not, but it’s better than the E AWD systems in the Toyota and Honda competition and should be more capable. Maybe I’ll wind up taking a look at this since I really like the Passport but the fuel economy is a non-starter. 38 combined MPG sure is better than *checks notes* 20….