Production delays aside, Jeep is steaming towards its September on-sale date for the 2014 Cherokee. The reborn midsizer's configurator has just gone live, meaning you can fiddle with different options, colors and trim levels to your heart's content.

The cheapest model available is the 4X2 Sport, which starts at a reasonable $22,995. On the high end, the Cherokee's builder allowed us to indulge our passion for ludicrously priced vehicles by outfitting the top-end Trailhawk, which already starts at $29,495, with $8,610 in options. The resulting car, which you can see above, would retail for $39,100 after the $995 destination is factored in.

Head on over to Jeep's build-it-yourself website and have a look around.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 133 Comments
      AdamVIP
      • 1 Year Ago
      What is this available 3.2L 6 cyl? Have they used that on anything else. What are the specs?
      Brian Meissen
      • 1 Year Ago
      The SUV that's uglier than the Pontiac Aztec. We have a new king for ugliest car ever built.
      svntsvn
      • 1 Year Ago
      2014 Jeep Aztec... Any takers?
        bookemd
        • 1 Year Ago
        @svntsvn
        Not even close. It's getting old with Aztec comparisons. This vehicle signifies a a new direction for Jeep. (ie broader customer base) The aZtec just checked the boxes for Pontiac design in a jumbled way., as Lutz used to say they did at GM design.
      Lynchenstein
      • 1 Year Ago
      The ugly is still standard equipment?
      NewTexian Brewery
      • 1 Year Ago
      $40k for that monstrosity of a POS???
        Tyler
        • 1 Year Ago
        @NewTexian Brewery
        Sure...if you select every single option possible. You can do the same thing on an Escape.
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
      NightFlight
      • 1 Year Ago
      I can't get over how shockingly ugly this thing is. It looks like three different design teams worked on this vehicle, nothing at all flows together. $39,000 for a loaded Cherokee is pure crack pipe. You'd have to be out of your mind to choose this over the fantastic Grand Cherokee. I foresee Jeep relying on fleet sales and heavy incentives to move this monstrosity.
        Tyler
        • 1 Year Ago
        @NightFlight
        It's $39000 for every single option. A nicely equipped non-Trailhawk version will land you in the high twenties and low thirties, right where it's competition is. It'll do fine.
          NightFlight
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Tyler
          You can also get a Grand Cherokee in the low $30's. So again, why would someone buy this ugly thing over a FAR superior vehicle?
      dohc73
      • 1 Year Ago
      $39,0000000000000???????? What has become of affordable cars now-a-days?? Is $35,000 the new $25,000 average? For an ugly-girl-with-braces mug like that?
        express2day
        • 1 Year Ago
        @dohc73
        Comparable car prices, on average, are actually lower "now-a-days" and sometimes much lower but the problem is with people looking at upper trim, overly optioned models as if that's supposed to be the norm or what they have to buy. The 2014 Cherokee Sport starts at only $23,990, already pretty nicely equipped.
      See_York_Chin
      • 1 Year Ago
      Jeep Aztec.
      RWD.Master
      • 1 Year Ago
      You can't polish a turd
      MAX
      • 1 Year Ago
      Look for Jeep to have huge months going forward. They built a bunch of Grand's, unlimiteds and Compasses last month. This new gorgeous and most capable in it's class, Cherokee is going to be a huge success and add much to the sales offensive.
        NightFlight
        • 1 Year Ago
        @MAX
        I literally laughed out loud when I read you said this is gorgeous. Jeep better ramp up production of the Compass, they've upped their fleet ratio with it.
      SquareFour
      • 1 Year Ago
      "The cheapest model available is the 4X2 Sport, which starts at a reasonable $22,995..." I don't find that reasonable at all. Is this what the other jacked-up cars (collectively known as compact CUVs) start at? If so, no thanks. Looks like the Mazda CX-5 starts at $20,995, and it's at least nice to look at. So Jeep is charging a premium simply for the "Jeep" name. Considering the dubious build quality of recent FIAT products (check out Edmunds long-term fleet for their experiences with the 500 and Dodge Dart) it seems to me that this is a fool's purchase in base trim. Now, if it came standard with 4wd--which all Jeeps should--it would maybe justify the price, but an Impreza XV Crosstrek starts at a grand cheaper...
        reattadudes
        • 1 Year Ago
        @SquareFour
        yet oddly, my 500 is now almost two years old (64,000 miles), and the only time its been to the dealer is for oil changes. I've had twelve people buy 500s after driving mine, and theirs have been just as trouble-free. perhaps you could let me know when I should expect those problems to start. if you think they're so "terrible", you might want to stop by a FIAT dealer in your local area. my dealer says they'd starve to death depending on warranty work. there isn't any. and be sure when you see these new Cherokees all over town, you tell them what a bad investment they made. and if you think $22.995 "isn't reasonable", you might want to check out the competition.
          kcroc10077
          • 1 Year Ago
          @reattadudes
          No need to get huffy. Anecdotal experience is just that. When taken in aggregate, Chrysler products don't fare well. It's not just Edmunds saying that. Take a look manufacturer reliability ratings from a number of different sources and you'll find Chrysler at or very close to the bottom.
          svntsvn
          • 1 Year Ago
          @reattadudes
          As much as your reasonable reply may resonate to some here, one might say wait and see on this CUV with buyers..as its pricey and its a Chrysler product. They can not and will not launch a successful vehicle since the new Grand Cherokee. This vehicle is not a top buy in anyone's book by any means. Rebadged items don't always sell because of the name. It may be a capable vehicle in it's class, but it should not be wearing the identifiable name plate the past generation had for almost 20 yrs. Buyers will spend their money elsewhere. Do you have any predicted production figures? Lucky if Jeep moves 100,000 in the U.S. for 2014.
        Dave
        • 1 Year Ago
        @SquareFour
        I actually did a comparative build and price with the Chevy Equinox, Ford Escape, GMC Terrain, Honda CRV, and Toyota Rav4. I did a mid-level comparison, AWD/4x4, and by the time I finished, putting as many equal options on them, it was either the Honda or the Toyota that was least expensive, but the Jeep was the second least expensive. I didn't do the Mazda, because one, it slipped my mind, two, I've built quite a few of them recently anyways, and three, Mazda doesn't have the market-share that the others do. GMC and Chevy I count as the same share, because the money goes to the same company.
          SquareFour
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Dave
          I'm not talking about optioned out examples though. This is purely about base model MSRPs.
          Michael D. Mitchell
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Dave
          You can get a larger motor on the Mazda CX-5, but it simply doesn't have the off-road prowess of the Cherokee, so it really just comes down to what is more important to you.
          SquareFour
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Dave
          @Michael D. Mitchell, Except the Cherokee doesn't come standard with 4wd, while the Impreza does. And to some of us that 5-speed manual is something to be praised, not derided. Considering Chry/FIAT's track record with transmissions, I don't want to be the 1st on my block with this 9speed wonder. And what "off-road prowess" are you speaking of? The base Cherokee is FWD, without skid plates, riding on economy tires. It's pretty much just another suburban mall-crawler. At least the base CX-5 is entertaining to drive and presents a pretty face to the world. Plus, as I said, it starts two grand less than this Jeep. So, if I were in the market for a small CUV for pavement and ocassional light duty trail use, why would I buy a base Cherokee when I could have a CX-5 or Impreza for less? As to size: Cherokee- Exterior Measurements WIDTH6 ft. 1.2 in. (73.2 in.) HEIGHT5 ft. 5.7 in. (65.7 in.) LENGTH15 ft. 2 in. (182 in.) FRONT TRACK5 ft. 2 in. (62 in.) REAR TRACK5 ft. 1.9 in. (61.9 in.) WHEEL BASE8 ft. 10.3 in. (106.3 in.) Interior Measurements FRONT HEAD ROOM39.4 in. FRONT HIP ROOM53.8 in. FRONT LEG ROOM41.1 in. FRONT SHOULDER ROOM57.6 in. REAR HIP ROOM49.9 in. REAR HEAD ROOM38.5 in. REAR LEG ROOM40.3 in. REAR SHOULDER ROOM55.1 in Impreza- Exterior Measurements WIDTH5 ft. 8.5 in. (68.5 in.) HEIGHT4 ft. 9.7 in. (57.7 in.) LENGTH14 ft. 5.8 in. (173.8 in.) GROUND CLEARANCE0 ft. 5.7 in. (5.7 in.) FRONT TRACK4 ft. 11.4 in. (59.4 in.) REAR TRACK4 ft. 11.6 in. (59.6 in.) WHEEL BASE8 ft. 8.1 in. (104.1 in.) Interior Measurements FRONT HEAD ROOM39.8 in. FRONT HIP ROOM52.2 in. FRONT LEG ROOM43.5 in. FRONT SHOULDER ROOM55.6 in. REAR HIP ROOM53.1 in. REAR HEAD ROOM37.7 in. REAR LEG ROOM35.4 in. REAR SHOULDER ROOM54.2 in. That's not really a "fair bit larger."
          Michael D. Mitchell
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Dave
          @ SquareFour, The base price on a Cherokee nets you an industry-first 9-speed automatic and a 184hp 2.4L motor. The base price on a Subaru XV Crosstrek nets you a 5-speed manual and a wheezy 2.0L boxer. The Cherokee is also a fair bit larger, too.
        Skicat
        • 1 Year Ago
        @SquareFour
        "There's a reason FIAT has a rep for poor build quality." What FIATs have you driven? Owned? In what decade? What countries? I've spent time in the 500 here in the States and the Punto in Italy. Both were solid, reliable vehicles, well-suited to their markets. And they were built as well as the many cars I've driven as part of my job in the U.S. auto industry (not with Chrysler, BTW).
          SquareFour
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Skicat
          -I had a 500 seat adjuster break off in my hand during a test drive. So did Edmunds. -I rented a Panda in Italy and its headlights didn't work. -The Dart I test drove had a rattle in the steering column and the window switches would sink into the armrest every time I tried to use them. Is that enough for you?
          NightFlight
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Skicat
          I had a 500 for four days as a rental, and I thought it was outrageously lackluster. The IP was beyond cheap, and could be pulled off rather easily.
    • Load More Comments