I don't see a market for the ST-8.
Daimler doesn't have a utility vehicle like the Land Rover where
ugly is not a factor, but ability is, so the Commander may save their
a**.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Kevin_S wrote:
>
> I would buy the ST-8 as a grocery getter, but not to off-road. If I
> had that kind of $$, which I don't. Guess I'll havev to stick to the
> XJ.
>
> The commander is U-G-L-Y.....

 

I don't see a market for the ST-8.
Daimler doesn't have a utility vehicle like the Land Rover where
ugly is not a factor, but ability is, so the Commander may save their
a**.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Kevin_S wrote:
>
> I would buy the ST-8 as a grocery getter, but not to off-road. If I
> had that kind of $$, which I don't. Guess I'll havev to stick to the
> XJ.
>
> The commander is U-G-L-Y.....

 

I don't see a market for the ST-8.
Daimler doesn't have a utility vehicle like the Land Rover where
ugly is not a factor, but ability is, so the Commander may save their
a**.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Kevin_S wrote:
>
> I would buy the ST-8 as a grocery getter, but not to off-road. If I
> had that kind of $$, which I don't. Guess I'll havev to stick to the
> XJ.
>
> The commander is U-G-L-Y.....

 

Kevin_S wrote:
> New Jeep Commander (ick!)
> http://new-york-auto-show.autoblog.c...4000963037258/

Actually, it's refreshing to see a body designed for function instead of
slavishly following latest faddish future-fantasy 'look'. Yes, it's a
big friggin box, but it fits three-row tiered seating without
significantly bloating the wheelbase and overall dimensions of a Grand.
Returning to utility is a good direction for Jeep. Unfortunately, the
performance design priority is for car-like handling and ride comfort
(marginal ground clearance, independent front suspension, electronic
anti-roll crap). Not much of an offroader and therefore not much of a
Jeep. Still, they'll sell a pile of these in suburbia.

http://macleans.auto123.com/en/info/...tid=38056&pg=7

> Jeep GC SRT-8 (kinda cool, but probably worthless off-road)
> http://new-york-auto-show.autoblog.c...4000863037255/

ick!

 

Kevin_S wrote:
> New Jeep Commander (ick!)
> http://new-york-auto-show.autoblog.c...4000963037258/

Actually, it's refreshing to see a body designed for function instead of
slavishly following latest faddish future-fantasy 'look'. Yes, it's a
big friggin box, but it fits three-row tiered seating without
significantly bloating the wheelbase and overall dimensions of a Grand.
Returning to utility is a good direction for Jeep. Unfortunately, the
performance design priority is for car-like handling and ride comfort
(marginal ground clearance, independent front suspension, electronic
anti-roll crap). Not much of an offroader and therefore not much of a
Jeep. Still, they'll sell a pile of these in suburbia.

http://macleans.auto123.com/en/info/...tid=38056&pg=7

> Jeep GC SRT-8 (kinda cool, but probably worthless off-road)
> http://new-york-auto-show.autoblog.c...4000863037255/

ick!

 

Kevin_S wrote:
> New Jeep Commander (ick!)
> http://new-york-auto-show.autoblog.c...4000963037258/

Actually, it's refreshing to see a body designed for function instead of
slavishly following latest faddish future-fantasy 'look'. Yes, it's a
big friggin box, but it fits three-row tiered seating without
significantly bloating the wheelbase and overall dimensions of a Grand.
Returning to utility is a good direction for Jeep. Unfortunately, the
performance design priority is for car-like handling and ride comfort
(marginal ground clearance, independent front suspension, electronic
anti-roll crap). Not much of an offroader and therefore not much of a
Jeep. Still, they'll sell a pile of these in suburbia.

http://macleans.auto123.com/en/info/...tid=38056&pg=7

> Jeep GC SRT-8 (kinda cool, but probably worthless off-road)
> http://new-york-auto-show.autoblog.c...4000863037255/

ick!

 

.... like it was made for your page.

Steve
http://xjeep.dyndns.org


L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> The Cherokee with it's twenty inch rims and
> spoiler qualifies for my Low Rider Page:
> http://----------.com/lowrider.htm

 

.... like it was made for your page.

Steve
http://xjeep.dyndns.org


L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> The Cherokee with it's twenty inch rims and
> spoiler qualifies for my Low Rider Page:
> http://----------.com/lowrider.htm

 

.... like it was made for your page.

Steve
http://xjeep.dyndns.org


L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> The Cherokee with it's twenty inch rims and
> spoiler qualifies for my Low Rider Page:
> http://----------.com/lowrider.htm

 

Commander is competition for Suburban, Armada, Expedition, et al. Meant
to look like an XJ crossed with a Land Rover. The Rescue concept was
aimed at the Hummer H2. Actual H3 competitor will probably be Gladiator
and variants thereof.

Steve
http://xjeep.dyndns.org


Pi-eyed Piper wrote:
> I'm really not a fan of that commander, they say that it's competition for
> the hummer....looks more like a full size subaru forrester.
>
> "Kevin_S" <ksperle@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1111682024.242630.160550@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
>
>>New Jeep Commander (ick!)
>>http://new-york-auto-show.autoblog.c...4000963037258/
>>
>>Jeep GC SRT-8 (kinda cool, but probably worthless off-road)
>>http://new-york-auto-show.autoblog.c...4000863037255/