Renegade Trailhawk

Tweaksta

Tweaksta

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
615
Location
McMahons Point, Sydney
Car Year
2000
Transmission
5MT
The JEEP Renegade Trailhawk is now in Aussie showrooms....

26-2015-jeep-renegade-trailhawk-1.jpg


2.4L engine, 134kW / 237Nm, 1621kg, 9 speed auto, 7.8 litres/100km claimed, 8.4L/100km average (source: caradvice).

Impressive 4wd system, Lo Range, crawler gear, 220mm clearance. Approach, departure and breakover angles are 31 degrees, 34 degrees and 26 degrees respectively.

https://youtu.be/Snvsw5Z8c7M
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avWFn90D-6Q"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avWFn90D-6Q[/ame]
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaAPLntPdfE"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaAPLntPdfE[/ame]
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSrXHFSjT40"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSrXHFSjT40[/ame]
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhmkH89_dcA"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhmkH89_dcA[/ame]

Could it be a Subaru beater?
Possibly in an out-of-the-box comparison. However, some of our modded Subies would easily show it a thing or two. Then you have to wonder about reliability. I wonder how these things will be going in 15 years with 200,000km on them. Surely not as well as well as some of ours.

I still kinda like it though.
I'd love to see an off road comparison with a Forester.
 
Well, I would say reliability comes first. I go to remote areas with kids and no other cars, so a Jeep is very much out of the question. I cannot trust a Jeep. Their vehicles have a tendency to die during off-road tests conducted by magazines (happened both to the current Grand Cherokee and to the Cherokee). I know, pre-production and early production quirks and all, but it does not inspire confidence. Second, their reliability ratings are nowhere Subaru's.

In fact, if I recall correctly, the latest US rankings from CR have Jeep second to last (Fiat) with Subaru fifth overall. The reliability rankings of 2009+ Subarus are excellent, which was not the case of the pre-2009 models.

Thus the off-road features are irrelevant to me. Then there is the size problem of the Renegade, far too small.

Now, leaving that aside, it must be mentioned that this does NOT have Jeep's signature 4x4 system which is found on the Wrangler and the Grand Cherokee Overland 4x4.

It does simulate low range etc and I am sure it will defeat any Subaru on a tougher trail, but 1/ I am pretty sure this does not have a transfer case and with a heavy reliance on electronics and a Jeep reputation for lack of reliability....and 2/this is certainly not nearly as capable as a Wrangler.

Bottom line: as far as I am concerned, I would rather get a Subaru or get a proven, traditional 4x4 systems. No Subaru can argue with Jeep's quadradrive 4x4 system, not in the wildest dreams of its most fervent supporters and I do not care how many mods the Subaru has: it stands no chance. However, there is a lot more to a vehicle than the 4x4/AWD system.

The only SUVs on sale in the US in 2016 I would trust off-road as an overall package are the Toyota 4Runner Trail/TRD and the Jeep Wrangler, this one with some hesitation. That's all that is left. All others are Land Rover models which are known for problems and the upper levels of the Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, and now this Renegade, which I do not trust. Nissan just left the true 4x4 segment here.

The traditional Jeep crowd in the US cannot stand the current Cherokee and will not accept the Renegade either.

In the US I am sure that the hard-core group will remain Wrangler focused, then Toyota trucks will remain next.

Conversely, those who would shop for a Subaru would not care for this Trailhawk's offroad ability.
 
As for a comparison, in stock form, which also means stock tires, I am sure a Forester will be easily defeated by this Renegade Trailhawk.

For all their nightmare reliability reputation, Jeep understands off-road like no other brand (well, ok, Land Rover) and they actually test the off-road trims of their vehicles in stock form over terrain where no one would take a stock Subie. I think they take them all over the Rubicon trail.

Then, again, a toy is one thing, a car or an overland vehicle, quite another.
 
MiddleAgeSubie said:
In fact, if I recall correctly, the latest US rankings from CR have Jeep second to last (Fiat) with Subaru fifth overall. The reliability rankings of 2009+ Subarus are excellent, which was not the case of the pre-2009 models.
Click to expand...

I agree about Subaru reliability, except that ...

For much more than 20 years, I have kept an eye on a variety of reliability rankings and surveys. Seems to me that Subaru vehicles of all descriptions have reliably rated in the top sections of all of these lists, regardless of country. Subaru certainly rates very highly here in Oz, and this country is not known for being easy on vehicles!

Maybe the USA is different, but I am sure that many of these lists originated there as well. So I would extend your comment to pre-2009 Subarus as well ...
 
The one thing that ruined those ratings is...you know which one. The good news there, of course, is that it was not the kind of problem that would strand you in the middle of nowhere.
 
^ the 2010 FB engine ... ? Ten year warranty on this problem, same as on the EJ-251 head gasket problem ...
 
Once upon a time all Jeeps had to be able to do the Rubicon trail in stock form, however recently they changed their minds and only the "offroad" Jeeps have to be capable of completing the trail in stock form. Last I read the Renegade has not done the Rubicon trail and they are not actually trying to sell the Renegade as a true offroader.
 
jf1sf5 said:
Here's a comparison with the Subaru XV vs Jeep Renegade

https://expeditionportal.com/head-to-head-subaru-xv-crosstrek-2-0i-vs-jeep-renegade-trailhawk/
Click to expand...

Many thanks for this, a nice read!

Basically, it confirms my expectations.

The one thing that SHOCKED me is that they actually took the XV all the way up Engineer and Cinnamon Passes! Whoa! This is real testing. These are moderate trails and, frankly, I am thrilled the XV made it all the way up with the little naturally aspirated engine and no low range. As they say, it was almost defeated, but it made it! But I think those putting larger tires on n/a H4s would be in for a bad surprise.

I cannot agree more with the article. The one MASSIVE limitation of the XV is its approach angle, which is same as mine (ok, mine is 1-1.5 deg better after mods, not that this changes anything).

I also agree that Jeep will sell a great many 2wd or base trim Renegades. The off-road crowd will get the JK anyway. The Renegade should rightfully poach a few outdoors-minded people from Subaru, as some trail-heads are on really rough access roads and not everyone wants to mod a car or even change tires, but probably not many.
 
Thanks for that link, JF.

I think I saw one of these on the road yesterday, Very brand new, with a very nervous, new car driver ... :iconwink:. We have all been there, done that :eek:! Looked to be a nicer looking car in the flesh than it looks in the link.

What surprised me was the necessity to turn the Jeep air conditioning off manually when under stress. Even my 2006 Forester turns the compressor off when the engine does anything out of the ordinary. Very useful feature IMO. I used to do this manually with my 1.8L Impreza - it needed every bit of help it could get :poke: :iconwink:. Not unlike the 2.0L XV, from what I can see of its weight, and serious lack of power/torque.

Love the 'proper' design of the front of the Jeep. Far better approach angle than the XV (or our SH, FTM!). I do not understand why Subaru cannot do better than they do with the approach and departure angles. I have hung Roo2 up only once, but the approach angle with the standard front bar was nowhere near as good as it could have been. The SubaXtreme front bar helps this a lot.

Jeep just has to regain its quality control and general build quality. The specs and design of their vehicles makes them very fit for purpose, but they are apparently let down badly in the quality stakes ...
 
In the first video that Tweak listed, I was very impressed with the Jeep's mud ploughing ability. Good stuff. Obviously has an excellent powertrain and power to ground transmission. Probably (hopefully) has respectable underbody protection as well.

Singularly unimpressed with the dead fog light on a brand new vehicle ...
 
My understanding is that the symmetrical AWD does not allow for a really good approach angle.

That and the fact that Subaru simply does not care for 4x4 trails.
 
MiddleAgeSubie said:
My understanding is that the symmetrical AWD does not allow for a really good approach angle.
Click to expand...

That's a rather odd idea. How do you come to that conclusion MAS?

The approach angle on mine with the SubaXtreme front bar is about 23°. The departure angle is limited by my tow bar rather than the body, but I have still only scraped this lightly once.

Both approach and departure angles on mine are governed by things other than the AWD system, which has zero impact AFAICS.

That and the fact that Subaru simply does not care for 4x4 trails.
Click to expand...

Subaru are marketing their vehicles as "off-road", so not sure what you mean.

It really surprises me that Subaru offer an OEM sump guard in the UK (!), but not in Oz. Now that's really weird!

It would be terrific if Subaru actually did support the off-road capabilities of our vehicles better. I cannot believe that they are incapable of doing this at a country/dealer level.

After all, how much would it cost FHI to engineer some basic skid plates for under sump, geabox and rear diff? No harder than getting Hayman Reese here to make "OEM" tow bars for them ...

Here in Oz we are very fortunate to have SubaXtreme making sump guards and front/rear off-road bumper replacements. Other countries are not so lucky.

I note that one of the Jeep links that Tweak posted shows the new one with a 0.8" factory lift. It would be nice to be able to specify these kinds of basic mods for our cars.
 
Ratbag said:
That's a rather odd idea. How do you come to that conclusion MAS?

The approach angle on mine with the SubaXtreme front bar is about 23°. The departure angle is limited by my tow bar rather than the body, but I have still only scraped this lightly once.

Both approach and departure angles on mine are governed by things other than the AWD system, which has zero impact AFAICS.



Subaru are marketing their vehicles as "off-road", so not sure what you mean.

It really surprises me that Subaru offer an OEM sump guard in the UK (!), but not in Oz. Now that's really weird!

It would be terrific if Subaru actually did support the off-road capabilities of our vehicles better. I cannot believe that they are incapable of doing this at a country/dealer level.
Click to expand...

I think what MAS is getting at RE: the subaru AWD system and approach angles is, is that the design of Subaru's AWad system puts the front drive axles out of the transmission, which is behind the engine. As such, although the subaru engine is relatively short, doors-aft, it still rides in from of the drive a les, meaning the entire engine site in front of the axles, thus a long front nose by design of Subaru's symmetrical AWD system. Departure angle defies my understanding why it's so atrocious.

And copy that, when swapping the space-eating stock bumper and bumper cover for something like the awesomeness of SubaExtreme bumpers, sure you get a great approach angle. My tube bumper got me 31 deg approach angle, and my departure is bad beacause of the receiver (as with you). I'd like to fab a rear bumper with integrated receiver to get that up higher.

And, while subarus do decently off road, we, as that audience and professors of their capability off road, are honestly but a niche of the target audience. To some degrees, subaru has departed from us as the target to a more mainstreM target audience (as evidenced by their recent redesigns and marketing), while continuing to advertise as outdoorsy. The bikers, climbers, bikers, campers, etc. demand the need for confidence in leaving pavement, it's venturing to county and died roads, not so specifically "trails" and "tracks".

The majority of the target audience wants safety, efficiency (and while full time awd, subaru (compared to other ft awd rigs) is comparable to RWD rigs so safety is highly marketable for subarus along side with efficiency.

But yeah, I think subaru COULD do a bit more in their advertising, to promote what off road could mean, besides dirt roads and puddles. Articulation is still car like but roo's straight ground clearance (model specifically applicable) does a lot for beyond dirt road capability.




Aaaanyway, I hope this comes through and makes sense, considering it was entered on a tiny screen (aka phone. 😉 ;)
 
Oh, and those fog lights aren't broke . My parents' 2016 forester do that too. There's a circuit that turns on the fog light in the direction of the steering wheel, to aid in illumination. If the fogs are off, and one is driving straight but turns slightly (as for a lane change), or to turn the wheel (for maneuvering around a corner), the fog on that side turns on.

As such, I. The jeep video, when the passenger fog turns on then off, it's with the driver turning right the. Back straight.

And yeah, that thing would sadly but truly take a forester's cake off rad no problem. While it's a soft roared for sure, it still is a jeep, and I think is is trail rated at that (whatever that means in the jeep badging. Surely not the rubicon any more).

Anyhoo, that is all for now.

Just saying.
 
Thanks, Superu, for explaining the AA issue.

Subaru chose to have a good departure angle on the XV.

Ratbag, 23 deg approach angle is nothing. There is no way whatsoever to get over 30 w/o going into extremes like Superu or GrantWilson on the OB forum. And then you get the Wrangler which has over 40 in stock form! The best I can ever achieve on mine after more lift and the SubaX bumper will be 26-27.

Subaru is NOT marketed as an OFF road vehicle in its largest market. You need not look at the lack of full size spare, at the weak OEM battery, or the commercials. All you need to see is the only stock tire option. In the US, Subaru is marketed strictly as an all-weather vehicle great also for unpaved roads. The 4x4 trails are definitely not considered Subaru territory here by anybody, Subaru included.

In Australia, where maybe ultra-long but not technically challenging dirt roads are the name of the game, Subaru will do far better than in the US where "wheeling" does not mean going places as much as going over rocks for the sake of it.

Subaru is a completely irrelevant player in Europe, so frankly it does not really matter; few people will buy them either way considering that they are essentially a luxury product there.

If Subaru cared for off-road, they would have actually bothered improving the angles as much as possible as well as offered as an option a basic package (AT tires, full size spare, better battery, skid plates, reinforced rocker panels, and recovery points). In Australia, they gave you back the full size spare they tried to take from you because of push back, as far as I understand. But you still do not get anything else that is a typical feature of a 4x4. And again, maybe in Australia off-road is more of the overland variety than of the conquering of trails type.

There is no way one looks at anything Subaru does in the US and concludes that it has any off-road ambitions at all. All we get is simply a byproduct of all-weather ability. Plenty enough for dirt roads in bad condition. Far from enough, in stock form, for more than the occasional drive over a particularly Subaru-friendly 4WD HC road.
 
I also think that all of us who actually use our Subarus atypically have got into the brand somehow and then remained plugged in for whatever reason.

There is no way I look at vehicles with off-road ability as #1 concern and even consider a Subaru. Then, again, how many can afford a toy? No overall package beats a Subie.
 
Definitely marketed as off-road capable down here; just have a look a the local website: "Subaru Off-Road Vehicles
When you need to escape, there’s nothing quite like heading off-road"

Have you actually driven any of our "ultra-long but not technically challenging dirt roads" ;-) Our outback roads tend to deliver on both counts. Our country is not all flat; we do have some hilly bits :ebiggrin:

"you still do not get anything else that is a typical feature of a 4x4" - how about hill descent control?
 
You will not hear Subaru say "off-road" here.

Hill descent control? Yes, now they have x-mode. This is nice, no doubt. But it is not low range. You can, of course, say that the categories are blurring tremendously. That is why I said that the pure breed 4x4s are almost extinct here.

If you look at the Discovery line of Rovers or at the new Cherokee and Renegade, you will see that electronics have taken over. However, you also see far better angles, proper tires, and so on.

To me, a vehicle is not meant for off-road unless 1/it is so marketed, which Subaru is not in the US and 2/covers the basics, which Subaru does not.

They probably have well understood that the hardcore 4x4 crowd is out of their reach, for a variety of reasons, and that the others really do not need much more than what Subaru offers.

Again, those like us, which is essentially people who need a good car and a good old LandCruiser, not a Wrangler, fall between the cracks. Unless one can afford a do-it-all-well LR4--and thus also a satellite phone!
 
MAS, I have driven my Subarus (even the low slung Impreza) places that I could not, or would not, safely drive my LWB 1968 Landcruiser deep well ute. It is hard these days to find a more basic and capable vehicle than the latter.

Equally, I have driven my '68 LC places which would have broken my Subarus beyond repair (ditto as regards my Subies vs my LC ... ). I don't even have to leave the Greater Melbourne metropolitan area to find such a place where my Suby managed and my LC would have been destroyed, and would quite possibly have killed me. Bunyip State Park is one such place. There are others.

Nor would I attempt to tow a two tonne tandem axle dual horse float behind any of my Subies ... Plain foolhardy to even attempt it.

ALL vehicles have vulnerabilities, strengths and weaknesses. It is the job of any competent driver to identify those S&Ws, and to drive the vehicle accordingly.

Many places I have driven, I would drive straight through the mess in my LC, where I would take the chicken run in my Subies. Taking the chicken run could well have been very dangerous in my LC (poor tip angles, weight, primitive suspension and steering); and taking the obstruction head on could be very dangerous or plain silly in my Subies (insufficient ground clearance, hang angles, approach departure angles, inadequate tyres, etc).

I hold a National Heavies licence (heavy truck driver's licence. I am licensed to drive almost anything, legally), so I am quite used to assessing what one should and should not do with regard to safety depending on the capabilities of the vehicle I am driving. It goes with the territory.

While the comparison between the Jeep and the XV is interesting, they are two very different vehicles. If I were to drive the Jeep on road how I routinely drive my Subaru, it would probably kill me eventually. I do far more driving on made roads, either tarmac or dirt than I do 'true' off-road driving. For me, that makes the Subaru a no-brain choice for safety, stability and sheer driving pleasure, whether on our 500 Km gibber plains, sand dunes, sand tracks mountain roads and tracks or highways and freeways ...

We can leave aside the fact that it is a hanging offence in most places in Oz to drive one's vehicle off a surveyed road (bush track, whatever - these also count as "roads" if they are marked on any kind of survey map as gazetted roads under the various Crown Lands Acts). The environment is protected here even if it isn't in a National Park or State Park. In some States, the offence is punishable by confiscation of one's vehicle, plus other penalties ...

Also, here in Oz, one's comprehensive insurance is usually void if one is not in very close proximity to a surveyed road.

I do not know where you get the idea that there are no challenging roads in Oz. Often quite major roads can be "technical" ... to use the American term. It is often the case that merely having one's vehicle survive in one piece while travelling from one end to the other is quite an achievement!

Just a few thoughts, FWIW :poke: :iconwink:.

[EDIT]

BTW, my LC had an approach angle of about 45 degrees and clearance under the centre of about 20-24 inches; less under the TC. I do understand the importance of these things ...

[End edit]
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top