Back in the mid-80s Jeep got a jump on its competitors by launching the first four-door compact SUV in the 1984 model year. GM and Ford took six years to respond, and Jeep sales surged through the 1980s, and continued to grow through the 1990s as the entire segment enjoyed explosive growth.

In the late 1990s Chrysler led the way again with the three-row Dodge Durango. Over the next few years just about everyone everyone stuffed a third-row of seats into their (now midsize) SUVs. This time, however, Jeep lagged the bunch. Chrysler figured that those seeking a three-row SUV could buy the Dodge, leaving the Jeep for those who truly needed an SUV. The larger an SUV is, the harder it is to maneuver off-road, so a vehicle-expanding third-row just didn't seem appropriate for a Jeep.

As a result, Jeep sales stagnated. If the brand was to maintain its share of the segment, it needed a three-row vehicle. In response, Chrysler created a new model, the 2006 Commander, using the basic components of the Grand Cherokee.

I've been under pressure from my wife, my parents, and even my kids to get a three-row vehicle. Even though I could use a Jeep's ground clearance to get out of my neighborhood when it snows in the winter, a true SUV isn't likely to appeal to me. But I'm always ready to be surprised.

Interested in seeing how well the new Commander stacks up against other three-row SUVs, I took one for a test drive.

Styling

The Commander's styling is a result of two factors: the need to package a third-row seat without sacrificing off-road capability, and the challenge posed by Hummer.

To maximize off-road maneuverability, the new Commander has the same wheelbase as the Grand Cherokee, and is less than two inches longer overall. To enlarge the interior, Chrysler mostly relied on a four-inch increase in height and more upright windows all around. Still, the Commander is not terribly tall. The Grand Cherokee was less tall than the average SUV, lending it a lower center of gravity. So adding four inches merely brings the Commander up to the class average.

The Commander might only be as tall as an Explorer or TrailBlazer, but it looks taller than those vehicles. Credit--or blame--the styling. Jeeps were traditionally very square vehicles. Yet the now classic Cherokee, sold from 1984 to 2001, was a very attractive vehicle owing to near-perfect proportions and panel transitions.

Despite the Cherokee's widespread appeal, with the Grand Cherokee Chrysler jumped on the aero bandwagon. With each redesign the Grand Cherokee's lines have become sleeker and its detailing more upscale. The second-generation vehicle's headlamps would not have looked out of place on a BMW sedan.

While allowing the Grand Cherokee to appeal to more mainstream buyers, and especially those whose other vehicles are luxury sedans, this styling evolution opened up a huge opportunity for a more rugged-looking SUV, one that GM's Hummer has profitably exploited.

Not only did Hummer steal sales that might have otherwise gone to Jeep, but it threatened to steal Jeep's image as the SUV for serious off-roaders. This threat only intensified with the recent introduction of the $30,000 H3.

With the Commander, Jeep counter-attacks. The newest Jeep looks very much like an enlarged Cherokee, and thus like a Hummer has an upright windshield and very square lines. Vertical headlamps, with the bulbs stacked rather than side-by-side, further accentuate the vehicle's height. As a result, the Commander appears even taller than it is.

Frankly, I'm not so sure about the headlamps. The problem isn't that they are vertically arranged, but that they pinch in at the bottom. Shapes that get wider from top to bottom appear tippy to the human eye. And it's probably not a good thing for a tall vehicle to appear not only even taller than it is but also tippy.

Inside the Commander has also been styled to appear less upscale and more utilitarian than the Grand Cherokee. Too trucky for me, but perhaps the tall, square instrument panel will appeal to off-road enthusiasts. Notably, even the H3's instrument panel appears more car-like.

As in many Chrysler models, the bulk of the interior is only available in two-tone gray. Those seeking a less blah atmosphere are largely out of luck. For $150, The Limited's leather seats are available in brown rather than the standard gray, and I'd personally spend the extra dough. But a warmer color on the dash, center console, door panels, and floor would make the interior even more welcoming. And, no, the Limited's wood trim doesn't quite serve this function. The non-Limited I drove had gray cloth seats. I suppose they look rugged.

Screw heads

Welcome to my "first ever" section on screw heads. (I'm not sure what appeal "first ever" has, but judging from its advertising for the G6 and now the Torrent Pontiac seems to think this phrase has a lot of appeal. So I'll give it a shot.)

The Commander's more-rugged-than-thou styling finds its most widespread expression in allen-head bolts, most and perhaps all of them non-functional. Once upon a time domestic vehicle interiors were widely criticized for having exposed screw heads. Well, the Commander's instrument panel has sixteen of them, four around each set of air vents. Wouldn't want them popping out of the dash while traversing an especially nasty boulder field, I suppose. Get the Limited trim, and the fender flares have exposed screw heads around their perimeters. I'm not sure this is a wise choice--isn't the Limited supposed to be the luxury model? I'd save this detail for an off-road-oriented trim, perhaps a Renegade.

The brochure draws attention to a third set of screw heads, on page 26: "Details are paramount. The dual-quad headlamp assemblies appear to be bolted in place with allen-head bolts. Not styled, but constructed." Call me confused, but when I read "appear to be" I'm thinking "just styling, not really assembled this way." Elsewhere (on page 36) the brochure informs us that the outside mirrors also "have a constructed look." Basically, they're saying, "Even though the Commander is put together no differently than other SUVs, it is styled to appear more ruggedly constructed, so it is better." The Hummer influence could not be more clear.

Accommodations

The view from the driver's seat if far different than that in the Grand Cherokee. Credit the more upright windshield and more massive instrument panel. You're much more clearly in a truck. I'm a car guy, so I prefer the Grand Cherokee here. But those who find Hummers and Land Rovers appealing will no doubt prefer the Commander.

As in a Hummer the distant rearview mirror cannot be adjusted without leaning forward. So you cannot check your view through it and adjust it at the same time. I'm seeing a power rearview mirror adjustment down the road for these vehicles.

If the third row is up, the Commander's rearview mirror is of limited use anyway. The headrests on the third-row seat nearly touch the ceiling. Even with these headrests down the view rearward is largely obstructed by the high third-row seatbacks. Put the seat down the rearward visibility is almost acceptable. It's not hard to figure out why a rear obstacle detection system is standard on every Commander. You'll need it. Similarly, this might be why the second-row seat lacks a center headrest. Good for rearward visibility, if not for safety.

The front seats are reasonably comfortable. The cushion is longer than many these days; adult men will appreciate the extra under-thigh support this provides. Lateral support is limited, but corners should not be taken too quickly in such a tall vehicle anyway. A power reclining passenger seat is optional on the base trim, standard on the Limited. Those who often cannot get the amount of recline "just right" with a manual lever system (me) will appreciate it.

Taking full advantage of the Commander's height, the second row seat is mounted well off the floor. As a result adults will find much better thigh support than in the Grand Cherokee, and children as well as adults have a clear view forward through the windshield. The sunroof (optional and not on the base vehicle I drove, standard on the Limited), includes a set of fixed glass panels over the second row. Even without these no one will feel claustrophobic back here. The second row in a Nissan Pathfinder or Toyota 4Runner is much tighter, especially for knees and legs. As in a growing number of midsize SUVs, the Commander's second row seatbacks recline.

For the Commander, Jeep has retained a rugged live rear axle, so the floor under the third row has to be very high off the ground. Still, the third-row is about as roomy as you'll find in a three-row midsize SUV. Meaning the head of the average adult mail will squeak in just below the headliner, and his knees will be about shoulder-level. Only the Land Rover LR3, with a more space-efficient independent rear suspension, does significantly better here. Even then, if you want a third row suitable for adults you'll want a Ford Expedition (which, like the LR3, benefits from an IRS).

If you'll have people in back on hot summer days, you'll want the rear A/C (optional on the base model and standard on the Limited). Even without this option second-row passengers get their own vents.

The Jeep's high rear floor also affects its cargo-carrying capabilities. With the third row folded, there is less distance from floor to ceiling than in many SUVs. As a result, cargo volume is a compact SUV-like 68.5 cubic feet. Most midsize SUVs offer an additional ten to twenty cubes. The almost full-size Durango, a foot longer than the Commander, offers 102 cubic feet of cargo volume. This rather than passenger room is the primary cost of the Commander's relatively compact exterior combined with a live rear axle.

On the other hand, nearly 70 cubic feet is still a useful amount of volume. Personally, I'm more concerned about the height of the floor off the ground--a touch over three feet. Sure, a Hummer's load floor is higher still, but those of most SUVs, including Chrysler's Durango and Grand Cherokee, are three to six inches lower. This is what happens when a folded third row must be packaged atop a live rear axle. (I suspect that the Durango's greater length allows the seat to fit in a well behind the axle.)

The salesperson pointed out the grocery bag hooks on the third-row seatback. They don't seem terribly necessary, as there's very little cargo volume behind the third-row seat. Paper grocery bags might not even fit, and even plastic ones wouldn't be able to go anywhere. The few inches of load floor behind the third-row seat flip over to reveal a tray. This tray sits a few inches lower than the rest of the floor, aiding lift-in height for items less than six inches deep.

If you want to carry more than five passengers and cargo, the latter is going into a roof top carrier. The Limited comes with D-pillar-mounted grab handles to aid stepping onto the rear bumper. All Commanders should have this feature.

On the Road

The Commander in the showroom was equipped with the base, 210-horsepower 3.7-liter V6. I asked the salesman to drive a V8. The Limited with its optional 330-horsepower 5.7-liter Hemi doesn't appear to be on lots yet, but the 235-horsepower 4.7-liter V8 standard in the Limited and optional in the base model should be sufficient. At least this is what I hoped to find out. I had little hope that the six would do the job, as the all-wheel-drive Commander weighs over 5,000 pounds. Though it makes nearly as much peak power a the 4.7-liter V8, it produces far less midrange power (as evidenced by its maximum torque, 235 vs. 305 foot-pounds).

Well, when the salesman pulled the vehicle up he said it was a V6, but that the performance was nevertheless pretty good. And, guess what, it was. Though acceleration was far from thrilling, it was easily sufficient. Perhaps most importantly, the engine remained quiet even when pushed, never groaning, roaring, or obviously straining. I was quite surprised.

Back at the lot, the salesman popped open the hood to show me the engine. Peering into the engine compartment, I instantly noticed a large "4.7-liter V8" embossed on the fan shroud. Seems he'd grabbed a V8 without realizing it. So as before I'm thinking the six isn't going to cut it and anyone interested in sprightly acceleration will want the Hemi.

The Commander handles about as well as any other three-row SUV I've driven, roughly tying the Nissan Pathfinder, and significantly better than many. It feels tall, but not unwieldy. A Grand Cherokee feels much more agile, but that's what a lower center of gravity will do for you. A Land Rover LR3 feels much looser, especially through the first ultra-soft inch or so of its suspension travel.

Considering that the Commander is a true, off-road-capable SUV, its ride quality is quite good. Composure is not quite up to that of the Grand Cherokee, with some minor pitching and bobbling over rough roads, but impacts are very well absorbed. As in the Grand Cherokee, noise levels are very low, even at highway speeds. I'd expected some wind roar around the upright A-pillars, but discovered none. We're talking luxury car territory here. The average SUV is considerably louder inside. A Nissan Pathfinder, for example, sounds and feels much more like a truck despite having an independent rear suspension.

Jeep Commander Price Comparisons and Pricing

A couple of quick comparisons with a minimum level of features:

Commander Base vs. Grand Cherokee Laredo: dead even, despite a $500 higher rebate on the latter; adjusting for remaining feature differences (such as the third row) gives the Commander a $1,700 advantage. Suddenly its apparent why the Commander's interior appears lower grade.

Commander Limited vs. Nissan Pathfinder LE: MSRP to MSRP the Nissan is $2,100 less, but adjusting for remaining feature differences cuts this advantage to $500.

Commander Base vs. Land Rover LR3 SE: The Jeep is about $12,000 less.

The price certainly seems reasonable.

Prices change frequently, and differences will vary based on feature level. To quickly generate these and other comparisons with the specific features you want, visit my Web site, www.truedelta.com. (It's the only site that provides true "apples-to-apples" price comparisons.)

TrueDelta's page for the Commander:

http://www.truedelta.com/models/Commander.php

Last Words

The Commander doesn't have the sporty handling I require in a vehicle and the load floor is high. But in most other areas it performs well, and it is competitively priced. Toss in styling that returns Jeep to its roots, and it should sell very well to those seeking off-road capability and three rows of seats. And well to those who'd like to think they have (but will never actually use) off-road capability and like their vehicles "not styled, but constructed."

A Note on Jeep Commander Reliability

I cannot practically cover reliability within the context of this review. However, many people are interested in such information, so I've started collecting my own data. Results, once they are available, will be posted to my site, www.truedelta.com, with updates every three months.

Unlike other sources, TrueDelta will clearly identify what difference it will make if you buy a Commander rather than another vehicle by providing "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats (among others). You will be able to specify the number of years, annual miles, and types of repairs to include in Jeep Commander reliability comparisons.

Before I can report results, I need data on all cars--not just the Commander--from people like you. To encourage participation, those who help provide the data will receive free access to the site's reliability information. Non-participants will have to pay an access fee.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.

A link to this website and alphabetized links to my other vehicle reviews can be found on my profile page.

Some of my reviews of related vehicles:
Dodge Durango review
Ford Explorer review
Hummer H3 review
Jeep Grand Cherokee review
Land Rover LR3 review
Mercedes GL-Class review
Nissan Pathfinder review
Toyota 4Runner review