In the automotive world, details are the basis on which cars are bought and sold. Therefor, when comparing two different vehicles, it is important to emphasize every difference and identify where a certain vehicle trumps another. This year, one of Ford’s top competitors, Jeep, has released an ideal contestant to topple the market giant, 2014 Ford Escape. With 2012 Ford Escape sales dominating Toyota’s Rav4 and Honda’s CRV in the Sport/Compact SUV market, and the 2013 Ford Escape continuing to lead sport SUV sales, Ford has not failed to further improve and redesign the vehicle to be the superior automobile of its class in every aspect. Jeep’s engineers knew that they had to set the bar high this year to compete in the market, offering forth the new 2014 Jeep Cherokee; a redesigned, refined 4WD sport SUV. Honestly, each vehicle has amazed me in many different aspects such as the Jeep’s complicated 9-gear transmission, or Ford’s EcoBoost 1.6L engine, however I concluded that for most demanding of consumers, the 2014 Ford Escape pulls ahead once again, and here is why:
Engine, Transmission, and Fuel System:
Introduced in 2012, the EcoBoost engine line has surpassed most modern similarly sized engines. The Cherokee comes equipped with either the 2.4L Tigershark I4 or the 3.2L Pentastar V6 engine, which are of no exception. The small 1.6L Turbo-equipped EcoBoost achieves 30mpg on highway, versus the Tigershark that manages only 28mpg on highway, despite the complicated, bulky, automatic, 9-gear transmission which optimizes fuel efficiency by providing a plethora of underdrive and overdrive gears. The presence of these gears means that the Jeep Cherokee allows for a great 9.8 ratio spread, which carries out it’s purpose phenomenally well. However, due to the smart EcoBoost turbo, the Escape’s automatic 6-gear transmission is sufficient for more powerful, gas-preserving accelerations and performance. Using Ecoboost turbo also allows the Escape to reach a maximum torque of 184 ft-lbs at a mere 2500 RPM compared to the Cherokee’s maximum torque of 171 ft-lbs at a gas drinking 4,800 RPM. This scenario highlights Ford’s success with EcoBoost line, and determines that Ford’s engineers have successfully addressed non-hybrid fuel efficiency by using a smaller turbo-equipped engines instead of adding countless gears in an effort to attain a better ratio spread on larger, cumbersome engines such as Jeep’s Tigershark.
Furthermore, Ford’s 2014 Escape SE comes equipped with a direct injection fuel injection system whereas the Jeep Cherokee uses a more primitive sequential multi-port injection fuel system. The primary functional difference between these two systems is where and when the fuel is injected. Ford’s Direct Inject fuel system sprays fuel directly into each combustion chamber at the command of an EcoBoost specific program that monitors fuel injection based on engine requirements. The Cherokee’s simpler sequential multi-port injection system sprays fuel downstream into the cylinder before each combustion chamber at the command of a monitoring program. Overall, the direct injection fuel system thrives from faster response times, where the sequential MPI suffers from the lag that is required for the fuel mixture to move to the combustion chamber. In addition, the direct injection system is capable of injecting fuel at any time, whereas the sequential MPI has to wait for the cylinder stroke to complete its cycle before adjusting intake qualities.
Drivetrain and Traction Control:
Sometimes overlooked, the drivetrain of a vehicle has a huge impact on drive quality and maneuverability, especially in New England’s merciless winters. The AWD equipped Escape, uses a road-bias adaptive traction control system that gives the 2014 Ford Escape needed traction control for many different surfaces ranging from rugged off-road conditions to icy freeways. The Jeep Cherokee responds with a bulkier more balanced 4WD adaptive traction control system that gives the sport SUV optimal traction on any surface that planet Earth can dish out. This makes the Jeep Cherokee a more off-road orientated vehicle, with settings for most surface conditions and a computer that can regulate it with reliable precision. The main difference can be seen in the application of these drivetrains, all-wheel-drive being used on premium sedans and crossovers and four-wheel-drive on off-road ready trucks. Conclusively, simpler AWD systems provide satisfactory traction performance for most on-road vehicles where the 4WD systems goes above and beyond the call of duty to provide calculated traction control in the most intense of conditions at the cost of more expensive, complicated, and larger drivetrain parts. As far as the sport/compact SUV category, Ford’s all-wheel-drive system provides adequate traction control for New England’s harsh climate without overburdening the vehicle with a cumbersome 4WD system for off-road duties that most consumers will not exploit.
Cargo:
The 2014 Ford Escape absolutely dominates the 2014 Jeep Cherokee in terms of cargo. Smaller in dimension, than the Jeep, the Escape provides an astounding 13.2 cubic feet of space MORE than the 2014 Cherokee. This type of difference is monumental, and comes from Ford’s willingness to use smaller, more effective parts such as the EcoBoost engine, smaller 6-speed automatic transmission, and a simpler AWD drivetrain to afford competitive cargo space for demanding consumers. Being a compact SUV, cargo is central concept to the class, especially if it can be achieved without increasing the actual size of the vehicle. The Cherokee’s crossover-like cargo space simply can’t compete to the Escape’s 68.1 cubic feet of maximum cargo space.
From engine, to drivetrain, to cargo, Ford’s intuitive engineers have designed a vehicle that can rival it’s sport SUV competitors for years. The Escape’s sales will continue to dominate in the next years, and it will take a lot more than a year of design & technology to dispute it’s title as best compact SUV of the past decade. The full spec comparison can be viewed here via Ford.com.