When an automaker introduces a slew of new products in a 12-month period, there will undoubtedly be a few products that will fail.  Chrysler has been proudly proclaiming (like a broken record) the success of many of its new products over the past year, most notably the 300, Dodge Magnum and Charger.  And while those rightly belong in the success category, there is one product that Chrysler must put on the other side of the ledger: the Jeep Commander.

The Commander is the only flop in Chrysler’s massive new product line-up for the ’06 model year.  Chrysler’s senior management evidently saw what they thought would be an ideal opportunity to make additional cash with little additional investment by taking the respected Jeep Grand Cherokee platform, expanding it a bit and adding a third row to fill a noticeable void in the Jeep lineup.  While that sounds like a no-brainer, the Commander is a clear example of how good intentions can go awry.

The problems start with the Commander’s exterior styling, which lacks harmony.  I’ll never forget being at Chrysler’s Arizona proving grounds several months ago to get a preview of the Commander, and when the SUV came around the corner, a collective groan overcame the throaty roars of SRTs that were screaming on the nearby test track.  That’s not a good sign.  Commander’s design goes off course right at the front fascia, where the headlamps are an odd combination of rounded inserts in a square clear lens cover.  This leads to the obvious question: What the hell does this vehicle want to be, modern or rugged?  I have no idea.  The confusion continues with the faux Alan wrench bolts that flank the trapezoidal wheel wells.  Finally, the rear fascia seems to be copied from the LR3, although with bad execution.   Jeep designers try to defend the Commander by saying it takes cue from the long-lost Cherokee, as well as the Liberty and Wrangler.  Well, it doesn’t work. 

It doesn’t get any better inside, where the faux fasteners seem to hold the instrument panel in place. The top of the dashboard goes on for miles and miles because of the upright angle of the windshield. The power seat adjustment levers are buried so far down that you have to open the driver’s side door to adjust them, while the optional navigation system is anti-intuitive as you have to continually push the tiny little “enter” button to input each and every letter of the street and city name, a major pain when contrasted with the touch screen systems available in many other vehicles. Moving through the rest of the cabin continues to elicit complaints, especially the third row seating, which is basically unusable for average-sized adults.  One Chrysler exec told me during the Arizona preview that Dieter Zetsche himself actually sat back in the third row seat and found it quite comfortable (I find that pretty hard to believe unless he sat there for only 5 seconds).  Utilizing the rear space for a third row also eliminates much of the storage capacity in the rear of the Commander.  Sure, you can have seven passengers, but they better not bring more than a pair of underwear and socks for the trip or one of them is going to have to walk.

Where the Commander does score major points is in ride and handling.  Riding over rickety railroad tracks at 45 mph displayed the excellent isolation of the suspension, while daily commuting was pleasurable.  During my test Michigan was blanketed with six-plus inches of snow, and the Commander plowed through the white stuff with no problem; even the pile of snow left at the bottom of my driveway by my local DPW was no match for the Commander.  Likewise, the 5.7-liter HEMI (with the fuel sipping multi-displacement system) was impressive when it came to available passing power and overall fuel economy.  Still, there’s no getting past the ugly and confusing exterior and interior, along with the compromises that come with using the third row seat, to make the Commander a consideration for any true full-size SUV buyer.