FCA recently unveiled the all-new 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee L, a three-row model variant for the automaker’s popular SUV nameplate. With seating for up to seven passengers, the new Jeep Grand Cherokee L looks to rival a variety of General Motors products, including the Chevy Traverse. As such, we’re taking a closer look at the new Jeep’s specs and how they line up against the Traverse in the following GM Authority Dimensional Comparison.
Chevrolet Traverse
Jeep Grand Cherokee L
Exterior Dimensions
Let’s start with the exterior dimensions, but before we do, it is worth mentioning that the 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee L rides on a brand-new unibody platform, while the latest Chevy Traverse rides on the long wheelbase variant of the GM C1 platform, also shared with the second-generation Buick Enclave.
Looking over the numbers, we find the Chevy Traverse is in fact smaller than the Jeep Grand Cherokee in most exterior dimensions. That includes the wheelbase, overall length, and overall height, with the Jeep out-sizing the Chevy by 0.8 inches, 0.6 inches, and 0.8 inches in each respective measurement.
That said, the Chevy Traverse is wider than the Grand Cherokee L, with an extra 0.7 inches of overall width, and an extra 1.9 inches and 1.6 inches for the front and rear track, respectively.
| Dimension | Chevrolet Traverse | Jeep Grand Cherokee L | +/- Chevrolet Traverse |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheelbase (in.) | 120.9 | 121.7 | -0.8 |
| Overall Length (in.) | 204.3 | 204.9 | -0.6 |
| Overall Width (in.) | 78.6 | 77.9 | +0.7 |
| Overall Height (in.) | 70.7 | 71.5 | -0.8 |
| Front Track (in.) | 67.3 | 65.4 | +1.9 |
| Rear Track (in.) | 67.0 | 65.4 | +1.6 |
| Dimension | Chevrolet Traverse | Jeep Grand Cherokee L | +/- Chevrolet Traverse |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheelbase (mm) | 3071 | 3091 | -20 |
| Overall Length (mm) | 5189 | 5204 | -15 |
| Overall Width (mm) | 1996 | 1979 | +17 |
| Overall Height (mm) | 1795 | 1815 | -20 |
| Front Track (mm) | 1709 | 1660 | +49 |
| Rear Track (mm) | 1702 | 1660 | +42 |
Chevy Traverse
Jeep Grand Cherokee L
Interior Dimensions
With shorter wheelbase, overall length, and overall height compared to the Jeep Grand Cherokee L, it bears to reason that the Chevy Traverse would offer smaller interior dimensions as well. However, as it turns out, the Chevy is in fact more spacious in most interior dimensions.
Some of the biggest differences include first-row headroom (+1.5 inches), first-row shoulder room (+2.9 inches), second-row shoulder room (+4.2 inches), and third-row shoulder and hip room (both + 5.6 inches).
That said, the Jeep Grand Cherokee does beat the Chevy Traverse in two interior dimensions – first-row legroom and second-row legroom, with an extra 0.3 inches and 1 inch, respectively.
| Dimension | Chevrolet Traverse | Jeep Grand Cherokee L | +/- Chevrolet Traverse |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Row Headroom (in.) | 41.3 | 39.8 | +1.5 |
| First Row Legroom (in.) | 41.0 | 41.3 | -0.3 |
| First Row Shoulder Room (in.) | 62.1 | 59.2 | +2.9 |
| First Row Hip Room (in.) | 58.1 | 57.4 | +0.7 |
| Second Row Headroom (in.) | 40.0 | 39.9 | +0.1 |
| Second Row Legroom (in.) | 38.4 | 39.4 | -1 |
| Second Row Shoulder Room (in.) | 62.2 | 58.0 | +4.2 |
| Second Row Hip Room (in.) | 56.9 | 56.3 | +0.6 |
| Third Row Headroom (in.) | 38.2 | 37.3 | +0.9 |
| Third Row Legroom (in.) | 33.5 | 30.3 | +3.2 |
| Third Row Shoulder Room (in.) | 57.5 | 51.9 | +5.6 |
| Third Row Hip Room (in.) | 48.5 | 42.9 | +5.6 |
| Dimension | Chevrolet Traverse | Jeep Grand Cherokee L | +/- Chevrolet Traverse |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Row Headroom (mm) | 1049 | 1012 | +37 |
| First Row Legroom (mm) | 1042 | 1050 | -8 |
| First Row Shoulder Room (mm) | 1577 | 1504 | +73 |
| First Row Hip Room (mm) | 1476 | 1459 | +17 |
| Second Row Headroom (mm) | 1016 | 1014 | +2 |
| Second Row Legroom (mm) | 985 | 1000 | -15 |
| Second Row Shoulder Room (mm) | 1580 | 1474 | +106 |
| Second Row Hip Room (mm) | 1445 | 1429 | +16 |
| Third Row Headroom (mm) | 970 | 947 | +23 |
| Third Row Legroom (mm) | 851 | 770 | +81 |
| Third Row Shoulder Room (mm) | 1460 | 1317 | +143 |
| Third Row Hip Room (mm) | 1232 | 1090 | +142 |
Chevrolet Traverse
Jeep Grand Cherokee L
Cargo Dimensions
Cargo room is critical in this segment, and compared to the 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee L, the Chevy Traverse boasts more. That includes an extra 13.6 cubic feet behind the first row, an extra 10.6 cubic feet behind the second row, and an extra 5.8 cubic feet behind the third row.
| Dimension | Chevrolet Traverse | Jeep Grand Cherokee L | +/- Chevrolet Traverse |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cargo Volume Behind First Row (cu. ft.) | 98.2 | 84.6 | +13.6 |
| Cargo Volume Behind Second Row (cu. ft.) | 57.8 | 46.9 | +10.9 |
| Cargo Volume Behind Third Row (cu. ft.) | 23.0 | 17.2 | +5.8 |
| Dimension | Chevrolet Traverse | Jeep Grand Cherokee L | +/- Chevrolet Traverse |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cargo Volume Behind First Row (liters) | 2781 | 2390 | +391 |
| Cargo Volume Behind Second Row (liters) | 1637 | 1330 | +307 |
| Cargo Volume Behind Third Row (liters) | 651 | 490 | +161 |
Subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevrolet Traverse news, Chevrolet news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
These two are like ice cream. But one is chocolate and the other is vanilla. Similar but still vet different.
The FWD based vs RWD based drivetrain still separates them drastically.
There are buyers that support each yet will not cross over. To me this makes it legit to offer both and I wish GM did.
Well said C8.R
True… but GM will not offer RWD in this segment, they offer Tahoe. All we all know their reason is $$$ Why deplete revenue. They have an identity crisis with Encore and Encore GX.
While GM may not have anything in the RWD/AWD they are making good money with what they have.
I too am disappointed by the lack of the other model but at times wonder how long they will be able to continue to sell these much heavier models.
I see what your saying but the GC has been one of the go-to models for hipsters. It’s become a generational icon amongst a decent amount of people who has upgraded there model with little changes. The regular wheelbase version will be the one to Lookout for depending on pricing structure.
Now the L version has stepped into a area being dominated by the likes of the Traverse and Palisade. Interior volume is key and that where it’s lacking. Also it’s a very price sensitive market. If priced to closely to the Tahoe I think you can forget about it selling in large numbers.
It’s designed to cover the Traverse to the xt6 since I guess they’re treating jeep as a mainstream luxury brand now. I’m guessing it’s probably going to have pricing similar to the Explorer and the Aviator or possibly even more since it’s proven that people will pay more for the Jeep brand but I highly doubt that it will get over 80k but the base models are probably going to be the same as the Explorer. They have to know where to draw the line since people often turn to midsize 3 row suvs rather than large suvs because it’s cheaper.
“There are buyers that support each yet will not cross over.” That isn’t a large group and mostly not due to the drive train type but brand loyalty…
“To me this makes it legit to offer both and I wish GM did.” Not at all, these two cross over in the same market immensely, there is no way GM can have two similar size, unibody vehicles under the same brand with just a different drivetrain layout being the difference. GM has done a fantastic job of covering all the classes and aiming towards what the large percentage buy. Most (probably 90%) have no clue or care which wheels are driven, and if one way is better in more circumstances (FWD) then that is the better way to go and sales show that.
Take the Blazer, if they did a Bronco type vehicle after the initial hype it would be selling in much smaller numbers than the current Blazer which has been selling strong the entire time. The on road market is much much larger than the “hard core” off road market especially when most people drive the off road versions and realize how much worse they are than a proper on road set up vehicle that isn’t trying to make a compromise.
GM would hurt itself as a company with costs trying to develop a direct GC competitor that is rwd when they have the Traverse and its twins which sell in droves. The development costs and expenses they would carry for such a vehicle to get maybe 5% more sales would be a laughable decision at the top.
Jeep is a brand loyal company, and not because they make better vehicles. Wranglers are horrible on road and with space, the small CUV’s are usually at the bottom of their class and the grand cherokee is towards the bottom of being unreliable and expensive yet they still sell because of the loyalty to Jeep. The off road part is a small percentage, even the Wrangler only has a 40% or so off road usage based on what one of their engineers stated in an interview years ago and the rest of the brand is down under 20% or less that leave the pavement. With that 80% of the people could choose a better vehicle for their needs but they like that name and symbolism that Jeep gives off, not because it is a better product. All the other brands and competitors are reaping the benefits in comparison tests and strong sales.
GM has nothing to complete with this. Closest would be RWD Tahoe. GM is FWD SUV & electric focused. Vette will be last RWD car as they are letting Camaro die again soon. The new Caddy ICE sedans will be allowed to die quickly for the dreaded GM “no longer a profitable market segment”, Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon/XL & pickups last RWD ICE to survive.
If that RWD doesn’t come with 4×4, they can keep it. JMO. It’s like buying a 2WD truck or an old Deville in snow…no thanks.
2wd rwd are a hard sell anywhere it snows if you find them on dealer lots in the snowbelt they are “ad cars” and newer trade ins will likely be sent to fair weather states.
Don’t mistake what I say. I am a true GM guy and probably will be forever through thick and thin. But I’ve also had a good number of Jeeps and have loved them. With that said, I really think this new GC and GC- L will be a force to recon with. Chevrolet needs to get this freshened Traverse out NOW. And with the interiors of the upper level Jeeps as nice as they are, I really think those will compete more with the Buick or even Cadillac. The lower level Jeeps with the Chevy.
Buick & Caddy don’t have a RWD vehicle to compete with this either.
70: That is true, but for me I’m only talking about size, ability to carry people and interior/exterior styling and looks. You are correct in that the GC-L would be better suited to take on the Tahoe, but I feel that most buyers (who aren’t like you and me and most on here) won’t ever look beyond the style and will it fit the needs/wants they have.
The Traverse’s interior looks so old compared to the new Grand Cherokee’s cabin.
Looking at the photos of the interior to me they are hard to compare because of the different angles. the jeep look like it was done with a wide angle or panoramic lens.
The traverses #1 problem always has been not the engine, not the style, but the competition. Toyota Highlander-yuck, Ford Explorer-cheaply built, no other real competition till now. Look how long the gen1 traverse went without an update and still sold strong. This Jeep honestly is the first thing the traverse has had to contend with! Honestly I’m a little disappointed in the Jeep. It beats out the traverse in many aspects, but Chevy has so many things they have been holding back on honestly. Chevy needs to add the 2.7 turbo engine and a Z71 pack (like the Acadia AT4, chin spoiler delete and duratracs). The traverse AWD system is excellent, and incredibly rugged if you’ve ever seen it, so it’s transverse motor platform isn’t really disadvantaged. Oh do I love competition! Chevy finally has competiton in this class!
Yet the Explorer is the one that sells the most. Once you pass the XLT and base trims and to an extent the limited trim then it uses less plastic and it has a lot more features including massaging seats, real wood, bunch of drivers assist features including self parking and 365-400 hp. How hard is it to add a few turbo chargers to their engines?! If your not going to add a V8 at least they could turbo charge it.
Joe, Explorer sells the most as a stripped out police car. I see few families buying the explorer, but almost 3 families in traverses to every owned family explorer I see. Ford also sells the explorer as a fleet vehicle at large discounts. Its the same situation as the crown Vics, of 10 years ago. Was it a popular family car? no. Did it sell a crap ton? yes. Was it the better vehicle compared to an impala? Heck no!
I cannot fathom a scenario where I would choose the FWD-based Traverse over a true 4×4 with a proper V8, even if giving up an inch or two here or there. From my perspective, it’s a car masquerading as truck-like versus something I would actually enjoy owning and using.
It would work great in a vehicle you use once a year to tow and go off road. Audi uses a similar AWD vehicle power train for their Quattro line. IMHO the Cherokee L still is a bad “SUV” for two entirely different reasons, independent rear axle and Unibody construction. For off roaring, a frame needs to be flexible enough to bend under extreme loads, which a unibody can’t do. A solid rear axle does a lot better in distributing heat and maintaining a stable footing. If I had to choose between frame and longitudinal engine, frame every day, no competition. The Pontiac Fiero proved a transverse mounted platform can handle heavy loads (as long as there is plenty of cooling and the springs are tight enough to handle high RPM) the 2.7turbo and 9speed would do about the same as the Jeep detuned V8 for towing. I’m fine with the traverse platform, as it is a great “compromise” between economy, refinement and capability and I think they could push the envelope a lot more. Of course what is really needed is a Colorado based SUV. You are right that this is the superior power train. Cant wait to see what Chevy does to counter
It.
GM will do nothing to counter this. Except, maybe, offer an offroad-oriented aesthetics package – e.g. dark psuedo fender flares, tires with tread on the sidewalls, and some graphics. GM will not create a new platform; they will sooner kill the Traverse and claim the market for three-row SUV’s has dried up.
Also, the 9T65 is a very potent Transmission. For reference. it comes standard with a 1st gear of 4.69 and a finale drive of 3.69. The GMC Acadia AT4 is (essentially the off-road version of the traverse in a smaller footprint) has a final drive ratio of 3.80. Both of these vehicles will actually start in 2nd gear and only use their lower 1st for hard off the line acceleration, crawling and towing. The 6 speed 6T65 also offered a 4.10:1 rear end ratio if Chevy wants to get really competitive. Many Cherokees use the 3.08 as the standard and 3.55 as the low gear ratio and the ZF 8 HP 70 has the same first of 4.69:1. That said the traverse has a gear advantage on the single speed transfer case Cherokees and would be compared to a borg 1.5:1 speed transfer case in low gear. Of course Jeep also likes adding on the trail oriented vehicles with high gear reductions up to 4:1 in their 2 speed transfer cases.
I don’t care that everything is basically off a inch compared to the Traverse. In my option the Grand Cherokee looks better and a lot more modern and it just seems worth it to spend a bit more money if it is more expensive. It’s so good I don’t know if I would want the Aviator or the Grand Cherokee anymore. The XT6 is ok but it can’t really compete. Not enough features for me. Even though Cadillac has just released the XT6 they need to go back to the drawing boards in able to compete. The same goes for the Acadia and the Traverse. A new screen and grill isn’t going to hit it also.
For all this whining again what FCA has against Escalade and Yukon Denali?, Wagoner is a Cherokee with an PS5 dashboard. GM isn’t slowing down on full-size CUV sales and you need more space and capability get a bof SUV.
I believe the next round of large GM ICE CUVs will be rwd.
I certainly hope so! the explorer is now RWD even though it has a unibody, and its a segment too hot to be ignored by GM. now that FCA has upped the Ante, (the explorer wasnt really competition) GM now has the ball in their court, and i think we can expect a lot from the 3rd gen traverse in a couple years.
The next round of CUVs will be EVs. I think there is a reason we don’t see next gen XT5 and Acadias running around. They are the oldest of the group.
They have to look up to the Explorer and now the Grand Cherokee L so I hope that they’re not just doing a lousy mid cycle refresh with a new grill and a slightly upgraded interior. First thing they need to do is add a more powerful engine. They’re the ones with the lowest HP out of all the American brands and yet they advertise it as a sporty vehicle with all these sport packages and yet a Lincoln which is advertised as purely luxury focused has 400-494 HP.
Who’s they? More Power…the GC stock v6 slated for the GC has the least HP of the segment. As for the beloved Lincoln, you’re talking about 3.0 v6 twin turbo, not the same. Just like the Supercharged 3.6 v6 spinning out 425 hp but again not the same. The 3.6 twin turbo in the Cadillac huffs a decent 436 hp. It’s there but is it necessary when you have a larger platform like Tahoe designed to haul larger objects… you get more hp from aftermarket vendors for a mere 8k-10k if you need hp. JMO…