Consumer Reports testing has indicated that the "blind spot" of the Jeep Commander is the worst that they've tested - and that includes over 200 vehicles.
A DaimlerChrysler spokesman didn't have too much to say in rebuttal other than the fact that they take safety very seriously and will "take it into consideration in designing future products".
Previous to the Commander taking the crown, the 2002 Chevy Avalanche had the worst blind spot for a 5'1" driver at 51'. The Commander's blind spot for the same size drive is 69'.
Knowing that the a rearview video camera option is available (as part of a navigation package that costs well over $1,000) for the Commander, we're thinking that might be money well-spent for drivers of lesser stature.
From the Sun-Sentinel.com web site:
The magazine's testers concluded that a driver 5 feet 1 inch tall could not see the top of a 28-inch-tall traffic cone placed behind the Commander and meant to represent a child until the cone was moved 69 feet back from the Jeep's rear bumper. For a driver 5 feet 8 inches tall, the "blind" distance was 44 feet.
"The Commander's blind zone is considerably larger than that for other midsized and large sport utility vehicles," the magazine said.
The comments are owned by the poster.
We aren't responsible for their content.
You must login or register to post a comment.
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
Sweeney | Posted: 2006/8/27 9:25 Updated: 2006/8/27 9:25 |
Just popping in ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/8/27 From: Posts: 1 |
![]() I find CR to be nearly useless unless you're shopping for a toaster. A local radio station has one of their "car guys" on every now and then and he proves to be greatly lacking in his knowledge of autos.
The issue with the Commander "blind spot" is with a driver operating a vehicle that they shouldn't be... |
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
hoghead00 | Posted: 2006/8/25 16:58 Updated: 2006/8/25 16:58 |
Not too shy to talk ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/5/10 From: Posts: 39 |
![]() Has Consumer Reports ever said anything good about a Jeep?
|
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
01TJ | Posted: 2006/8/25 14:27 Updated: 2006/8/25 14:27 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/8/25 From: Posts: 71 |
![]() First off Consumer Reports is a magazine by idoits for idiots. I beleive that half the reason the big three American manufacturers are is the shape they are it that CR bashes everything they put out, while making the imports seem like the best things since sliced bread... screw CR and what they have to say. The Commander comes standard with backup sensors in the rear bumper. Either way one should not be going fast enough to kill someone in reverse... just how fast can you back out of your driveway??? I guess if your are an idoit then you can go pretty fast.
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
scottyc | Posted: 2006/8/25 13:49 Updated: 2006/8/25 13:49 |
Just popping in ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/8/24 From: Posts: 14 |
![]() They're not talking about the normal over-the-shoulder lane-change blind spot. This measurement is for directly behind the vehicle while backing up.
I've never heard of anyone backing over a child from 69 feet away... |
|
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
Brian_R | Posted: 2006/8/25 12:35 Updated: 2006/8/25 12:35 |
Quite a regular ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/11/28 From: Posts: 43 |
![]() Then again, is the average US adult really 5'1"? seems like a pretty short height to judge blind spots.
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
RUBICON | Posted: 2006/8/25 11:47 Updated: 2006/8/25 11:47 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/7/13 From: Chandler, AZ Posts: 357 |
![]() You just can't win...
By law, you need to include beefier pillars to be able to hold 1.5 - 2.5 times the weight of the vehicle in the event of a rollover. This causes visibility problems. You need to include headrests to prevent whiplash. This causes rear visibility problems. So which do you want it CR? |
|