The new Jeep Cherokee - the look is not retro.

FIAT is modernizing the look of JEEP products. Here is a photo of the next Cherokee. I think it will position JEEP to compete against Land Rover. However, the look is not traditional. Still, I like it.

http://jalopnik.com/2014-jeep-cherok...s-it-376452776

It's okay. I still prefer "The Jeep"--as in originally used in the military. I hope they don't change its looks much.

And in a year or two other SUV's will follow suit if history is any guide. Ever notice how many major car companies patterned at least one of their SUV's after the Jeep XJ, ZJ or YJ?
If they really are building it on a car frame there are going to be a lot of unhappy Jeep fans.

This model is replacing the Liberty which was a slow seller and unattractive in its last years. The part of the styling that I am not wild about are the tail lights. I would have preferred that they had kept the vertical rectangular ones from prior designs rather than the horizontal ovals on this new design (not shown here) which, in my opinion, are unoriginal and not traditional.

The original Liberty design was too cute looking for most guys. I think this look is contemporary. As for its mechanicals - the days of solid axles and leaf springs are gone. Rear wheel drive is not very efficient as it's heavier (though more durable), resulting is higher gas consumption. I fully expect that 4-wheel drive will be available and those models, at least, will have good off-road capabilities.

Good point, it used to be only primative suspensions could cope with offroad, but thanks to modern computer hardware even unibody vehicles can handle all but the very toughest terrain, The Forester (2014) for example. has a new X mode which is very impressive offroad.

To prove the point even further regarding sophisticated AWD, James May of Top Gear completed an off road rally stage using a Bentley Continental GT3 which performed brillantly

For the most hardcore folks there is the Jeep Rangler, Nissan Xterra and Toyota 4 Runner which are built on frames. Lets face though, CUVs and SUVs are now just big station wagons for most of their buyers.

There it is And then there's the Escalade and the Hummer which are purely for status.
Not sure if unibody construction matters that much. The XJ was always a unibody as was the ZJ and WJ and they were great offroad vehicles. I owned a ZJ and an XJ. And yes for me they were just for navigating our frequently flooded streets The ZJ was quieter and more comfortable than any other SUV I've been in. If not for the awful mpg I'd love to have another one. I drove a Wrangler TJ for a while. Fun ...except on the freeway

Unibody SUVs and CUVs are much less likely to flip over than body-on-frame vehicles. Unibody construction is also lighter, stiffer and has fewer rattles.

That's true and it must be a big factor in why the rock crawlers love them so much I admit that sport(?) looks like big fun but the initial outlay of the aftermarket parts required and the tendency to break stuff makes it very expensive. All in all I love old Jeeps... just not practical anymore with the price of gas being what it is.
I'd love to have a '98 ZJ Limited