No image car front available

The Cherokee is designed for the USA and the thinking behind it differs from vehicles intended primarily for Europe. This proved a factor in the knee impact zone where a bolster was fitted to protect an unbelted driver, as required by US law. In general, the Cherokee performed well and came close to achieving four stars. But the driver experienced fairly high loads on his body from the restraint system and these could have harmed him. The child restraints were effective, especially in cushioning heads during the side impact. Protection given to pedestrians proved to be poor, however.

Front impact
The vehicle's body protected well. The impact left the driver's door largely undistorted and the footwell remained in good shape, too, although the driver risked injury from the brake and clutch pedals, which were pushed backwards. A bolster fitted where knees might strike did not give full protection and the driver risked injuries severe enough to disable him. The centre rear belt was of a three- point type that gives greater protection than a lap belt will. The belt could not be used unless the seat back was latched in place: a good safety feature.

Side impact
The Dutch-market Cherokee tested had no side airbags but performed well. Generally, tall vehicles such as 4x4s can be expected to deliver above-average safety in this type of crash. The Cherokee was penalised, though, because loads were transferred in an unrealistic manner from the seat to the dummy's back, so reducing the measured loads on the chest.

Child-protection
The same vehicle-specific ISOFIX restraints were chosen for both children, and both were attached using top tethers and ISOFIX. Protection in the side impact proved to be very good and both children's heads were contained. But in the frontal impact, the 3-year-old's head was unprotected and the younger child risked neck injuries. A rear-facing restraint may have improved matters.