07 Wrangler?

[Tradesman300]

Subaru Baja on Crack
Great Looking Rig
Not a Jeep, Don't Care

[rock rash]

ehhh...its solid front axle

[Ghost]

Reminds me of the Dakar, what the TJ should have been! :twak: However the engine choice SUCKS! I looked at a 2wd one and it had 4.10's! That is scary if the 3.8 or what ever it is needs 4.10 with a 235 tire to keep it alive!

[CartsXJ]

When I went to the dealer for a couple of parts, they just got a few 4 door saharas in, definately built for th yuppie. SO I stroll over and check them out. The salesman couldn't get there fast enough, funny watching try to get outside and thru the other jeeps to me. Asked if I was interested, to which I replied, got any rubicon? No, they haven't been releaed yet, he tells me. I said, well when you get one call me. To which he insisted that I take it for a test drive..........sure why not. Talk about a dog compared to the 4.0L, completely different power curve. You have to keep the rpms up and I am high 3000+ to feel any power. The dealer was asking why I was rev'ing it, I told him to get the thing moving. It really needs a hemi or 4.7 V8 option. I mean the thing must weight more than a comander and only a 3.8L V6. I was highly disappointed in the power and let the dealer know this. And he thought it was enough. I asked if he wanted to take a ride in my jeep to actually feel what a true jeep 6 cyl motor should feel like. I wish I took a pic of his face when I showed him my XJ, when he asked what jeep is yours? He then proceded to tell me that jeep didn't design the new wrangler for guys like me that take it offroad, it was designed for the masses that what to feel like they can go offroad. And he was right. I am all for the new frame, suspension, axles.....but that powerplant is what will be the wrangler's downfall. Maybe not on the 2 door, have yet to see one in person, but definately on the 4 door........


He never did take that ride in my XJ.

[Bradlybob]

I looked at one the other day too and I'm conflicted. Some things are welcome improvements while others on the Rubicon trail during the journalist event. He was impressed with the overall vehicle but the fuffy stuff is kinda gay. The engine was a compromise for sure. The big honkin bumpers scream "take me off". There's not much that can be done with the FJ-esque interior though. The Rubi is supposed to have a real Dana 44 front end with a crossover steering linkage. Plus the wheel lug pattern is now 5 on 5.
Now all they need is to give us locking hubs and a 5 on 5.5 lug pattern and a real motor.

[motorcityxj]

the looks or design dont offend me, the lack of a diesel and a long wheel base 2 door like the tj/LJ unlimited, pisses me off big time. I never bought a new jeep before, but if they bring the diesel and a longwheelbase 2 door all is forgiven for that POS minivan v6 the used, and i would go to the dealer and buy my first new jeep if they bring the diesel with long wheelbase 2 door. Prolly never happen. Fawkers :twak:

[Bradlybob]

Sure would be cool if they put the diesel from the Grand Chero in there. Probably sell a bucket of 'em

[Lawn Cher']

the looks or design dont offend me, the lack of a diesel and a long wheel base 2 door like the tj/LJ unlimited, pisses me off big time. I never bought a new jeep before, but if they bring the diesel and a longwheelbase 2 door all is forgiven for that POS minivan v6 the used, and i would go to the dealer and buy my first new jeep if they bring the diesel with long wheelbase 2 door. Prolly never happen. Fawkers :twak:

Just so I understand you correctly, you like the long wheelbase 2-door with the diesel?

[Starboard M]

I want one. Give it 10 years when they start to be cheap and Ill get one.
How can you say no to this?
http://www.bayarea4x4.com/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6255.0;id=3674;ima ge
http://project-jk.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=2378&g2_serialNumber=2

[Hellbent]

[quote=Bradlybob]..I'm conflicted.[quote]

that's where i'm at right now. looks a little goofy in stock trim; sits too low, tires too small, doesn't appear to have the greatest ground clearance. interior's not bad, still rides a little "choppy" like a wrangler should. 3.8 definitely lacks the low end "grunt" of the venerable 4.0. it's not quite as awful as i thought it would be, but it's not as good as it could've been.

[Tradesman300]

Plus if Jeep listens which the often do, they will improve the low end torque.

[Hellbent]

engine compartment appears to have plenty of room for a 4.7. or, for that matter, a hemi....

[Matt S.]

In about 6 years when I get ready to build another trail rig. It will probably be one of those 4 door unlimiteds. SRT 6.1 crates wont be expensive, and putting a good manual or auto with an Atlas or Stak will fix the power and crappy DCX stuff. Of course Hi9s will be tossed for whatever new and better stuff is out, so those will have to go in.

I believe this is the death of the wrangler line. But, it wont stop me from buying a 2wd unmolested one in 6 years when they have lost their value.

[motorcityxj]

Just so I understand you correctly, you like the long wheelbase 2-door with the diesel?

yeah but i have moles in DCX and they say atleast for now there is no plans to make a long wheelbase 2 door a la the old tj/lj. Diesel might very well make it here in a few years though is the word.

[motorcityxj]

engine compartment appears to have plenty of room for a 4.7. or, for that matter, a hemi....

i know a guy that crashes all of the vehicles for DCX, the v8's cant pass the crash standards. To much intrusion into the cabin :rattle:

[Root Moose]

i know a guy that crashes all of the vehicles for DCX, the v8's cant pass the crash standards. To much intrusion into the cabin :rattle:
Then I guess it's a matter of watching Advanced Adapters and Novak.

Federal regs are a b!tch.

[CartsXJ]

i know a guy that crashes all of the vehicles for DCX, the v8's cant pass the crash standards. To much intrusion into the cabin :rattle:

Wait a sec, I believe you, but how can it pass for the unibody commander/grand cherokee and not a body on frame construction of the wrangler???? I would think that the body on frame contruction would, depending on the crash, kinda wedge its way between them or not effect the cab at all. Bad mount design? And when I popped the hood of the 07, there had to be about equal if not more room than whats in front of my mom 05 grand V6.

[Root Moose]

Wait a sec, I believe you, but how can it pass for the unibody commander/grand cherokee and not a body on frame construction of the wrangler???? I would think that the body on frame contruction would, depending on the crash, kinda wedge its way between them or not effect the cab at all. Bad mount design? And when I popped the hood of the 07, there had to be about equal if not more room than whats in front of my mom 05 grand V6.
Could be bad mounts or with the JK having a simpler shape the cowl area may be less complex and as such less likely to deflect/absorb an engine that has broken loose (or whatever).

That said, I'm sure it wouldn't be a big deal for D-C to redo the cowl/firewall stampings if they wanted to get past the crash tests. If the TJ was any indicator the the JK will be in production for around a decade. That's a lot of time to payback a "minor" retool, especially when you consider that most "real wheelers" will be likely to buy used with an eye on doing their own re-engine. If the JK was offered with a real engine the real wheelers would be more inlined to buy new. At least that's how I feel about it.

[motorcityxj]

Wait a sec, I believe you, but how can it pass for the unibody commander/grand cherokee and not a body on frame construction of the wrangler???? I would think that the body on frame contruction would, depending on the crash, kinda wedge its way between them or not effect the cab at all. Bad mount design? And when I popped the hood of the 07, there had to be about equal if not more room than whats in front of my mom 05 grand V6.

i am a self employed businessman with a degree in marketing not an engineer, but i THINK its not always better to have body on frame. Makes for very unpredictable crumple zones. You can really make a unit body fold up in a certain way and it wont even hardly dent the a pillar (Detroit internationa auto show had a SAWEET demo of such engineering on volvo S4 ... they had a laser cut right up the middle to the windshield then crashed it. On the demo you could go right up to it .... The whole front end was pushed up to the a pillar and i kid you not the only damage aft of the a pillar was a TINY TINY dent on the A pillar. Looked like maybe a baseball dented it. VERY impressive. Its not that the V8 s in general cant pass, just the other constraints of the jk design for everything from cost, to marketing to asthetics combined to make it AT THE MOMENT atleast not an option with crash standard for either 4.7 or 5.7 - 6.1 HEMIs to pass crash standards.

I could ask for specifics if thats not a good enough answer. For more info or better understanding see if you can go view some videos of the NHSTA or insurance institute crash testing. I personally love vehicles that are v8 and rwd on a frame, if they are the larger vehicle the mass helps them win a crash (seen on leno of all things a LTI 1995 CAPRICE crash a honda accord at like 35 mph) t boned it. Accord was RUINED, bumper on Caprice was a lil bent in lol thats it ! , all the energy is transfered to the accord. VERY complex physics this businessman doesnt understand. :laugh3: If you watch enough videos of crashs you can get a lay persons perspecitive of what works and why even if you cant say it in science speak :roll: you can kinda get a decent grasp of it.

[CartsXJ]

i am a self employed businessman with a degree in marketing not an engineer, but i THINK its not always better to have body on frame. Makes for very unpredictable crumple zones. You can really make a unit body fold up in a certain way and it wont even hardly dent the a pillar (Detroit internationa auto show had a SAWEET demo of such engineering on volvo S4 ... they had a laser cut right up the middle to the windshield then crashed it. On the demo you could go right up to it .... The whole front end was pushed up to the a pillar and i kid you not the only damage aft of the a pillar was a TINY TINY dent on the A pillar. Looked like maybe a baseball dented it. VERY impressive. Its not that the V8 s in general cant pass, just the other constraints of the jk design for everything from cost, to marketing to asthetics combined to make it AT THE MOMENT atleast not an option with crash standard for either 4.7 or 5.7 - 6.1 HEMIs to pass crash standards.

I could ask for specifics if thats not a good enough answer. For more info or better understanding see if you can go view some videos of the NHSTA or insurance institute crash testing. I personally love vehicles that are v8 and rwd on a frame, if they are the larger vehicle the mass helps them win a crash (seen on leno of all things a LTI 1995 CAPRICE crash a honda accord at like 35 mph) t boned it. Accord was RUINED, bumper on Caprice was a lil bent in lol thats it ! , all the energy is transfered to the accord. VERY complex physics this businessman doesnt understand. :laugh3: If you watch enough videos of crashs you can get a lay persons perspecitive of what works and why even if you cant say it in science speak :roll: you can kinda get a decent grasp of it.


Not to put down your opinion and some things I agree with, but being an engineer by prof., I think it comes down to cost. Trust me you can get a body on frame to crumple where you want it too, if you design it correctly. It also comes down to the fed regulations, about not hurting the smaller cars too much. Why do you think Ford had to but that crash bar across the front of their Super Duties, or why chevy made all there fullsize trucks the same height as mid-size. Ok, maybe the chevy thing is a bit much, but I bet they pass crash regs better than fords and by that I mean the effective damage donw to the other car. Its all these :rattle: that drive little cars and then complain that they feel inferior and scared against larger cars and trucks in traffic, becaue if they ever get in an accident they might be fatally harmed. Here's two tips for those people; First, drive a bigger car or truck, level the playing field. I would rather have myself and family in a larger SUV or truck for safety reason than a compact. Secondly, and this goes for alot of people, LEARN HOW TO DRIVE!!!!. All these new "safety" systems, ABS, Trac-control, motion control, etc. were developed and are for these people who never learned how to drive correctly under all condition. Hell even I can drive a front motor, rear wheel drive sedan in the snow ro any storm conditions.......its all about training and knowing the road conditions and your car, truck, jeep, suv, etc's abilities.


OK I am going to get off my soapbox now and back on topic. I bet you won't see an oil-burner wrangler in all 50 states unless they can get it to pass Cali-emissions, they seem to set the standards for the rest of us.

[Weasel]

I like them but hate the engine. Not sure how the increased width will effect it either, similar to any XJ I would guess. Would love to get one and drop a I-6/Aw4 in it but whos got that kind of $$$$$$$.

[Hellbent]

i know a guy that crashes all of the vehicles for DCX, the v8's cant pass the crash standards. To much intrusion into the cabin :rattle:

as i understand it, that was one of the main reasons for the demise of 4.0. and some crap about emissions/efficiency.

[Root Moose]

Friday afternoon, I'm bored, tired of watching machines compile the known universe...

I'm kinda keen on the new Wrangler.

I just recently sold my "new to me" Scrambler - traded for another XJ.

Why?

I made the mistake of just sitting in the Scrambler and taking it all in.

I really don't fit in a CJ that well. Not wide enough, left arm is kinda tight against the door. Sure, doorless, but reality means door will likely be on most times.

I'm guessing a TJ would be pretty much the same for width.

Now, with the new Wrangler being ~4+ inches wider, I may fit better.

That said, with two built XJs what need is there for a Wrangler? I'd never buy a new Wrangler with the mini-van engine. It would have to be a used vehicle to justify an engine swap. When they get to around $10k used I may look at them closer.