Raze wrote:John Brown wrote: Something to ponder: 2011 (Ford) Jeep Wrangler with MZR turbo engine.How bout the 2.5L / 3.0L Duratorque turbo diesels offered in SA, AU, and NZ?
They already do a 2.8 diesel for the rest of the world, no need to adapt.
Raze wrote:John Brown wrote: Something to ponder: 2011 (Ford) Jeep Wrangler with MZR turbo engine.How bout the 2.5L / 3.0L Duratorque turbo diesels offered in SA, AU, and NZ?
They already do a 2.8 diesel for the rest of the world, no need to adapt.
Of all vehicles which are final assembled in the US, I suspect that the small Jeeps(Wrangler and Liberty) have to be the most exported to other countries. When driving roads and highways around the Toledo, Ohio production facility it is very common to see them road testing right hand models with diesel badging.
It would greatly suck to see this product end.
ignorant wrote:Raze wrote:They already do a 2.8 diesel for the rest of the world, no need to adapt.John Brown wrote: Something to ponder: 2011 (Ford) Jeep Wrangler with MZR turbo engine.How bout the 2.5L / 3.0L Duratorque turbo diesels offered in SA, AU, and NZ?
I understood that, but since we were speaking hypothetically about it becoming a Ford, I thought I'd use theirs for reference assuming there might be some changes to engine manufacture which is common when companies are gobbled up...
Isn't it obvious? They have to sell it because it's not fuel efficient and nobody wants a vehicle that can't get 120mpg. I wonder if Chrysler, Fiat or the government was behind this idea.
And selling the Ram? That's even more idiotic than selling the Wrangler. "Let's sell our most competitive, highest margin vehicle line."
Seriously, are they selling this to raise money to make the 5 or 6 electric vehicles they rolled out a few months ago? That's the only thing I can think of. They'll sell all of their low mpg vehicle lines and try to become the greenest of the green automakers. That will work great for publicity, but I really doubt it will work great for sales.
Bob
Schmidlap wrote: Isn't it obvious? They have to sell it because it's not fuel efficient and nobody wants a vehicle that can't get 120mpg. I wonder if Chrysler, Fiat or the government was behind this idea. And selling the Ram? That's even more idiotic than selling the Wrangler. "Let's sell our most competitive, highest margin vehicle line." Bob
Agree with you on the fuel-efficiency of the Wrangler, and also agree a little bit about the Ram...
That being said, your comment about "nobody wants a vehicle that can't get 120 mpg" is a little bit left of way off-base.
Wrangler sales, to date, compared to the same period last year are up a significant amount. About 16%, last I knew. Dealer inventory is the lowest of any Chrysler product, and there are still orders coming in that need to be built, even though the plant is shut down right now.
Dr. Hess wrote:mtn wrote:And Ford.Stealthtercel wrote: The Wrangler has survived being a Kaiser, an AMC, a Renault, and a Chrysler; there is no reason why it couldn't do quite nicely as a GMC.Don't forget Willys. And Daimler
Actually, Ford never owned Jeep. They just manufactured them during WWII. Ah, government contract.
what about CAFE and how ram and wrangler affect the average??
Schmidlap wrote: And selling the Ram? That's even more idiotic than selling the Wrangler. "Let's sell our most competitive, highest margin vehicle line."
I think you guys are missing the forest for the trees. They're not trying to sell off the good stuff to shore up the bad, they're trying to sell the good stuff because those are the only assets anyone wants. Chrysler is going to cease to exist. Mark my words.
agreed
Compass & Patriot were created to combat the CAFE problem. Those two useless vehicles otherwise wouldn't exist under the Jeep brand.
It baffles me somewhat why the Wranger can't achieve at least mid 20s in the mpg war. It must be aerodynamics.
ddavidv wrote: Compass & Patriot were created to combat the CAFE problem. Those two useless vehicles otherwise wouldn't exist under the Jeep brand. It baffles me somewhat why the Wranger can't achieve at least mid 20s in the mpg war. It must be aerodynamics.
It is aero. Jeeps are bricks. Consider that until 2006, they still used a completely flat, nearly upright windshield. Every time they make a change in an effort to improve aero, they get howls of protest from buyers about how they are selling out, becoming soccer mom mobiles, etc.
The people who run car companies make no sense to me. It must be because I'm an enthusiast.
I still don't understand why they wouldn't sell the Egyptian military version stateside. Many, many people I know (as well as me) would be very interested in one of those oil burnin' beasts. Especially with the Scrambler body. Seems like a pretty easy formula or profit. Oh well.
That Egyptian military version uses leaf springs instead of coils (meaning it rides like a buckboard) and has several other changes that probably would not go over real big with the average US buyer.
including the fact that at the moment its difficult to get a diesel through the emissions testing in the US, and diesel prices are higher than gas... americans in general don't like diesels so much.
mblommel wrote: The people who run car companies make no sense to me. It must be because I'm an enthusiast. I still don't understand why they wouldn't sell the Egyptian military version stateside. Many, many people I know (as well as me) would be very interested in one of those oil burnin' beasts. Especially with the Scrambler body. Seems like a pretty easy formula or profit. Oh well.
Problem with that is the fact that the Egyptian military models are built in Egypt, not Toledo. Too expensive to re-tool for minimal returns.
And, DON'T GIVE THESE TO GM. Good lord people, do you forget what GM does to a good product? They turn it into 6 other models for use in every other GM brand on earth, neuter it, then IF they do start to get it right, they kill it like the fiero et all.
Thank you. Finally someone has summed up in one paragraph what I have thought for years.
These are sad times for the US auto industry. I just hope a Chinese or Indian group doen't end up with Jeep. Now that would be rally sad. One more foreign concern with an iconic American brand. Gulp!
FIAT wants Jeep and Dodge truck. The government wants GM and Chrysler to exist to build green vehicles. Congress has recently passed legislation which would give potential car buyers upt to $4500 to trade their current "clunkers", as the government calls them, in for new hybrids. As Barny Frank stated, automakers will build cars that the people want, not what shareholdes want. Shareholders want what sells and makes money,
Also, rebates are they only way to get sales high enough to keep GM and Chrysler in a zombie like state to keep the UAW employed.
I just read in JP mag that international has an agreement to purchase jeep...They really didnt go into great detail other than it had been in the works for a while and international already has a new drive train for the wrangler. Also international wants to bring back a full size suv and a truck based on the jeep platform (Maybe a cherokee-ish vehicle)
I aggree that the egyptian jeeps would be awsome but by the time the J-8 met american standards...well it wouldnt!
MedicineMan wrote: I just read in JP mag that international has an agreement to purchase jeep...They really didnt go into great detail other than it had been in the works for a while and international already has a new drive train for the wrangler. Also international wants to bring back a full size suv and a truck based on the jeep platform (Maybe a cherokee-ish vehicle) I aggree that the egyptian jeeps would be awsome but by the time the J-8 met american standards...well it wouldnt!
Based upon my friends who worked for IH on the powerstroke and a chief engineer I know in class 8 NVH... This is NOT good news. That company is screwed up and lost most of its talent in the past 2 years when they started going down the tubes.
That was in the April issue of JP. ie, it's an April Fool story. They always have one.
Yea I must be a little slow 
I just figured that out! Oh well it would be awsome to have a little diesel in a wrangler
John Brown wrote: Something to ponder: 2011 (Ford) Jeep Wrangler with MZR turbo engine.
Why not a Wrangler with SRT4 engine? It's already halfway there.
Chrysler HAD that chance, blew it. Also they had a chance to clean up the CRD engine... Blew it also.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/Chryslerdealerlist05142009.pdf
Three Lansing dealers closing, One I have worked for, one is on our block and the other I used to supply to when I worked in St.Johns.
Anyone else have one next door to them going down?
When I go to Chysler's dealer finder (http://www.chrysler.com/hostc/fad/findDealers.do) it shows 4 near me. They're closing 3
Which means there will be as many Mini dealers as Chrysler dealers (one).
There will be more Saab, Volvo, Suzuki and Kia dealers than Chrysler dealers. Actually, there will be more dealers for almost anything than there will be Chrysler dealers.
They'll have Lotus, Ferrari and Lamborghini beat. We don't have any dealers for them in the Kansas City area.
You'll need to log in to post.
