the wrangler will reportedly lose its solid front axle in 016

It's possible to design an independent suspension that does very well off-road. Generally requires portal hubs, but not always. Whether the f**king bean-counters or the engineers win in this one is an open question.

Hopefully it will at least still be offered with a real transmission, not only an automatic designed for kathoeys and imbeciles.

Well, they must have listened to the Kardashian wannabes about their Unlimited Sahara Cheapo Range Rover riding too rough.

I don't see too many enthusiasts with a 2007 and newer. Up until then I never saw a wrangler with 22"s on it.

The 2004 Wrangler Rubicon I sold 5 years ago is worth exactly the same amount today, maybe even a little more if it had the same amount of miles. Inline 6, 5 speed manual trans, short and skinny platform... Things you cannot buy new anymore.

__________________
1985 500SL Euro w/ AMG bits 130k
1984 300SD Turbodiesel 192k
1980 240D Stick China 188k
2001 CLK55 AMG 101k
2007 S600 Biturbo 149k Overheated Project, IT'S ALIVE!!!

Other than the platform, why is an I-6 inherently superior to a V-6, or a 5-speed manual superior to the 6-speed that's currently offered?

jeeps suck anyways unless they are built.

__________________
have no worries.....President Obama swears "If you like your gun, you can keep it

I've driven both extensively, mostly in the Colorado rockies. The V6 with the 6 speed has no low end grunt which is really needing for off-roading, but much better feeling on the highway. Perhaps it was because I am so used to the 5 speed, but I could never find the right gear for the situation. The torque and the gearing make all the difference with the older model. Feels faster...

The new platform is larger, wider and 800 pounds (20%) heavier. So the 25% more power does not make up for it.

__________________
1985 500SL Euro w/ AMG bits 130k
1984 300SD Turbodiesel 192k
1980 240D Stick China 188k
2001 CLK55 AMG 101k
2007 S600 Biturbo 149k Overheated Project, IT'S ALIVE!!!

As far as used vehicles--Jeep cj's / wranglers have always held their value as well as any out there.

An inline engine compared to a v configuration of the same size--in general would make 30% more torque.
Thats not so much the case in the current stuff -like a 4.3 chevy compared to A 250 inline.---if we had a south american 250 to compare- that would be so interesting .

Is there any technical/physics reason for this, or is it simply because V-6s tend to be newer designs and thus high-revving rather than built for max torque?

Based on what I read, it's a rumor that they MIGHT. I'd think they'd be nuts to do it, but I'm sure the corporate geniuses are thinking that most buyers are city folk anyways and this won't piss them off. But it will piss off the Jeep followers (I have a CJ), and when they start bad-mouthing everything online, I'd think that would reverberate.

__________________
- Brian


1989 500SEL Euro
1966 250SE Cabriolet
1958 BMW Isetta 600

its a phisics thing, a rule that used to be the case, nowdays modern engines thats not so much true with the technical advances-presumably, but we have no FI inline's anymore to compare with except the old jeep engine thats now departed.
Gm axed the inline 6 in the 80's here- the p series vans were the only ones still equipped--with carbs.
down in Brasil they refined the inlines for the south American Silverados & gmcs--Lotus redesigned the head and added long runner EFI port injection manifolds

BMW still sells I-6's in North America for one thing. They range from revvy to grunty, depending on tuning.

But again, what would cause V-6's to be inherently less torquey? Firing order is the same on an even-fire V-6, so that isn't it. Manifold design and how the intake/exhaust pulses interact?

Seriously curious here.

They might do it, the Italians took the Dodge name off their trucks. Now they are just Ram, wtf is that?

I can see them ruining Jeep as well, would be about par for the course.

They are pretty much aiming the Wrangler at people who cannot afford a Range Rover or G wagon and still want to look dope running around on the shore in the summer.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

The M151 Mutt had independant 4 wheel for better high speed off road use, and so does th hummer.

Jeep has maintained a ww2 era 4wd solid axle system for 60 years. Modernizing it is just a sign of the times. The military light jeepish vehices (mutt) haven't had solid axle suspension since the end of the korean war, and the hummer is the same.

This will be a radical change, but at the same time will produce a better ride, better off road capability, you name it. The mutt compared to the original willys jeep was a roomier more comfortable vehicle for the same basic size by using a unibody vs body on frame and solid axle. I for one am pretty interested to see how this turns out.

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

Maybe if they had D44HDs front and rear like the early Rubicons, but nowadays it's all about sales numbers. You can walk into a tractor or motorcycle dealer and ride out in a side by side that embarrasses a modern Wrangler off road for half the price. For years, the CJ and then the Wrangler gave garbage axles that wouldn't handle engine upgrades with tires over 31", and leaf springs gave it all the flex of a brick on a roller skate. They learned a lot with the Cherokee, except how to give the room for larger tires, and applied the suspension tech to the TJ. That wasn't bad, but the beginning of the "softening" of the Wrangler platform. It was well accepted and did good off road, but made it more approachable as a daily driver for non-wheelers, who pushed to turn it into more of a little car with better poser status than a Patriot or Compass.
What they should have done with Jeep is kept it a fairly serious off road capable machine, but then they wouldn't have sold nearly as many.