Interview with head of Jeep design

[forsakenfuture]

Thanx for the report--However

I can't imagine a Wrangler, 2dr/4dr, without a frame to support the front/rear axles/xfer case/tranny as rigidity/torsional strength for the acrobatics the jeep CAN DO--

We gonna have to wait-and-see !

JIMBO

This is the Jeep ICON from probably ten years ago. It was unibody with no solid axles. If i remember correctly when I saw it at Camp Jeep 2002, it was pretty tall and short and narrow. Looked like a roll over waiting to happen. My issue with unibody is the XJs and ZJs that i go off pavement with are starting to show signs of wear in the structure that the full framed vehicles are not.

[reece146]

A PROPERLY designed unibody will spank a body on frame design in strength, utility, and weight (i.e. mpg).

The floppy noodle body on the current Wrangler is a joke.

[reece146]

My issue with unibody is the XJs and ZJs that i go off pavement with are starting to show signs of wear in the structure that the full framed vehicles are not.

And yet the unibodies on the WJ show no such pattern of wear. It's almost like the WJ unibody wasn't designed by Chrysler. Hmm.

[JIMBO]

:sombrero: Interesting, what might you find a "JOKE" about the current Wrangler body on frame ???

A PROPERLY designed unibody will spank a body on frame design in strength, utility, and weight (i.e. mpg).

The floppy noodle body on the current Wrangler is a joke.

Perhaps you have a ddifferent sense of humor ?

:costumed-smiley-007:wings: JIMBO

[forsakenfuture]

Interesting, what might you find a "JOKE" about the current Wrangler body on frame ???



Perhaps you have a ddifferent sense of humor ?

JIMBO

I think he is refering to the body on JKs not the frame of a JK.


I dont have enough experiance with WJs to know how they hold up over time.

[JIMBO]

Heh Heh, I don't really care if he's refering to the lug nuts on the "Current" Wrangler--

I think he is refering to the body on JKs not the frame of a JK.


I dont have enough experiance with WJs to know how they hold up over time.

I'd just like to know what part of the "Current" Wrangler is a Joke and to whom !

JIMBO

[Mbogo]

While it may be true that the newer Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles are holding up better to off-road pounding than any XJ Cherokee design, I imagine it would be exceedingly difficult to build a unibody off road vehicle in roadster form. The roadster version of unibody sports cars are almost always heavier than their hardtop counterparts, often by a significant margin. Further, these convertibles very often, but not aways, exhibit greater levels of cowl shake, vague steering feel, and NVH compared to the hardtop versions. It should also be noted that the suspension design and intended purpose of these drop-top sports cars favor LESS wheel travel than a typical sedan, not to mention an off-road vehicle. The question is: can a roadster Jeep brand vehicle with a unibody design remain rigid enough and durable enough off road without the weight penalty that would negate all of the benefits of going to unibody in the first place? And if not, would a dedicated tin top be in keeping with the true "Jeep identity"?

[reece146]

Drive an S2000. Topless and good rigidity are not mutually exclusive.

Take the roof off a JK. Slam the rear doors and watch the rear quarter of the tub flop around.

[JIMBO]

Defective constructionmaintenance/modifications--

Drive an S2000. Topless and good rigidity are not mutually exclusive.

Take the roof off a JK. Slam the rear doors and watch the rear quarter of the tub flop around.

I've had my JKUR top off/doors off, RUBICON trek and the body/frame haven't "Deflected" any/ever--solid as a rock-

Look around and smell the roses !

JIMBO

[reece146]

Defective constructionmaintenance/modifications--

On the showroom floor (literally)?

Unless people demand better the same crappy levels of quality will repeat from Chrysler.