Is the Jeep Wrangler in the lineage? |
Post Reply | Page <12345 7> |
Author | ||||||
52 M38
Member Joined: 26 Nov. 2012 Location: New England Status: Offline Points: 1286 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
I'm going to say no. The only reasoning is that it makes my jeep feel less special. I have no other defense for my opinion. I will still wave though.
|
||||||
7slotguy
Member Joined: 02 Oct. 2013 Location: northeast Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
Some interesting discussions here guys, some spot on, some merely mis-guided opinions, and that's fine, everybody is entitled to one. I just prefer to stick to factual history rather than opinions, and I guess that's more so what I was looking for, something factual that would legitimize the thought that a Wrangler was a continuation of the lineage. So far none has been provided.
I discount the link to the Jeep website because the Chrysler corp and it's many flavors has been the source of this fairly newfound misconception. They've had everything to gain by promoting this myth, by riding the coattails of this iconic and historic vehicle, simply because they now own the rights to the trademark name, which gives them cart blanch to write the narrative to their liking $$. Which gets easier as time passes because now a whole new generation has been duped into thinking one way, while ignoring history. It's become a fad more or less. Most of todays Jeep brand vehicle owners aren't even aware that theres an actual vehicle model named the "Jeep" and it was around long before any company named Jeep or even a brand. Some even think the Cherokee's used to be Wagoneer's. Ignorance abounds! But if you want to put stock in Chrysler's Jeep website then you can't cherry pick parts of it because they also admit at jeep.com: " The Wrangler was envisioned as a more civil version of the wildly-popular CJ lineage, and despite having a very similar body design, the Wrangler had much more in common with the Cherokee than the old CJs." http://blog.jeep.com/models/jeepwrangler/the-history-of-the-1987-1995-jeep-wrangler-yj/ But lets look at some of the history books on the Jeep. From the book ”Jeep Wrangler” by Robert Ackerson- Building upon AMC’s characterization of the Wrangler as “new from the ground up”, Francois A. Castaing, AMC Vice President of Product Engineering, reported that the “Jeep Wrangler combines a classic open air design with state of the art four wheel drive engineering, including “shift on the fly” capability and a tuned, smooth ride suspension. This new generation of small sport utility vehicles will offer very comfortable and enjoyable on-highway driving and superb of-road capability.” Outwardly resembling the Jeep CJ-7, the Wrangler, which was formally announced on May 13, 1986, was based on a new set of design parameters. “The product philosophy behind the two vehicles” Castaing explained, “is completely different”. Our market research told us that in recent years customers were using these types of vehicles more for personal transportation, as well as for recreational activities. ….. As a result of these factors the Wranglers designers and engineers were assigned four basic product objectives when design work began on what became the 1987 Wrangler. First, they were asked to develop a completely new, small, sport utility vehicle. Second, it had to be a modern, open vehicle design vehicle. Third, it was to have the traditional Jeep characteristic of rugged, durable, four-wheel drive capability. Finally, the Wrangler was envisioned as a sophisticated vehicle for it’s class with a modern exterior and interior appearance, smooth highway riding performance, easy rear access and convenient soft top fit, function and sealing, and the latest in corrosion protection." From the book “The Story of The Jeep” –Patrick Foster : page 200-201"The Wrangler went on sale May 13, 1986, as a 1987 model. It didn’t look al that radical in appearance. At first glance it seemed like nothing more than a CJ-7 with a bent grille and rectangular headlights. It was, however, a whole new animal. The Wrangler was certainly more civilized. It’s suspension design was borrowed from the Cherokee, and the stance was both low and wide. Front and rear axles from the Cherokee gave Wrangler the widest track in it’s class. Wrangler also got Cherokee’s steering system, brakes, hydraulic clutch, wheels, tires, and shift on the fly transfer case. Wranglers power train was significantly upgraded. The base engine was the fuel injected 2.5 liter 4cyl. From the XJ series. The 258 cid carbureted six was optional. A styling team under the direction of Chuck Mashigan, a long time Jeep enthusiast, completely redesigned the small Jeep. Compared to the CJ-7, Wrangler was slightly wider but about an inch shorter in shorter in length. The wheelbase, at 93.4 inches, was the same as the CJ-7. Wranglers came standard with half metal doors, a soft top (removable, not convertible like CJ’s or despite what AMC’s president had predicted), and a one piece swing away tailgate that also served as a spare tire carrier. The instrument panel was all new and greatly improved over the CJ series. Perhaps in an effort to divorce it from the CJ line, wrangler didn’t offer a Renegade package. The Jeep CJ series was retired, a victim of changing times and a glut of personal injury lawsuits resulting from rollover accidents. No matter- AMC made sure the CJ marched off into history in style. A small brochure was produced touting the history and heritage of the Jeep, and offering buyers “The Last of The Jeep CJ’s” –a special Collectors Edition commemorating the end of CJ production."And, while not a "history book" a reputable source nonetheless: Heritage Region Jeep Alliance- Jeep History - "However, while the growing market for compact 4WD vehicles still sought the utilitarian virtues of the Jeep CJ series, consumers also were seeking more of the "creature features" associated with the typical passenger car. AMC responded to this market demand in 1986 by discontinuing the CJ series and by introducing the 1987 Jeep Wrangler (YJ). Although the Wrangler shared the familiar open-body profile of the CJ-7, it contained few common parts with its famous predecessor. In fact, mechanically, the Wrangler had more in common with the Cherokee (XJ) than the CJ-7. With the Wrangler, AMC was able to improve the comfort, ride quality and appearance while preserving the durability and unrivaled off-road prowess of the Jeep CJ-7." But lets just apply some logic here. The first CJ was an MB plucked right off the assembly line, had it's military accessories removed, and was called a civilian Jeep and given a CJ prefix to it's model number. From that point on it never changed for 43 years. It's number changed as it "evolved" with upgrades and improvements, but it always remained a Jeep model, CJ version X. AND, as time went by, no one ever lumped all the different vehicle models produced by Willys, Kaiser, or AMC as just "Jeeps". They were referred to as trucks, wagons, Commando's, Jeepster's, Gladiators, Cherokee's, etc. The Jeep and the CJ were synonymous. Though some none car types did refer to any small sized 4wd vehicles like the Bronco or Landcruiser as jeeps, but that was based on ignorance alone. I'm not trying to stir the pot here, I just hate to see the Jeep's history get all muddied and forgotten and I've seen it more and more in the past decade than ever. Please take some time and refresh yourself or research the history of the vehicle we all love so much. |
||||||
scoutpilot
Member Joined: 30 Dec. 2008 Location: Asheboro, NC Status: Offline Points: 4373 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
Thank you Denny. Objective research is always better than anecdotal information. Great Grandpa MB started life and lives on as a 1/4 Ton 4 X 4 Truck not an SUV.
|
||||||
WeeWilly
Member Sponsor Member x 2 Joined: 07 May 2009 Location: Clayton IN Status: Offline Points: 3423 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
Good insight on the history of the Jeep. But referring to the original post of comparing the CJ2A in linage with the Wrangler I personally stop it at when name Willys was stopped being used.
Jim |
||||||
47 CJ2A (Ranch Hand) 48 CJ2A, 48 Willys truck, T3C 3782, M274 (Military Mule)
|
||||||
Hey2a
Member Joined: 27 Apr. 2012 Location: Dover DE Status: Offline Points: 293 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
If you trace company origins and names and titles...the Fiat Pop is a descendant of the CJ2A...but the OP was is the Wrangler a direct descendant of the 2A...Any reasonable person should say yes....The Willys MB and Ford GPW spawned the 2A.. and the CIVILIAN jeep line starts...changed company names...improvements to the jeeps ensued...the 2a and the CJ7 wow, but basically the same...the Wrangler, the early Wrangler is a direct descendant of the CJ2A...one can logically follow the development of the Jeep through the years and company name changes...but the fact is the essence of the jeep remains...regardless of the demographics and actual use versus intended use...
Edited by Hey2a - 26 Feb. 2015 at 9:38pm |
||||||
1946 CJ2a
1978 CJ7 2002 KJ M100 |
||||||
7slotguy
Member Joined: 02 Oct. 2013 Location: northeast Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
I think logic would dictate you remove any preconceived notions and base things on factual history and comments from those in the know during that point in history. And any reasonable person would say that would be the people who designed and engineered the Wrangler. That would be AMC not Chrysler. However I did ask for “opinions” and those are usually biased to ones perception. Your right that the company origin goes back, but we’re talking about a specific model, the Jeep, not the company or brand. And yes the MB spawned the CJ, which was the same vehicle minus the military attributes. And the M* line and the CJ* line spawned each other thru the years. An M* turned into a CJ* and a CJ* turned into a M*. But when that company says that 45 year lineage has ended…. It’s ended. Using your logic that would make the Compass a direct descendent as well….. and those are 2WD. The basic dna of a Jeep is “a ¼ ton 4x4”! I’m not sure what your point is with the women. Sure they drive the Wrangler more, that’s because it’s a more creature comfort laden vehicle, unlike the Jeep which was simplistic and rugged with few comforts, one of it’s downfalls. The Wrangler was designed around the Cherokee for that very reason. Sure it’s still an off road vehicle, as many vehicle models are, inside and outside the Jeep brand. And if you check the history of the Wrangler, the improvements over the Jeep were in comfort amenities not in off road abilities. They didn’t improve that until 11 years later. And it's not about the model name and number, as far as simply changing it back. It wasn't changed to begin with, it was totally new because it was a totally new model. If it didn't initially resemble the Jeep in it's looks this erroneous perception wouldn't even exist. The Jeep was updated and improved during it's 45 year life but they never seen any need to change the name or model number prefix. Even during the tenure of 3 different companies. Yes the body of a Jeep can be made to fit the early Wranglers but not without some modifying. But then a Corvette body can be made to fit also. However theres much more to a Jeep than the body. The frames are not interchangeable. And logic would dictate that many vehicles can be “hybrid-ised” when modifications are made, but then they are no longer a Jeep or a Wrangler as intended. |
||||||
Joe Friday
Moderator Group Sponsor Member x 2 Joined: 26 Dec. 2010 Location: Jeep Central Status: Offline Points: 3654 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
I'm really not sure what the real purpose of this thread is other then alienating owners of multiple Jeep models, or whether it even still merits being on the Cj2Apage.
I'll agree that the JK has very little in common with earlier models, but to somehow draw a line that anything with the Wrangler name is not a CJ or an 'original Jeep' is not a reasonable conclusion. You have regurgitated lots of marketing speak from popular books that repeated the revisionist history. I enjoyed Ackerman's books. filled with industry data and specs, and dry commentary. I hope to meet Patrick Foster again this summer to understand how he went from being a salesman at a CT Jeep dealer to writing several books and befriending Roy Chapin. I have to assume this is how he was able to access the Jeep archive, which mysteriously closed to the public after his visit and his book was published. Francois Castaing? You have to be f-ing kidding. OBVIOUSLY you never worked with the man or you wouldn't have wasted your time quoting him and his pure BS. John Conde fed alot of AMC and Jeep PR to journalists. (and he sold alot at Hershey) But he never had access to the original design records because they were sent to California when Kaiser took over Willys in Oct 1954. He was only there for AMC, the Renault and Chrysler years suffered from guys like Chris Theodore. Yes, Conde sold alot of AMC/Jeep history, but he also left some important parts to the archive where he went to school in Laramie. As I mentioned before, from 1941 to around 2000 when Mike Gabriel passed away, there were only six chief engineers in charge of the "CJ" or Wrangler. I worked with four of them. They were VERY like minded. Jim Allen, Moses Ludel, and Fred Coldwell are 3 names I can think of that have taken the time to locate the primordial data on Jeep engineering and development and have written books that accurately document the facts. Just because an XJ leaf spring is similar to a YJ leaf spring proves NOTHING. This whole thread is worthless rhetoric. Just because you read it in a popular book from Borders doesn't make it "Factual History". |
||||||
67charger
Member Joined: 27 Sep. 2011 Location: Kentucky Status: Offline Points: 1272 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
Im going to add my two cents... haha.
|
||||||
rocnroll
Member Sponsor Member Joined: 20 July 2005 Location: Tuscumbia, AL Status: Offline Points: 13584 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
Joe's next to the last sentence...... that has been my feeling from the first post, didn't want to spoil everybody's fun though.
There's my two cents worth...... |
||||||
'47 CJ2A PU
'48 CJ2A Lefty "Common sense is not that common" |
||||||
Doug Timme
Member Joined: 27 Aug. 2005 Location: St. Louis Missouri Status: Offline Points: 1399 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
Maybe someone should call Jerry Springer and order a paternity test....
|
||||||
7slotguy
Member Joined: 02 Oct. 2013 Location: northeast Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
The purpose is to hear
other peoples opinions and how they square with recorded history and Jeep
history that has been muddies during recent years under Chrysler’s marketing
plan. And I’d say that “revisionist history” describes some of it well. I’m not
sure why you think discussing Jeep history would “alienate” any owners of other
Jeep brand models. Why is it that Wrangler owners always get hot under the collar
when history is pointed out and it’s not what they assumed it was, but have no
issue claiming their model is superior to say a Liberty or Patriot , or that it’s not a
Wrangler. Hypocrisy at it’s finest. I personally have no problem with the
Wrangler model. I like several 4wd models out there, past and present. But my
first true love is the Jeep.
I don’t know you from Adam and this IS the internet. So throwing around some names like you know everyone personally, and because you can do that it makes you the final word is not how things work. Slandering former Jeep exec’s and discrediting authors of researched history books because they don’t jive with your memory or opinion doesn’t lend much credit to yourself. But I do appreciate your comments. I’m not sure what your point is about a Cherokee and a wrangler leaf spring is. All leaf springs are similar to a point. The Wrangler used a lot of parts similar to the Cherokee but I don’t think the leaf spring was one of them, seeing as they are different lengths. However, if you don’t like this thread I don’t believe anyone is forcing you to read it let alone comment on it. Move along and happy trails to you. Jeep Production to EndDETROIT — American Motors Corp. announced today that it will cease building its Jeep CJ models this January, ending about 45 years of production of the direct descendant of the famed World War II workhorse. http://articles.latimes.com/1985-11-27/news/mn-4878_1_jeep-production |
||||||
67charger
Member Joined: 27 Sep. 2011 Location: Kentucky Status: Offline Points: 1272 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
All i know is i drove my cj/ mb today in the snow and had some really fun times. When i have those fun times i think of the generation who used them for tools and war and tip my hat to them. I know if they were still my age they would have fun with them too. If the newest generation can have that fun with wranglers some day the wrangler did its job too.
|
||||||
rocnroll
Member Sponsor Member Joined: 20 July 2005 Location: Tuscumbia, AL Status: Offline Points: 13584 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
Just curious, Mr. Guy, if you have posed this same question on any of the other jeep boards.......more appropriately one of the late model jeep forums (since after all, you are speculating on that segment of the story)
Seems the only other thread you started was along the same line of thinking and was equally as debatable AND more importantly, just as devoid of CJ2A topic. For that reason, I was wondering what answers you got when you posed these questions on the late model/Wrangler jeep boards? Did they think they were part of the lineage? |
||||||
'47 CJ2A PU
'48 CJ2A Lefty "Common sense is not that common" |
||||||
athawk11
Member Joined: 18 Jan. 2012 Location: Arvada,Colorado Status: Offline Points: 4151 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
I have no dog in this hunt, but wanted to throw out an "opinion." I don't own a Wrangler. I've never driven one either, but even a laymen like me can look at one and see the sibling of the MB and CJ models. I also know that when I drive my Willys, folks in Wranglers are the most responsive. Waves, thumbs ups, smiles, conversations abound. I guess what I'm saying is, don't underestimate the unmistakeable connection between the Willys and the Wrangler, because the drivers of the Wranglers don't seem to.
Tim |
||||||
1- 1946 CJ2A
2- 1949 CJ3A |
||||||
Joe Friday
Moderator Group Sponsor Member x 2 Joined: 26 Dec. 2010 Location: Jeep Central Status: Offline Points: 3654 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
Sorry I couldn't get back to this post sooner, but I was in Toledo all day with some of those Jeep people I obviously don't know buying parts I don't need.
I got the impression you were trying to use marketing claims to prove that a Wrangler wasn't a decendant of a CJ for some reason. My point with the leaf spring example was that you quoted AMC/Renault as saying it was all new, when in reality about 70% of the parts were either equivalent, interchangeable, or had the same part number. If a leaf spring is an inch longer, half an inch wider, or mounted an inch further outboard, is that a new revolutionary design that makes it totally unlike a CJ? |
||||||
7slotguy
Member Joined: 02 Oct. 2013 Location: northeast Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
rocnroll - Please, call me 7slot.
Well I have. Not in a thread but in discussions. And as you'd expect
the vast majority of the Wrangler guys think they're driving a modern
JeepCJ. It's funny though because on the other hand they don't consider
the Cherokee a Jeep. They really busted on the new Grand Cherokee's...
simply due to it's looks. Which illustrates how much value they put into
the appearance of a vehicle (think how the wrangler resembles a Jeep in
it's look). However they never back up this thought with any factual
data or objectionable reasoning. And they really don't like the term
"real jeep". Mostly because they don't understand what guys mean by it
and instead take it as a derogatory term that effects their manhood. But
most Wrangler owners tend to be young and don't know any different so
it's understandable. They feel left out.
But when discussed on a CJ forum or facebook page most seem to agree, especially the fb folks. The ones that don't seem to be in a more neutral corner and don't really care one way or another. Most of the time it's because they own both. Joe - Marketing claims and quotes from the company in charge both show they were consciously making an effort to get the point across that it was not simply an updated model, but in fact a new model, and that the end of Jeep production was indeed the end of the Jeep lineage that started in 1941. Their words couldn't have been any plainer or to the point. They even made that point part of the Jeep..... And as far as your 70% comment. Lets get real. The wheels and tires, the axles, the stock engine, the transmission, the t-case, the frame, the springs, the body, the sport bar, the interior, the tailgate/door, the hardtop were all different. The door shells and paddle latch were the only things that were the same. I think you meant to say seven percent! |
||||||
Joe Friday
Moderator Group Sponsor Member x 2 Joined: 26 Dec. 2010 Location: Jeep Central Status: Offline Points: 3654 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
You do have a valid point that they changed to a chain drive Tcase .
As far as body? You're right. I'm jumping too far ahead and confusing a YJ to TJ comparison with a CJ to YJ comparison but I can no longer edit that post to correct it. I can't help but notice that you seem to be anti Chrysler. Having spent quite a bit of time at 14250 Plymouth Road when it was AMC, Renault, then JTE, I can tell you the morale was pretty good till the Daimler Takeover (RAPE). It was horrible during Cerberus (Three headed GANG RAPE), and will hopefully recover With Fiat. You might be better off asking these questions at an event like Camp Jeep rather than relying on the FB fans. I'm not surprised by the answers you're getting. Edited by Joe Friday - 01 Mar. 2015 at 6:17am |
||||||
WeeWilly
Member Sponsor Member x 2 Joined: 07 May 2009 Location: Clayton IN Status: Offline Points: 3423 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||
I took my 47 2a to a part store and a young fellow in the store said that looks something like a wrangler. I replied that the Wrangler looks a little like the Jeep. All those other guys there agreed.
Jim |
||||||
47 CJ2A (Ranch Hand) 48 CJ2A, 48 Willys truck, T3C 3782, M274 (Military Mule)
|
||||||
Post Reply | Page <12345 7> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |