 Less Macho Jeep?
Posted by mike on 2000/11/7 23:00:00 (314) reads
|
Yahoo! News has an article that should put fear in the hearts of many long-time Jeep owners... Is there room in Chrysler's garage for Jeep Lite? Executives at DaimlerChrysler AG's U.S. unit are locked in debate over whether a Jeep less suited for off-road travel and minus its trademark rugged styling would boost sales without hurting brand image. While cost-cutting efforts have thrown Chrysler's future product plans into flux, company insiders say there are no current plans to make a Jeep that can't conquer the Rubicon, an old Indian footpath in California's Sierra Nevada Mountains considered the most demanding 22 miles of off-road driving in America. But some automotive analysts say concept vehicles like the car-like Jeep Varsity -- unveiled last January at the Detroit auto show -- signal that Chrysler officials are wrestling with just such an idea. ``There's a huge internal debate because Jeep is their strongest brand,'' CSM Worldwide analyst Michael Robinet said. ''Jeep is going to have to not necessarily escape its Rubicon roots, but bend toward the competition if they want to maintain high-volume entrants.'' While analysts said a Varsity-like Jeep is unlikely before 2004, talk of a watered-down model is heresy to Jeep purists. ``They need to keep their animal instincts with Jeep,'' said Lancaster, Pa.'s Richard McCracken, 52, who has owned eight Jeeps in his lifetime. ``If they want to head for a fad, they're going to bite it financially.'' Ruggedness Will Remain While Chrysler President and Chief Executive Officer James Holden said the automaker would explore all options depending on consumer demand, Jeep won't lose any ruggedness on his watch. ``There's room to stretch the Jeep brand over time, but we wouldn't walk away from the (Rubicon-) capable thing,'' he told Reuters in September. Introduced as a design concept to show where Jeep could push the brand, Varsity offered a car-like ride and softer, more rounded looks to compete against Toyota Motor Corp.'s Lexus RX 300 or Honda Motor Co. Ltd.'s Acura MDX, both car-like luxury SUVs. Some Jeep dealers love the idea of a product that would appeal to a wider range of buyers. ``I'll let whoever wants sell that 1 percent that goes over the Rubicon and I'll take all the rest,'' Denver dealer John Schenden said. Some analysts also question whether Chrysler should stick to the Rubicon-ready rule when only 10 percent of owners drive their SUVs off road. ``The realities of the market say you have to bend that rule,'' PaineWebber analyst Joseph Phillippi said. ``There's a way to serve both masters. Something like the Varsity works.'' Other industry observers said that, regardless of the product, messing with Jeep's strong brand image as the most rugged and capable SUV on the road is a big mistake. ``Varsity in my mind is not a Jeep,'' said one analyst, who spoke on condition of anonymity. ``It's a classic example of prostituting the Jeep name.'' They argue Chrysler should keep Jeep true to its essence and use its Chrysler and Dodge brands for less rugged SUVs and car-truck combination vehicles. ``As soon as you start walking away from your (brand) equity, you have the opportunity, the potential to increase your sales,'' AutoPacific analyst James Hall said. ``You also have the potential to split the difference, lose your old buyers and not get the new ones.'' Be sure to check out the rest of the article.
Reader Reactions
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. You must login or register to post a comment.
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
 Originally posted by: JayBird here is my comment
Okay, here goes. I have owned 3 Jeeps and currently own most of my 4th (it's a work in progress). My newest (99 TJ) went away due to a need for better fuel economy and cheaper insurance (it was my 3rd Jeep daily driver, the new one will be just for fun).
Jeep will need to build a luxuary sport-ute like the current Grand Cherokee and it will have to compete with other models. The cherokee will also have to follow suit. Jeep will need to ad a "cute-ute" that is small and economical. These are realities.
If Jeep is to survive as "Jeep" the off-road capable TJ type vehicle must remain even in small volume sales (though I doubt it will be that small). It's a bed for research and essential to brand image. The Willy's Wagon, Jeepster, and others were great, but without the universal, Jeep would have died long ago. Jeep will live as long as the universal is around to set the tone.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Maichal here is my commentThe fact that they would even cocider a less capable jeep I find disturbing, the downward trend started with the axing of the XJ in faver of the Liberty.I guess it's all down hill from here! I think DC forgot that Jeep is a nich market.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Phillip S. Losh here is my comment:
JEEP... the strongest word in off-roading,
and it should remain so.
I currently own six Jeep vehicles and I guess I am in that "10%" of people that take thier Jeep off-road. I understand when people describe Jeep vehicles as being capable and having animal instincts. I don't think the IFS is the answer. Solid Axle is much more dependable, and a stronger all around unit-just ask any 3/4 ton truck.
Aluminum bodies suck. Try owning one before you say you like it.
The Varsity is not Jeep. It looks like it would get stuck in my front yard. Then I would have to get a real Jeep to pull me out.
I am sure Jeep is kicking thier own butt for not introducing the Dakar( which even my wife said we could get)after seeing how well that nissan thing did. But its not too late. A long wheel base Wrangler, A Dakar, a Wrangler based truck, these all are great ideas. Yes, real Jeeps are built, but it would sure be nice to start building with something more than a souped up Neon. I guess we can hope for someone like Catapillar to buy Jeep after Diamler/Chrysler goes under.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Phillip here is my comment
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: John here is my comment: Does it really matter? Real Jeeps are built, not bought.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: XJ KEN here is my comment IT SURE IS REASSURING TO KNOW THAT IN SEPTEMBER
JAMES HOLDEN STATED THAT JEEP WOULD NOT LOSE ANY RUGGEDNESS ON HIS WATCH. IF I'AM NOT MISTAKEN THAT WATCH ENDED YESTERDAY. NOW WHAT, JEEP KUBEWAGONS ? HEIL SCHREMPP ! WHAT AN IDIOT !
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Jeb A 21st century Jeep Wrangler would these specifications:
1) Turbo-diesel-intercooled common-rail twin camshafts & multivalve engine
2) Gasoline-direct Injection twin camshafts, multi-valve in I-6 form; same displacement.
3) Quad-cam multi-valve small displacement V8 employing GDI technology; 5.0 Liters
4) Standard 5-speed Electronic Auto Box; stick is OPTIONAL
5) Aluminum body panels; saves weight & corrosion resistant
6) Space Frame
7) SOLID AXLES with 3-LINK COIL SUSPENSION & REAR A-ARM
8) Lower ratio for off-road use & higher gearing for interstate convenience
9) Snorkel for fording
10) Xenon headlamps
11) Optional turbo-charging for V8
12) Full-time 4wd mandatory
Cherokee:
1) 3 -link coil setup with rear A-arm (Frt & rear)
2) Independent suspension offered for top-of-the-line model
3) Turbo-Diesel-Intercooled Common-Rail engine with 5spd Auto-box
GDi I-6 DOHC 5-valve Gasoline engine
GDi V8 4.7L 5-valve/cylinder (used in current GC)
4) Optional turbo-charging for V8 engine
5) Aluminum body panels
6) Space Frame
7) Maintain current exterior design...Please............... or macho-it-up!
Grand Cherokee:
1) 4.7L V8 DOHC 5-Valve/cylinder Turbo-charged-intercooled Standard
2) 6.0L V12 DOHC 5-valve/cylinder Turbo-charged-intercooled Option on high-end model
3) All-independent suspension standard
4) 3-link coil with rear A-arm OPTIONAL
5) Aluminum Body
6) Front, Rear & Center differential lock standard
7) Torque-sensing differential OPTIONAL when excluding Frt, rear Diff Locks
8) Anti-tipping technology & other electrical gadget for high-speed stability
9) Go back to original GC design, current design looks like a dodge caravan
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: rich Once again, the longing for the Dakar shows up
in so many of the commentaries! Why? WHy?
Why didn't they produce that damn vehicle?!
Rich
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: J counts Well, it was bound to happen-- This increasingly yuppie culture we live in finally watered down the vehicle brand that saved the world 55 years ago. I've owned a '48 Willys pickup, a '69 J4000 pickup, and now a '95 Cherokee. An '89 Toyota pickup and an '83 Ford Ranger also found their way in, too. I hate cars so much that I've never owned one. Granted, I'm in the minority, and the automakers must reach the majority, or they wouldn't be doing their job, right? Well, as has been mentioned, even wanna-bes will buy Jeep vehicles because they CAN hit the dirt if they want to.I'm in favor of delegating(also been mentioned) the car-like market to Chrysler, where it belongs. I'm in favor of the changeover to IFS--it is time for that , but if the Cherokee comes out looking like the freakin' Hyundai Santa Fe(tone of disgust), then we are all doomed! Memo to DCX: Round the body, change the suspension, but leave the dual transfer case alone. Also, don't put any chrome on it, please- It is revolting. Use that all-aluminum engine we've been hearing about, make ABS standard, price it competitively, and I'll be standing at the door of Ken's Chrysler(closest dealer) on rollout day at 8:00 a.m. with checkbook in hand!!!
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Alfonzo Chrysler should bring back AMC so they could help bring back the kaiser complete with 3-link coil suspension, Turbo-diesel-intercooled engine, aluminum body. This vehicle can compete direct with the HUMMER which is indirectly based on Kaiser. Blow off GM with their H2 (Hummer2) and at the same time initiate a market for no-frills recreational 'special' vehicles such as the Kaiser. Also, Chrysler could build a crew cab version making optional all the yuppie accessories to appeal to the more contemporary crowd & the stock version for purists which are the most interesting group of people in the U.S.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: david wilson I have a 2000 Grand Cherokee.$40,000 4W/D
The Caster & Camber are out of factory specifications. ( it also pulls to the right )
There are NO adjustments on the 2000 model for caster or camber.
Jeep must think they are able to build "perfect"
vechicles now. The 2000 model is the first year with no adjustments.
I'd like some feedback if possible.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Mack I want the current TJ maintained for the future with the addition of the following:
1) 3.0 Liter Twin-cam multi-valve In-line six Turbo-Diesel Intercooled Common-rail type coupled to a 5-speed Electrically-controlled auto-transmission.
2) Solid axles & 3-Link coil setup with rear A-arm for super articulation.
3) Aluminum body panels
4) Twin-cam V8 gasoline engine with multi-valves coupled to a high-tech 5-speed Auto box as standard equipment. Make turbo-charging optional for the wealthier owners. Limit displacement to 5.0liters. Suspension setup is super-off-road superior 3-link coil with A-arm at the rear providing minimum 18" of wheel travel.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Bob Holland Speaking of Willys... They also made a car in the
early '50s, the Willys Aero. It was aimed at the
Chevy and Ford sedans of that era. So, there is
prescedence for a non-traditional Jeep. Frankly, I
like the Jeep Varsity. I say go for
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: ugly monkey I too am a long time Jeep owner and enthusiast. I'm still driving my 4th Jeep. All this argument over whether or not Jeep should produce more mainstream vehicles is a mute point. "Jeep" has been producing non "rubicon" vehicles since it's inception. Has anybody taken the time to ever read about Jeep's history? Since 1946 Jeep has marketed "family" type cars as well as it's 4x4 offerings. Has anybody ever heard of a Willy's Wagon? They were produced in both 4 and 2 wheel drive. They were aimed squarly in the face of the family who wanted Jeep name ruggedness but with real world practicallity. The Willy's Wagons successor was the full size cherokee. It was introduced at first with an independant front suspension. Both 4 and 2 wheel drive! DJ Jeeps were offered as well which was a left hand drive mail Jeep! Lest we not forget the Jeepster! Never offered in a 4 wheel drive, it was aimed squarely at the sports-car, country club customer. Jeep has always produced cross-over vehicles. Who cares if Jeep has an independant suspension on it's Cherokee? It's just a fancied up station wagon anyway! Keep the Wrangler for off road and bring on the on road Jeeps! After all it's Jeeps tradition dating back to 1946! (ps, I've owned 2 Cherokee's so don't whine to me about not liking them!) ((WHY CAN'T JEEP PRODUCE A LONG WHEELBASE WRANGLER FOR THE AMERICAN MARKET, THEY HAVE ONE FOR EXPORT TO AFRICA AND EGYPT!))
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Clifford I think Chrysler should maintain the JEEP trademark by innovating and offering a vehicle that's capable & proven in the outback without sacrificing on-road prowess. We don't want anymore generic suvs like honda passports ( Isuzu Amigo ) , 4-Runner ( micro-Land Cruiser ), RX300 ( Mercedes M-class ).... think uniqueness, think profits through traditional markets and expanding by a well-recognized marque such as JEEP
Ps: Any turbo-diesel intercooled common-rail type engines on the way? Put it in the wrangler and nobody would be looking at the Defender 90 no longer!
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Patrick I definitely support the Jeep purist, but the name is very marketable and profitable, and changes are necessary. One cannot remain stagnent with old technology and expect the common consumer to pay the high premium. I think Jeep is moving in the right direction. I have owned 3 myself and think that their present actions are appropriate, specifically with a cute-ute and the new KJ with an independent front suspension. The KJ will be all the offroader any purist needs and the appeal the daily drivers needs. Oh, and the those who think the IFS will ruin the KJ; note that in numerous magazines and tests, the new Montero with a IFS was seen to be better offroader than both the previous solid Montero as well that the Land Rover Discovery. I guess technology can improve; so take a Prozac, relax, and wait to see that all your fears were wasted.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Griff P.S.
I just thought i would point out that what the Jeep dealer was quoted as saying in the above article, "I'll let whoever wants sell that 1 percent that goes over the Rubicon and I'll take all the rest." Did anyone notice this comment and get disturbed by it? I remember when Jeep dealers were the only guys at the dealers that didn't have on suit and had 5o'clock shadows on thier faces. One guy wouldn't let me leave the dealer with my Jeep back in 83 till he showed me the killer offroad course the dealer had set up for new and potential Jeep buyers. The guy told me about Jeep get togethers and clubs and the dealer sponsered a club and did bi-monthly trail rides. This guy shouldn't be a Jeep dealer, he sounds like the pretty boy with the 4 wheel drive that he never uses, or maybe he just bought a 2wheel drive Jeep. If I ever go to Denver I'll be sure to pay John Schenden a visit at his Jeep dealership and ask him where that dealer that sells Jeeps to the "1 percent that goes over the Rubicon," because I really don't think he is worthy to sell Jeeps.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Griff First I would just like to say that the comments made by Ken & XJguy should be a reminder to all of us why we bought a Jeep. All of us who bought Jeeps because that I6 isn't in any other chrysler cars, how Jeep manages to have the only Chrysler transmission that don't break because they are Jeep specific (aka 4 speed auto in the XJ), and things like that simple tried and true solid axle. Jeep needs to start thinking about that slogan that the shop teacher in High School 20 years ago said, K.I.S.S. - Keep It Simple Stupid. That should descibe the whole Jeep brand. If i wanted a car like ride and IFS I believe there is a soccer mom proven Ford called that the Explorer that I could have bought. But I like the individuality. No one ever said, "It's a Ford thing, you wouldn't understand." Sure Jeep could use a few new rigs in the lineup, but no one said they needed a few new sport-cutes in the lineup. Did everyone forget the Scrambler, great truck, had one for 5 years, or the classic Jeepsters, the full size J-10 trucks. I thought Chrysler was doing alright with the whole Jeep thing, then I remembered the only thing they did for the Jeep name was the TJ. AMC did most of the ZJ (Grand Cherokee) all of the XJs, and along with Kaiser they did the CJ's. Chrysler has given us the TJ thats it, They gave us the 99+ Grand Cherokee but they kinda missed the mark on that one. It still looks like they borrowed the Grand Caravan back door.
But really...sure Jeep could use expansion but don't loose the indivduality. I like getting in my XJ and looking around and the only thing i see that is Chrysler parts bin stuff is the radio. Look at Land Rover. They've had their ups and downs but they are the lux SUV niche vehicle. They have 2 cars marketed in America and they sell all of them and they have 2 or 3 models more overseas and they sell all of those and have Americans begging for them to be brought to the shores of the US. They've been thru several companies ownership and they still are the standard in capability and comfort in the high end SUV segment. Jeep has gone thru many companies and hard times. Jeep has made or broke companies and it definately isn't the reason for its low sales. Chrysler is, they ruin the name with talk of these new sport-cutes and cross-over station wagons with all wheel drive (not 4x4, 2 diff things). The newest example being the KJ which is seems like it is going to be the bastard child of the Jeep name. Jeep is going on a downward spiral. Hopefully if history repeats itself, when Jeep goes downhill it is put up for sale and usually picked up by a decent company that saves it from its demise or in this case its conformity to the SUV craze. God help us all if Jeep does conform to the trend.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Ken I do not agree with Bob. If Jeep was simply to become just like all the other mass-market automakers, then why should Jeep exist? If Jeep begins producing vehicles just like Toyota or Honda, why would you buy a Jeep? Should Jeep start making sedans because that is more mass-market?
Some of the reasons we buy a Jeep is that we know it is more than just a regular SUV. Granted Jeep is a niche player, but that has been why Jeep is successful. Just because only 10% of Jeeps sold actually go off-road is not an excuse to have Jeeps become less capable. Consumers purchase Corvettes and Vipers, and very few of them ever drive at the maximum speeds those vehicles can achieve. Should the Viper add a back seat because most people drive sedans?
The Cherokee has been a huge success for Jeep. How many vehicles that were developed back in 1983 are still around today? The Cherokee is a solid and practical SUV. Sales mostly dropped because of the removal of some of the incentive and leasing programs. Granted, the Cherokee is not flashy like some of the newer SUVs, but so what?
Granted, if Jeep initially built less capable vehicles than the competition, they would make money, but how long will that last? Do you really want all automakers to build the same product? Would Saturn exist if they were just another GM car line?
I would prefer Jeep to excel in what they do best. Let Jeep expand their line with vehicles like the Scrambler or similar truck models. Let Jeep be the specialty SUV and truck line instead of the run of the mill soccer mom SUVs. If Jeep is to survive, they need to remain in the niche market giving consumers an alternative to what everyone else makes.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: rich I go along wuth the idea of marketing more
car-like suv's under the Chrysler/Dodge moniker
and not Jeep.
The point about Land Rovers is well taken, but
I for one would only buy a Defender..if I was
filthy rich,..and they were still available,... and
Jeep kept making KJ's!
Rich
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Bob Holland I fully realize that my comments, and visions for
Jeep's future, are somewhat extreme for a forum
such as this, which is dedicated to Jeep fans.
However, I can't escape the belief that there are
not enough hard-core Jeepers out there to maintain
the sales that Jeep needs, in order to remain a
relatively "inexpensive" 4WD brand (I'm talking
about the Cherokee/Wrangler).
Jeep sales, this year especially, have taken a
nose dive. That trend is going to continue because
of all the new $15K-$25K SUVs out there. If the
Wrangler and Cherokee were to continue, even with
updated bodies, but with the same mechanicals;
they're going to end up with a much smaller market
share (and sales volume) than in the past. That
can only mean higher prices to remain profitable.
It's possible we could end up seeing $
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Ken I obviously want Jeep to remain the unique and true off-road vehicle auto manufacturer. Sadly, Chrysler had an opportunity to add a potential success vehicle to the Jeep stable with the Dakar. If they were so bent on replacing the Cherokee, at least build something like the Dakar. If Jeep is to be survive, they have to remain better then the competition or provide something the others do not have.
The TJ has been such a good design, why does Chrysler ignore the potential? Now if they really want to come out with something, a Scrambler type vehicle based on the TJ would get my vote. Chrysler lacks a small pickup in the Dodge line, so a pickup in the Jeep line would not take away sales from Dodge. A small roadster pickup is lacking in the industry, and Jeep could grab that market very easy. Jeep spent money on the research of stretching the Wrangler to make the Dakar. Why not use that base, and bring back the Scrambler? There is obviously an interest in this type of vehicle, just look at what used Scramblers sell for.
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Bob Holland In response to Ken's comment:
Let me clarify my position: I don't want Jeep to
be like all the other mass-market brands. I very
much want Jeep to remain unique——and very much an
off-road, first and formost.
What I'm saying is that Jeep need to move forward
and utilize the most up-to-date-technology to do
so. That means using independent suspensions, OHC
engines, 5-speed automatics with tip-tronic
capability, adjustible suspensions, etc.
To those who think IFS/IRS won't work off-road,
all you have to do is look at the Hummer, and the
new 2001 Montero——which has gotten excellent
reviews as an off-road vehicle. It ca
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: XJguy here is my comment:
Jeepers, just like a most Viper, Ferrari, Lamborghini owners who do not drive at 180mph, they take comfort in knowing that they dropped their money a a vehicle that could perform way better than the car next to them. Jeep owners take pride that they have a real 4x4 machine designed to be taken offroad, even if the most offroading they do is cutting across a lawn. You are buying the time proven name and heritage, not only the material that you leave the dealership with. Start messing around with its real life performance and you will lose that winning combination. There are many SUVs out there that are in the same price catagories as Jeeps, most even ride better on road...but Jeeps continue to sell well, its all do to the reputation, and the few of us that do offroad serve as testament that as far as Jeeps go, they are the real deal, not all show and no go. The Jeep driving purists act as rolling billboards that very effectively shout out, "Hey look its a Jeep and it can traverse nearly anything you throw in its path!"
XJguy
|
|
|
| Poster |
Thread |
| Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
| |
Originally posted by: Bob Holland I agree with the article 100%. While I too do not
want a less capable Jeep, I feel very strongly
that Jeep needs to move into the 21st Century (or
is it now the 22nd Century??).
If they don't move forward, they will lose market
share. It's already happening. Jeep sales,
especially those of the Cherokee have taken a huge
nose dive thanks to the much increased (showroom)
competition.
The only way to keep Jeep prices reasonable is to
remain a mass-market player. If Jeep sticks to the
solid axle technology, their sales will continue
to plummet (only hard-core Jeepers will buy them),
and their price will have to rise to remain
profitable.
Like it or not, it's all the Harry & Harriet
homeowners who have allowed to remain as they
they've been. Now Harry & Harriet have seen that
there are better answers to their vehicle needs.
They're the ones driving the mark
|
|
|
|
|
Digg This Story
Save This Page to del.icio.us
