I recently read Editor Cappa's "Trail Head"  in JP's April 06 issue.         Mr. Cappa stated that with the release of the new JK, "Current Wrangler model people will split into two camps." Basically stating that there will be those who want it, and those who don't. Mr. Cappa stated that those who "don't" will berate the JK,..........that is what I am here to do.

1. Why make the new JK bigger?   Jeep had a history of doing this in the early years, CJ-2 and 3 to CJ-5. CJ-5 to bigger CJ-5, and finally bigger CJ-5 to CJ-7.  Increasing the wheel base of the "traditional Jeep" around 14 inches from the first civilian models. However, from 1976 to 2006....30 years, the wheel base has remained around 94 inches, excluding CJ-6,8 and Unlimited models. Why change it? Must we keep increasing the wheel base and track width until he have a vehicle with the same dimensions as an H3? I understand that the engineers are making an effort to create a stable, soft, smooth ride........If I wanted that, I could go buy a Tahoe.

2. Why change styling cues that have been around for 50 years?  I'll start with the hood. Since the M38A1/CJ-5, Jeep hoods have had a "buldge" in the middle. This will be the first Jeep with a flat hood since the 1950's. The buldge just looks better to me.

The grill, every Jeep since the standardized MB has had a voluptous grill. What I mean by that is, the grill has tapered like the waist of a female from the headlights (widest point), to the bottom where it meets the frame. It has had a "V" shape. The JK is verticle, or nearly verticle and very ugly.

The front bumper, take the plastic boxing gloves off a TJ and it is very similar to a CJ bumper, and is clearly a relative of the MB bumper. The JK is a composite piece that looks like it belongs on a Saturn. I understand that it is removable, and that the majority of CJ/TJ owners replace their factory bumpers, but why dilute the image at the factory?

The front fenders. From the CJ-5 to the TJ (50 years), the front fenders have been very similar. The JK's look like they belong on anything but a Jeep. Again, I understand that these are removable, but I dont want to pay 30K for a vehicle and have to buy a new bumper and fenders before I can even drive it!!!

The windshield. Again flat for 60 years, why change it. If I wanted a vehicle without wind noise I would buy a Toyota.

The tail lights. Jeeps for 30+ years have had cheap "trailer" style brake/tail lights on them, why change it? The new JK has attempted to capture the look of the classic tail lights, but in a modern package. This is like trying to look like a gang banger when your a rich white kid, you make yourself and the thing you are trying to emulate, look foolish.

3. Powertrain  I understand that the 4.0L is an antique, and that it will not pass emission requirements and crash tests. Why replace it with a V-6 and not a V-8? It doesn't have to be a Hemi, a simple small V-8 would be fine. Make the engine compartment clean and simple like that of the TJ's. The pictures I have seen of the JK's engine compartment make it look very hard to access.

TCS, ABS, BA, ESP, AND ERM. Do we really need these in a vehicle that will be subjected to all sorts of mud, water, and debris? Have we as drivers let ourselves degrade to the point that we actually like a computer driving for us?

New JK has CV joints in the driveshafts? Why?.......What was wrong with U-Joints?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of good points to the new JK. I like the new Hard top, and some of the upgraded and stronger hardware underneath like the frame and axles, but overall I feel that Jeep has let 60+ years of tradition start slipping down a very slippery slope towards everyday SUV land.

I understand why Jeep made most of these changes. They feel like they can bring more people to the Wrangler by making it a quiter, safer, more stable, more comfortable vehicle. Unfortunately, I think they have misjudged why people buy Wrangers. I think people buy Wranglers because of the tough, rugged, adventurous image that will no longer be there when Jeeps turn into a plush, comfortable SUV.

Many members of the general public cannot tell a CJ-7 from a TJ at first glance. With the new JK, I don't think that level of similarity will be there. No one will confuse the new Wrangler for anything, except maybe an H3.............

This is what you get when a table full of suits in power ties has primarily marketing in their thick skulls.  

I feel for the JK engineers (many worked on the TJ, LJ, and Rubicon Wranglers). Most of them are just like the rest of us. The problem is the ever-increasing demand for better fuel economy, lower emissions, more comfortable, quieter, and safer vehicles. Some of this stuff is mandated by the government. In a couple years a vehicle like a TJ will not be legal to manufacture. It’s sad really. Welcome to what many people at DaimlerChrysler call the lunatic fringe.

Thank you sir, for your response.

I would like to ask though, at what point to manufacturers and the general public, stand up to big government and say enough is enough? If we gave in to all of the activist groups in the world, private transportation would be history. We would all live in government run ecco friendly apartments, and use public transportation exclusively!!

I enjoy clean air as much as the next guy, but I do feel that exceptions, or waivers, should be given to manufacturers who produce specialty use vehicles such as the Jeep Wrangler. I feel these vehicles should be afforded the same status as the Honda ATV I own, a separate provision for vehicles that are intended for off-highway use.

This could be extended to highway driven vehicles such as the Wrangler. I would even be happy to pay a hefty surcharge upon purchasing, that would be applied towards an EPA mandated program, or used to better our National Parks. In return for this surcharge, the vehicle would not have to pass government crash, safety, or emission tests like a standard automobile. Make it simply pass a mechanical safety inspection annually like a motorcycle that is driven on the street.

Motorcycles are allowed to be operated on public roadways, and you can be sure that they would never pass any kind of crash, safety, or emission test!! The operator assumes the risks inherent with riding these vehicles.

Now, if we can just get SEMA active on this, to create a new classification of vehicle that is exempt from all but the most basic of government mandates.............

Hey, we're on the same side here. I don't agree with what's going on either but at the end of the day Jeep needs to sell vehicles. And the truth of the matter is only a very small percentage of new Jeeps sold today are ever put into four-wheel-drive. It's very different from the market that the early flatfenders enjoyed. But I'd love to see a surcharge on an off-road specific (but still street legal) vehicle. I'm sick to death of TRD, FX4, and other stupid sticker packages that are supposed to indicate that this vehicle is more off-road ready...Because it has a few stickers, maybe some skidplates, and in some cases different shocks! That's just crap and Jeep is working in that direction with some of it's vehicles in my opinion. Ultimately you'll only see Jeeps that matter to the enthusiast market in Jp. Don't expect a Liberty straight axle conversion or Compass transfer case swap to grace the pages. It ain't gonna happen. When Jeep eventually stops building real Jeeps, Jp will no longer cover new Jeeps.

John

AMEN!!

Been seeing the trend of making more populous friendly vehicles over the years, just like in things like radio.  nobody goes after the niche markets anymore, everything is built to make the masses happy..  generic.  Generic = boring.

The Land Rover Defender is a good example.  That thing used to have a killer cage right from the factory, but a few years back that cage had to be dropped because it didn't comply with American regulations.  I don't know but I bet it's still built with the cage over seas.

Why can't Jeep build their masses vehicle but have their niche market traditional vehicle, much like GM has the H-!?  Of course, thanks to stiffer regulations, we would still need the surcharge idea to keep it from having to live up to some of the rules, much like motor cycles.

I was so hoping Jeep would keep at least the Wrangler somehow connected to it's roots, but I guess that dream is on the slow road to hell, and picking up speed.

        Our government is full of "Educated Idiots", that think common sents is running thin, and what we drive should do the thinking for us. Makes me think back when a friend of mine called because he had got his Off Road F150 and the horse trailer stuck next to his barn. I asked him when I got there. "All those computers on that truck, and not one of them can figure how to get you out of the mud"? Its not just what is happing to those of us who use our 4x4's to play around on the weekends. Some of the Farmers I know are spending more time and money making repairs to there lane-ways, because the newer trucks, ect. they are stuck driving won't do, or go where the trucks of 20 years a go would. Think about that when you think that can of corn cost too much. Jim was going the dump his old stand by, a 1972 GMC, when he got the new F 150. Guess what, the GMC still has a home, and its getting a new lease on life. He just can't aford to let it go. He has an on going list of problems now with the Ford, due to mud and such, the ABS mostly. $ 40,000 for a truck that can't handle much more than wet grass, sad isn't it?  

I agree with almost everything you stated.  I am curious to see where this changes heads.  For the last two models Jeep has ran a 10 +/- model year run.  My money says this model won't run more than 5 years before it takes the next step which as you stated is to be a watered down H3.

  We have to face the reality that traditionalists are the minority.  If you don't believe that just get in your Jeep and drive around waving at other Jeeps.  You'll go home a dejected traditionalist.  Maybe we are dinosaurs and should just slip away.  Most Jeep buyers today don't buy them because of their heritage, they just think they look cool or are cute.  Most can't engage low side without extreme difficulty.  Many will never even try.  I see Rubicons in my community being driven by people that I know would never dream of driving their Jeep on a muddy road, let alone off-road.

  So the manufacturer produces what the majority of the customers want.  For Jeeps that happens to be mall cruisers.

  I suggest that if you want a traditional Jeep, you better start buying them now because things, they are a changin'.