No Wrangler refresh until 2015
 

Sorry if this is old news, but I just read this article about Chrysler's plans for a Jeep pickup, and the CEO said it won't be happening until the Wrangler is refreshed in 2015. That's quite a wait!

ht tp://rumors.automobilemag.com/jeep-ceo-says-no-wrangler-pickup-until-2016-76503.html

ya i think its been posted. that is about right though if not early for the wrangler. it seems wrangler has been on about a 10 year cycle with minor updates in between.

that's ok by me! i like the JK a lot, so we can keep it around!:yup:

For any other car that would be a long time between redesign...but Jeeps always have a long shelf life so its not suprising.

Agreed, that would be a little early for the wrangler. Figured it would be either 2016 or 2017

I have a feeling the next generation of Jeeps aren't going to look so "jeep" They will probably follow suit with Landrover. If you haven't seen their new lineup they have gone a complete new direction

Yeah this worries me some too:thinking:

True.

Chrysler CEO has made a few comments about the Wrangler heritage, just recently I saw a new clip that says building a wrangler any were but USA wouldn't be right, nor will it happen. Toledo is the birth place.

I do think the bones of the wrangler can't stray too far from were we are today, doing so would kill the icon and legendary vehical Chrysler says's is their flagship vehical in the brand.

Long live the Wrangler...

I doubt they will stray too far with the design of the Wrangler. The shape is an American classic, the trademark grille, round headlights and fender shape. It may get smoothed out a little bit and a tad more windshield rake, but I don't see it looking like the Land Rovers, that's what the Grand Cherokee, Patriot, Liberty are for. They would kill a lot of sales if they alter the classic shape too much.

Agreed. The latest Defender concept is a completely new direction for the model.

Attachment 241940

Attachment 241939

What will kill the Jeep is Obama and his EPA - the new corporate average fuel economy requirements may cause Chrysler abandon the Jeep unless they can get it over 25MPG average.

X2 on that.......

Anything is possible, but unless the feds change something CAFE means "Corporate Average Fuel Economy". They make up for Jeeps that get 20 MPG with by selling econo-boxes that get 45 MPG.

I don't see Jeep going anywhere...

Jeep is one of the more profitable brands of the group, and the Wrangler is a hot seller. Don't fix what ain't broke... Minimal changes would be best concentrating on improving the drivetrain.

Those wheels and tires are just what most of the mall crawling Rover owners like.

Me, not so much.

:naw:

Damn him for being concerned about fuel standards and the environment. I love how Obama is going to kill the wrangler. C'mon, the wrangler isn't going anywhere.

With the poor quality composents of the JK, I'm affraid to see the new (urban) version of the Wrangler around 2017

I wouldn't be surprised to see IFS on the Sport and Sahara models

Just give us a diesel option in the US... Fuel economy problem solved.

I agree. I'm interested to see what they do to make the Wrangler more aerodynamic. It seems like a very un-Jeep thing to do, but they have to sell vehicles I suppose. I hope they don't mess with the design too much.

I heard they're bringing a diesel option back for the Grand in '13...I would love to hear the same for the JK

That's what the CJ guys said about the YJ, then the YJ guys said that about the TJ, then the TJ guys said that about us.....
Now it's our turn!

Again thank you EPA - why we have more strict diesel regs than Europe escapes me.

Well without Obama, Chrysler would have been out of business and Jeep would have probably died with it. Just sayin. :dontknow2:

Do a little research - the main reason for the auto bailouts was to keep the manufacturers from renegotiating their union contracts. The bailout was more for the unions. Plus, Jeep would have survived during a restructuring of Chrysler as it is profitable. And recall that Jeep used to belong to AMC etc. - it will survive as long as it makes money.

Just show me a diesel option, and maybe a little better fuel economy and I will show you my new Jeep! I hated the JK when it came out, I had a TJ at the time, and thought it looked stupid, too streamlined, then I drove it...fell directly into love with it. I can only assume that is going to be the case with every new generation of the wrangler. Which is why I refuse to go drive the '12. :rotflmao2:

At the time of the bailout, Jeep had the JK which was the only good vehicle in the lot but was criticized for lots of hard plastic. The Liberty, Commander, Patriot and Compass were all Daimler/Cerberus products and most of them were crappy plastic-laden decontented POS vehicles. Sales for Jeep were at an all time low and many of these models couldn't be given away. The brand could have died, kinda like how Hummer did.

As far as doing research, you'll notice they weren't "bailouts". They were very high interest government loans which both GM and Chrysler ditched as quickly as a dead cat once the banks (which were the real crooks - they got away with ACTUAL bailouts, money that the American people will NEVER see again) started to loan again.

The union renegotiations happened under the Chapter 11 umbrella, which was the only way to get the automakers back in the black. Legacy costs plus uncompetitive wages had to be cut back.

If McCain and "I-can-see-Russia-from-my-porch" Palin took charge, absolutely ZERO DOLLARS of government money would have been granted as loans. The bankruptcy would not have been government sponsored and would have probably dragged on until now. And yes, both companies would have went belly up. And as far as research is concerned, did you know that Ford shares about 70% or more of the auto suppliers that GM and Chrysler use? If GM and Chrysler went down, odds are Ford would follow soon after.

I still have a job in the auto industry thanks to THIS president. He's not perfect, and he's made a lot of mistakes, but for this one very clever act that saved the American auto industry, he has my thanks, my vote and my gratitude.

Ford took no bailout money and did well. I'm not sure if Chrysler has paid off their loans, and not saying they shouldn't have been offered some sort of cheap financing, but GM has not paid it back yet and may never given the stupid green cars they produce like the Volt at government behest. Also, I believe Bush initiated the bailouts anyway, including TARP, so you should give him some love, right?

Having said all that, I would prefer way less government intervention, especially from the regulation side of things. Ultimately it will crush innovation and productivity, and that should worry you.

In any event, thanks for helping to make a quality product, I love my Chrysler so far!

Cheers!

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/05/24/c...e-suvs-to-tha/ <-- Chrysler paid off the loans on the 24th of May, 2011, 6 years ahead of schedule. I'm not terribly impressed with how Chrysler was run before, and I have issues with some of their QC issues, huge issues with their tracking systems, and concerns about some of the directions they had been going - but lately they've been getting a lot better, and squaring away those loans was a good show on their part.

Very well said. It's ok to give credit where credit is due, which is something most don't do. I work for GM financial and I'm not sure I'd still have a job without those actions.

Attachment 243341 Attachment 243342

More aerodynamic Wrangler?

You do know that Sarah Palin never said that right? I would have no problem with a company that cannot sustain itself not getting bailouts and going belly up. That is the way the free market works, and the reason we have as many wonderful advances as we do. Things that people want succeed, things that people don't want fail. If a car company can't make vehicles that people want to drive, it shouldn't keep being dragged along by the government, it should fail and get out of the way. Do you really think that people would just quit driving? No, another company would come up in it's place and produce vehicles that people wanted to drive.

It's all a giant shell game, but actually, Chrysler hasn't (and never will) paid back at least $1.3B of their loans, by some accounting, it's more. This is according to the Treasury Department back in July. And even that is only because Fiat took a chance and now owns well more than half of Chrysler. I'm sure the accounting department at Fiat is having fun trying to value that investment now.

Also according to the latest Treasury estimate (just a couple weeks ago), the total GM/Chrysler bailout will cost taxpayers around $24-25B (mostly due to GM) - and if including their finance arms, about $80B (not sure how much, if any, is Chrysler Financial). It should also be noted that GM didn't have the benefit of a sugar daddy (e.g. Fiat) to prop up the investment - they had to go to the open market....where their shares have fallen by 1/3 since the IPO a year ago.

All the bailouts/loans/whatever did was delay the day of reckoning yet again - and until the union issues are realistically addressed, the US auto companies will remain way behind the 8 ball.

She has said a lot of things, none of which I'm impressed with. If you think she'd make a good vice president or president, I think we're done talking.

As far as letting auto companies fail, be careful what you wish for. I'm an engineer in the auto industry, one among many. I work 60 hour work weeks on average and have a pounding headache from work every day. There's a lot of work for very little manpower - so there's no token positions in the automakers anymore. Everyone's overworked.

Even having said that, every commodity in the vehicle takes literally TEAMS of engineers from the OEM on down to the suppliers. For each commodity, there could be a team anywhere from 100 to 200 personnel involved directly and indirectly, from OEM to supplier level, for every commodity, not including the plant workers. The manpower to engineer, to test, to design, to track logistics for, to audit for human interface, durability, NVH and etc. This is done for every mirror, seat, carpet, center console, steering column, IP, what have you. There are hundreds of commodities in each vehicle. Each OEM produces about 20 to 30 different models. Multiply that. Add in OEM plant personnel (usually 1000 to 2000 workers per plant), and supplier plant personnel (several hundred per plant). Don't forget the accounting, management, advertising and logistics people at the top of the pyramid helping to coordinate the entire company (easily 1000 plus there at the OEM level, 100 or so per supplier). Now mutiply by the three American OEM's. And you have a workforce that comprises a huge swath of America.

In towns like Detroit, where I live, almost the entire infrastructure of the city is built to support auto workers and engineers in the auto industry. Restaurants, housing, barbers, Home Depots. They all sell to people who work in the auto industry.

Now... say again that you "don't mind if a company goes belly up". Say that to literally millions of hard working Americans... Americans who actually MAKE stuff here in the USA. Not underwear or electronics. Cars. Vehicles. Jeeps. Americans who would be out of jobs, starving and homeless if Chrysler and/or GM failed. Do the math.

If all this still won't change your mind, then you'll be happy driving around in your ricer and buy Thailand shirts, Mexican beer and Chinese toys. Because the auto industry is the last true manufacturing industry in America. Be careful what you wish for.

Keep theorizing. Me and other people in the auto industry have work to do.

Lol I hope not

Ummmm, not theorizing, everything I wrote is a fact. Googling any of it would show you that in about 20 seconds. You can even read it in the HuffPo (not kidding, that will come up on page one of a search).

I'm new to the forum, and didn't join to troll or derail threads, but I did want to add some factual data to some of the inaccurate generalized statements made above. The taxpayers lost a lot of money on the auto industry. When it's all said and done, we'll probably lose a pretty good chunk on bailing out Wall Street as well. We can argue until the cows come home about whether either of those things were right, wrong, good, bad - whatever, but they're facts.

FWIW, I too am an engineer, spent almost two decades in U.S. manufacturing, a little in Europe, and now work in finance (not "Wall Street"). I respect your obvious patriotism and desire to keep our economy robust. But you of all people as an engineer, should recognize that facts are stubborn things - and the U.S. manufacturing sector has been on a 30+ year decline that has to do with as many external as internal factors - some controllable, but many not. Slapping a "buy American" bumper sticker on your Jeep, and sticking your head in the sand doesn't make a single one of those factors go away. Neither does supporting and advocating for more regulation and government intrusion. Just ask the good folks that would love to start cranking Dreamliners out of South Carolina.

Thanks for the work you do, based on the increased quality and appeal of most products coming out of the Big Three, I'd say you are doing a great job. My first car (and last American car) was a '78 Mercury Cougar - and after too many Japanese and European vehicles (still a couple in the driveway), I'm anxiously awaiting delivery of my loaded JKU Rubicon - so I'm putting my money where my mouth is. Cheers. :beer:

(Kinda funny/ironic that I'm watching them crash test South Carolina-made BMW's on CNBC as I finish typing this. :thumbsup: )

I take exception to your hypothesis above. The rest can be argued to be fact but don't underestimate your own home grown auto industry. Having worked in auto for 12 years, as a supplier and OEM, and seeing all sides of the playing field including the insides of Toyota, Honda and their suppliers, we're not only within striking distance, we're almost equal. The bankruptcies were our payment for sins committed in the 70's and 80's when our car companies got complacent. Things are different now. Expect great things ahead.

I hope you are right my friend. I have seen my intended career outsourced to China and the like. I am a textile engineer and there is virtually zero american textile manufacturing left in the US. Nothing compared to 10 years ago when I was working for my degree. I hope the same thing does not happen to the auto industry. it will be tough as unionized wages and regulations can not compete with over seas labor and non-regulated industries. I believe that if it were not so expensive to ship a car from China, we might already be there. Keep up the good work, I agree, our country needs the auto industry

Keep the shape and Jeep looks. They could hit a home run just by listening to this forum. Fix the leaking, the power verses mpg, and other little things that add up. There truly is no competitor for the Wrangler.