fire... definitely the fire thing
fire... definitely the fire thing
nocones said:I've complained about this before. Why are bad renderings (this, Mid engined normal cars, etc.) suddenly newsworthy? Probably 5-6 times a day I see some drivelopnik article about some rendering that isn't even possible. It's one thing if it's a rendering of a future product that is physically possible and being built. Or another if it's real art with fully immagined worlds like Kyzlyl Saleem stuff. But these things are just someone's instasnap blowing up for clicks.
That said this looks bad. It looks like all the bad parts of a Brubaker Box. Jeep already showed you how to do this with Jeep architecture with the Jeep Mighty FC. Which I still really want to build one out of a Wrangler Unlimited. I'm going to put a picture of it up because it's awesome.
Why do we get excited? Because we're not going to be building or buying them anyhow, so it's fun to imagine. Most concept cars are wildly impractical whether they move or not. So let us have our fun.
And you seem to think there's something wrong with a Brubaker Box :)
Land Rover 101 > Volvo C202 > Pinzgaur > Jeep FC.
I mean, I'm a firm believer that sliding doors are the main reason to own a van, but heck, I'd rock that one.
I would need back surgery getting to the driver's seat, but hey... might be worth it when I get there.
Not sure who renders a car without ingress and egress for the front seats.
David S. Wallens said:Tony Sestito said:I'd rock that Vangler! That thing is sweet!
And for the record, I'd also rock a Prangler.
That is something.
That's a Chrysler test mule from back in the day. I remember seeing several running around at the various proving grounds.
I think that it's very cool, but the technical issues are legit. One config that I can't recall seeing is a cabover with a stepdown to the rear area. You would raise the cg, but that way you can do away with the front overhang, but have copious vertical room for people and stuff out back .
Hi, I'm a Brubaker Box and you're stealing my bit.
nocones said:I've complained about this before. Why are bad renderings (this, Mid engined normal cars, etc.) suddenly newsworthy? Probably 5-6 times a day I see some drivelopnik article about some rendering that isn't even possible. It's one thing if it's a rendering of a future product that is physically possible and being built. Or another if it's real art with fully immagined worlds like Kyzlyl Saleem stuff. But these things are just someone's instasnap blowing up for clicks.
That said this looks bad. It looks like all the bad parts of a Brubaker Box. Jeep already showed you how to do this with Jeep architecture with the Jeep Mighty FC. Which I still really want to build one out of a Wrangler Unlimited. I'm going to put a picture of it up because it's awesome.
As an aside I'm not sure why people don't make a camper conversion for jeep gladiators. I don't mean a slide in. I mean a remove the bed and clamp a camper shell to the back.
Seems like since they are already convertible you could easily have a class C type pass through in a reversible sort of way. Sealing at the cab/camper junction would be easy, and bed height could be lower due to no roof in between.
A lot of the weird cab-over truck concept thingies like this Vrangler seem to have started as photoshopped images by the Gambler 500 guys on social media as a joke. I think they were getting a kick out of annoying the "angry face" mall crawler Jeep guys with them and sometimes calling them Joops, and then it took off from there. Since they were more jokes than practical concepts, things like getting in and out didn't really apply. Some more terrible (yet funny) examples:
Some Gambler guys are actually building these things in real life for future events!
That Mighty FC predates all of this, of course. That thing is one of the coolest concepts they have ever trotted out! I wish they could build that. FC's rule so hard.
This one totally floats my boat.
David S. Wallens said:Tony Sestito said:I'd rock that Vangler! That thing is sweet!
And for the record, I'd also rock a Prangler.
That is something.
It was a test mule for the Prowler engineering team.
Keith Tanner said:Mr_Asa said:Ignoring how it looks, I don't think it would be a good van. It looks like they maintained the internal body dimensions of a jeep wrangler, might be able to fit a twin size mattress in it. No fun if you're camping with your gf and your dog. Someone is going to be sleeping in the front seat.
This is a solved problem. Popup or a roof tent. Jeep guys love roof tents, but not as much as Land Rover guys do.
I'm amazed at how many Jeeps (and other SUVs) in my neighborhood have roof tents. I live in the burbs hours from any offroading with camping areas. And not a one of them appears to have ever been off pavement. Roof tents and rack-mounted traction boards are just the latest mall-crawler "overland" poser accessories out there.
Impractical design aside, lemme get one.
In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter) :
They're Mall Rated.
In reply to Tony Sestito :
Would that be called FC180 ?
They should have mirrored the doors around in that 'Vangler' rendering, so that the rear angle-cut door became the front door with the angle-cut up against the trailing edge of the front fender, and the front rectangular door becomes the rear door. Then relocate the hinges into a 'suicide' configuration.
Hey a Jeep I might actually be interested in
I think the render is a cool idea, but I'd rather have the Mighty FC with a van body behind the cab.
As for Gladiator based campers...This exists, the campers won't be far behind:
Thumbs up to the graphic designer who called out the drink can on the fender :)
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Yeah, my favorite feature! The XO guys are the top notch example of the Overland Craze (TM) but they seem pretty cool in the videos, and they damn sure put the stuff to the test.
As for Gladiator Campers, I did a little googling. They're out there.
David S. Wallens said:So, where's the engine?
EV.
Motor at each wheel. Battery pack in the chassis between the axles.
This is what happens when you leave a Pontiac Aztec and a Jeep alone for too long.
Dragons were created to deal with this kind of problem.
Oh look. Like clockwork. More of them..
Honestly, EV skateboard type architecture might make those a lot easier. Or at least physically possible.
In reply to ultraclyde (Forum Supporter) :
EV architecture doesn't reduce the structural intrusion of the beefy tires and suspension, and crumple zones don't count when your feet occupy them. So even as EV they would probably only physically get even close to any of these pointless renderings with a single, central, seating position for the driver... Or at best the 60 side of a 60/40 rear seat up front for a "1+1" drivers seat.
You guys are right about the doors.
Sketchup had a model of a Jeep in it so I spent 30 minutes making my brain hurt. Please Ignore the crudeness of the model 1/2 hour is all I was willing to spend making this.
I'm sorry internet. Making this really 3D doesn't make it work any better. But the door layout is way better.
That said I want to clarify I am not against making insane ideas and seeing what they look like. Concept cars and idea exploration are VERY important. They Just aren't "News". That's the aspect I complain about. I will explore bad ideas with renderings and sketches forever. I LOVE to do that.
You'll need to log in to post.
