nocones wrote: I didnt think you could get manual + diesel
Dang! You're right. It's even stranger than I thought.
nocones wrote: I didnt think you could get manual + diesel
Dang! You're right. It's even stranger than I thought.
you said vehicle.
T.J. wrote: How about Tesla? It is fairly strange to make a performance oriented EV.
What's not to like about an electric motor? The torque of a diesel, the smoothness of a rotary, and the maintenance requirements of, well an electric motor. The main thing holding backed electrics is range, not pow, and Tesla seems to have figured out a solution to that.
Cotton wrote:1988RedT2 wrote: Jeep Wrangler. Impractical, unattractive, uncomfortable. "Arguably the most controversial choice on the list is the iconic Jeep Wrangler (including its stretched four-door equivalent the Wrangler Unlimited). While the Wrangler has few equals as a rough-and-tumble go-anywhere off-road vehicle, it’s lacking in refinement, comfort and road manners as a pavement-planted daily driver. Among its many faults, Consumer Reports condemns the Wrangler with such comments as, “it rocks and jiggles constantly, and handling is very clumsy…wind noise becomes very loud at highway speeds…getting in and out is an awkward act…the interior is uncomfortable.” It also gets poor crash test ratings and performance/reliability scores." http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2012/11/28/new-cars-to-avoid/ I don't hate Jeeps, just never could understand why anyone would buy one.Have you driven a new wrangler? My wife's 2 door has 280hp, nav, sat radio, heated seats, a 3 piece hard top, and is actually a nice trip vehicle and is her DD. It's also awesome offroad. As far as unattractive.....you're probably in the minority on that one as most people seem to love the styling of the wranglers. I had an 87 wrangler and it was pretty impractical and uncomfortable, but the newer ones are not imo of course. I stopped reading consumer reports vehicle reviews years ago....they just got so annoying. They really should stick to the plain vanilla sedans that fit their target audience.
We had a 2014 Wrangler Sport as a loaner for a couple days last year (it had under 1k miles on it). I found it to have a reasonably nice dash/ergonomics, but the seats were uncomfortable, it felt woefully underpowered (it has the 6cyl) and the engine uninspiring (felt weaker than the old 4.0 in my XJ). The ride quality could only be described as "complete crap" (and I daily drive a lowered WRX on 350# springs), and the handling was, at best, almost as good as our Sequoia (which is way bigger and heavier). The brakes were about as good as my old XJ brakes (which is to say, about as good as the brakes on my 1970 Triumph). Also wind noise at even lowish speeds (with a hardtop).
Overall, it was one of the least pleasurable car to drive that I've ever driven and I couldn't wait to give it back - and I used to drive a 1990 XJ, so I'm not a Jeep Hater by any means.
Just amazes me that Jeep has put all the modern features and gadgets inside the Wranglers, but the rest of the vehicle is just as lousy on the road as they were decades ago. They really should just make a Wrangler with IFS/IRS for the masses (and have a separate wrangler specifically for the small group of people who actually wheel them).
irish44j wrote:Cotton wrote:We had a 2014 Wrangler Sport as a loaner for a couple days last year (it had under 1k miles on it). I found it to have a reasonably nice dash/ergonomics, but the seats were uncomfortable, it felt woefully underpowered (it has the 6cyl) and the engine uninspiring (felt weaker than the old 4.0 in my XJ). The ride quality could only be described as "complete crap" (and I daily drive a lowered WRX on 350# springs), and the handling was, at best, almost as good as our Sequoia (which is way bigger and heavier). The brakes were about as good as my old XJ brakes (which is to say, about as good as the brakes on my 1970 Triumph). Also wind noise at even lowish speeds (with a hardtop). Overall, it was one of the least pleasurable car to drive that I've ever driven and I couldn't wait to give it back - and I used to drive a 1990 XJ, so I'm not a Jeep Hater by any means. Just amazes me that Jeep has put all the modern features and gadgets inside the Wranglers, but the rest of the vehicle is just as lousy on the road as they were decades ago. They really should just make a Wrangler with IFS/IRS for the masses (and have a separate wrangler specifically for the small group of people who actually wheel them).1988RedT2 wrote: Jeep Wrangler. Impractical, unattractive, uncomfortable. "Arguably the most controversial choice on the list is the iconic Jeep Wrangler (including its stretched four-door equivalent the Wrangler Unlimited). While the Wrangler has few equals as a rough-and-tumble go-anywhere off-road vehicle, it’s lacking in refinement, comfort and road manners as a pavement-planted daily driver. Among its many faults, Consumer Reports condemns the Wrangler with such comments as, “it rocks and jiggles constantly, and handling is very clumsy…wind noise becomes very loud at highway speeds…getting in and out is an awkward act…the interior is uncomfortable.” It also gets poor crash test ratings and performance/reliability scores." http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2012/11/28/new-cars-to-avoid/ I don't hate Jeeps, just never could understand why anyone would buy one.Have you driven a new wrangler? My wife's 2 door has 280hp, nav, sat radio, heated seats, a 3 piece hard top, and is actually a nice trip vehicle and is her DD. It's also awesome offroad. As far as unattractive.....you're probably in the minority on that one as most people seem to love the styling of the wranglers. I had an 87 wrangler and it was pretty impractical and uncomfortable, but the newer ones are not imo of course. I stopped reading consumer reports vehicle reviews years ago....they just got so annoying. They really should stick to the plain vanilla sedans that fit their target audience.
I have a 99 Cherokee to go along with our 2012 Wrangler, which is the Arctic, so basically a Sahara with the Rubicon suspension. There is not comparison at all. The Wrangler is better in every area and of course more powerful. We had a base sport with soft-top as a rental in St Thomas and there was a pretty big difference between it and our current one.
We don't need IFS in our Wrangler. We have no problem with the ride. My Wife came from an Audi cab and Mach 1 Mustang prior to the Jeep, so if it was so horrible she wouldn't be happy with it.
C/D TEST RESULTS for 2014 Wrangler with the 3.6:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.6 sec
Zero to 90 mph: 15.3 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 7.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.3 sec @ 90 mph
Woefully underpowered? Really? That seems pretty strong for a Wrangler.
Cotton wrote:irish44j wrote:I have a 99 Cherokee to go along with our 2012 Wrangler, which is the Arctic, so basically a Sahara with the Rubicon suspension. There is not comparison at all. The Wrangler is better in every area and of course more powerful. We had a base sport with soft-top as a rental in St Thomas and there was a pretty big difference between it and our current one. We don't need IFS in our Wrangler. We have no problem with the ride. My Wife came from an Audi cab and Mach 1 Mustang prior to the Jeep, so if it was so horrible she wouldn't be happy with it. C/D TEST RESULTS for 2014 Wrangler with the 3.6: Zero to 60 mph: 6.6 sec Zero to 90 mph: 15.3 sec Street start, 5-60 mph: 7.4 sec Standing ¼-mile: 15.3 sec @ 90 mph Woefully underpowered? Really? That seems pretty strong for a Wrangler.Cotton wrote:We had a 2014 Wrangler Sport as a loaner for a couple days last year (it had under 1k miles on it). I found it to have a reasonably nice dash/ergonomics, but the seats were uncomfortable, it felt woefully underpowered (it has the 6cyl) and the engine uninspiring (felt weaker than the old 4.0 in my XJ). The ride quality could only be described as "complete crap" (and I daily drive a lowered WRX on 350# springs), and the handling was, at best, almost as good as our Sequoia (which is way bigger and heavier). The brakes were about as good as my old XJ brakes (which is to say, about as good as the brakes on my 1970 Triumph). Also wind noise at even lowish speeds (with a hardtop). Overall, it was one of the least pleasurable car to drive that I've ever driven and I couldn't wait to give it back - and I used to drive a 1990 XJ, so I'm not a Jeep Hater by any means. Just amazes me that Jeep has put all the modern features and gadgets inside the Wranglers, but the rest of the vehicle is just as lousy on the road as they were decades ago. They really should just make a Wrangler with IFS/IRS for the masses (and have a separate wrangler specifically for the small group of people who actually wheel them).1988RedT2 wrote: Jeep Wrangler. Impractical, unattractive, uncomfortable. "Arguably the most controversial choice on the list is the iconic Jeep Wrangler (including its stretched four-door equivalent the Wrangler Unlimited). While the Wrangler has few equals as a rough-and-tumble go-anywhere off-road vehicle, it’s lacking in refinement, comfort and road manners as a pavement-planted daily driver. Among its many faults, Consumer Reports condemns the Wrangler with such comments as, “it rocks and jiggles constantly, and handling is very clumsy…wind noise becomes very loud at highway speeds…getting in and out is an awkward act…the interior is uncomfortable.” It also gets poor crash test ratings and performance/reliability scores." http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2012/11/28/new-cars-to-avoid/ I don't hate Jeeps, just never could understand why anyone would buy one.Have you driven a new wrangler? My wife's 2 door has 280hp, nav, sat radio, heated seats, a 3 piece hard top, and is actually a nice trip vehicle and is her DD. It's also awesome offroad. As far as unattractive.....you're probably in the minority on that one as most people seem to love the styling of the wranglers. I had an 87 wrangler and it was pretty impractical and uncomfortable, but the newer ones are not imo of course. I stopped reading consumer reports vehicle reviews years ago....they just got so annoying. They really should stick to the plain vanilla sedans that fit their target audience.
Well, all I'm stating is my own opinion about the Sport (not the Rubicon or Arctic, which have different suspension/tires). Obviously E36 M3loads of people have Wranglers so they have different opinions, and E36 M3loads of people don't have Wranglers, lol. Most people don't buy wranglers for their power, speed, ride quality, or handling anyhow - they buy them for off-road (a small percentage) or otherwise the "Jeep Look" or top-down driving. Which is fine.
I said it "felt" underpowered - not compared to old Wranglers, just in general. Perhaps because I had heard so many good things about that engine and I expected it to blow away the old HO 4.0 (which I didn't feel that it did). Obviously "enough power" is in the eye of the beholder. That said, 15.3 in the 1/4......that's what my 2005 Sequoia does, and that truck weighs 2 1/2 tons and has never been described in any universe as "fast" or "quick." Regardless, the comment was only that the engine was underwhelming compared to what I was expecting.
In the end, people overlook the various poor qualities of a Wrangler because they have other qualities that people like that make up for them. It's that simple, IMO. I don't like soft-tops and don't do any heavy off-roading, so those qualities don't help me to overcome the things I don't like.
And for the record, the XJ was slow, handled and rode poorly, and had terrible brakes as well. I liked it for reasons that had nothing to do with any of those categories and still miss it sometimes. I imagine most other former Jeep owners say similar things, lol.
RossD wrote:I actually like full size vans, it's just Nissan got some crazy proportions to give the front end a 'truck-like' serviceability.
A Nissan version of a Suburban?
Fueled by Caffeine wrote:
So far this is looking like a winner. It's the first thing nobody has made a case for.
Each is a link to the respective catalog page.
Hammacher Schlemmer owns this category.
Murano Cross Cabrio /End thread. If Ford made a transit connect wagon with three pedals and a back seat, i'd be on it like cops on OJ.
jstein77 wrote: This gets my vote.
Weird? Yes...... but I like it. If they could drop a 300 HP lump in there I would be all over it.
fifty wrote: The VPG MV-1:
Except for color, to me this ride looks just like what a lot of mail carriers are driving around here now.
Feedyurhed wrote:jstein77 wrote: This gets my vote.Weird? Yes...... but I like it. If they could drop a 300 HP lump in there I would be all over it.
I think lowering it was the wrong way to go. Picture it with your 300hp lump, lifted like a Ford Raptor. Paint it green, call it Le Frog and flog it across the african desert. I see it in my sleep sometimes.
You'll need to log in to post.
