Jeep Moves Another Step Closer to Pickup Announcement
Thanks to Larry Vellequette of Automotive News, we now have more evidence that Jeep could bring back a pickup truck to its lineup and it very likely would be built at the Wrangler production plant in Toledo, Ohio. The Toledo plant is interesting because there are two separate buildings on the manufacturing site. One houses production for two versions of the body-on-frame Wrangler, while the other produces the unibody Jeep Cherokee crossover. Interestingly, both vehicles are on pace to sell around 200,000 units by year end and are the top-selling Jeep products. With the exception of the Ram lineup, those two Jeeps are the best-selling vehicles in the Fiat Chrysler Automobiles lineup.
But now, according to Automotive News, FCA will soon announce it's moving the production of the Cherokee from Toledo to Sterling Heights Assembly in Michigan or Belvidere Assembly in Illinois.That means the second plant in Toledo will be available to produce another vehicle. Likewise, producing a vehicle with the body-on-frame architecture of the Wrangler could mean some cost savings — always important when bringing a new vehicle to market.
Automotive News suggests that some suppliers are planning for an eventual combined production run between the two plants of 350,000 units, which means that the Jeep pickup plant would likely be able build 50,000 vehicles annually per shift, assuming a maximum of three shifts. That could make it interesting for competitors like the new Toyota Tacoma and Chevrolet Colorado, which are not inexpensive vehicles when configured the way most people purchase midsize pickups (V-6 engine, 4x4 drivetrain, crew cab, short bed). This could mean that Jeep could have a lower-volume, higher-priced competitor in a highly competitive field.
That kind of situation could be good for product separation but would put the vehicle at a significant price disadvantage like GMC Canyon All Terrain (with an average transaction of more than $40,000, putting it in half-ton territory), which does offer quite a bit of luxury. This would be an interesting choice for Jeep, offering a premium-priced smaller pickup, because it doesn't have any history in this arena. Think of the J10, J20 and even the Gladiator or Comanche. Not one of those pickup trucks offered anything other than practical capability and function — fairly clear Jeep core values.
There's no question half-ton buyers love premium amenities: A good number of buyers — sometimes more than 10 percent — will drop more than $50,000 for a loaded pickup. But we hope this isn't a case of Jeep thinking too highly of itself and paying too much attention to a vocal minority. A top-of-the-line fully loaded Grand Cherokee SUV is a very different animal than a premium-priced Jeep pickup, not to mention that those vehicles attract very different buyers.
Building a Jeep pickup could be one of those ideas that sounds great on paper, but doesn't quite work in reality. It wasn't that long ago that DaimlerChrysler announced it could not make money on a small pickup truck like the M80 (we still love that concept) unless it sold between 100,000 and 120,000 units per year.
Even with the most optimistic projections, Jeep isn't likely to sell more than half the number of Colorados in a given year, and likely a lot less. It also seems unrealistic to think Jeep could sell an off-road-biased four-wheel pickup on coil springs (we assume it would have some kind of advance heavy-duty rear end and powertrain technology). Look at what GM did with two new trucks: It has a new plant and a platform it doesn't use for any other vehicle, and it will be lucky to hit the 100,000-unit mark with both midsize pickups (the Colorado and Canyon) by the end of the year.
The only thing we can imagine that could save a Jeep pickup from collapsing on itself after just a few short years is if Jeep taps some of the pickup truck expertise at Ram. In fact, we predict that if Ram doesn't help Jeep become a better payload hauler and tow-technology user, than there's no hope. The only caveat we'd offer is that if FCA doubled down the exercise by allowing both Jeep and Ram to offer different and unique versions of a new midsize pickup at the same time. That might work.
In that scenario, these two new products could suck all of the midsize pickup truck air out of their competitors. Maybe Jeep could do a type of leap-frogging model debut, introducing a new trim or piece of technology on either the new Jeep or Ram midsize every three or four months for the first 16 to 18 months. First you could have the Jeep debut, then comes the Ram debut, then comes the Spartan Gladiator, then the Outdoor Rebel, then a Moab Special, then the Prospector Flatbed, then the Long Distance Backpacker and so on. That could get a lot of people excited and attract a new, younger crowd to both brands. But that will happen only if FCA priced both vehicles properly and emphasized their tremendous personality differences.
Yes, a new Jeep for this segment has some historical resonance and no doubt there will be some old-school buyers who will pay whatever it costs, but if this new Jeep pickup is just a Wrangler Limited with a bed and is simply priced above the rest of the players in the segment, it's doomed to be a low-volume, subsidized outlier. If FCA only had the problems Ford has deciding when and how to bring the global Ranger to the U.S., the decision to bring a Jeep pickup to market would be a no-brainer.
Manufacturer image of various Jeep concept trucks; Cars.com photos by Mark Williams
Comments
My sister in law wAs looking at buying a new SUV. She asked if I liked the Patriot--no. How about the Cherokee--no. She then asked, are there ANY Jeeps you would buy. I said yes--a Wrangler. Cause unfortunately Toyota doesn't build the FJ, Ford doesn't build the Bronco, and Chevy doesn't build the Blazer any more. If they did, no I probably wouldn't buy any Jeep.
They should build it simplistically...start with 4WD, V6 and manual transmission, mechanical windows and door locks, vinyl upholstery and such. Add diesel, auto, cloth, etc as options. Luxury model wouldn't fit right with the design of the truck, especially if it has removable parts like the Wrangler. The last midsize luxury off road pickup got killed off in a year or two because of brand consolidation (Hummer H3T), but it didn't sell well and Jeep doesn't need that headache.
I had a Commanche which was a capable and somewhat reliable vehicle. It did have a few shortcomings.
First it only carried 10 gallons of gas.
It's GM sourced water pump would fail every 20K miles.
The interior space suffered because of exterior styling. The regular cab was much too short to put in an adequately sized seat. Fore to aft seat length did not support the thigh.
The 3.08 rear differential paired with manual transmission was to high of a gear for an off road vehicle.
If Jeep can correct these past mistakes and get a reliable drive train then Jeep can have a viable pickup.
Wrangler Unlimited's have become the SUV of choice in my area because of their image as rugged off-roaders. Younger families like the image since it send the message "I haven't given up on life's fun". Minivans exude that image and most CUV's and SUV"S also send that image to the younger folks and even older ones (that want to look young).
The price point of the Jeep truck won't matter much to the "poser" crowd just like the price of mid-sized don't matter much to most. I say that because the Colorado and Tacoma sell like hotcakes at a charity breakfast and most are priced at the high end of the scale (at least most of the one's I see).
The "real" truck buyer and "real" off-roader crowd will buy the closest thing to their needs they can find and will modify. That part never changes. "Posers" buy Jeeps and pickups because of the image built by the "real" core users.
Lots of truth there Lou.
So the question comes up who cares? Jeep people care. And Jeep people are well different. Jeep is a brand and image thats far more successful at brand image and offroading than it is at staying profitable building a quality semi comprehensive vehicle line, delivering value and having widespread appeal. Yea occasionally the Cherokee/Grand Cherokee catches fire and sells but other than that those who bought liberties, compasses, and commanders were badly embarrassed/disappointed and if you don't take your Wrangler off roading regularly then you as a consumer don't value your money or comfort. Obviously a small truck would have to share a platform with something existing... since we are all about image and offroading its gotta be the Wrangler. So now we have a Wrangler based pickup. Will it take sales from Toy/Nis/GMs little trucks or just give a wrangler buyer another choice? Given the importance of being open air and the look/feel/primitiaveness of the wranger I would say more often the latter. So another way to spend lots of money on image for most and another already out there way to offroad for others...
That thing got a Hemi?
I agree with you too Dav. Even though I like Wranger... the image and performance, the fun... But its a miserable thing to drive day in day out. Expensive, Primitive, loud, hard seats, harsh ride, wind/water leaks, break ins, crummy mileage... its a lot to put up with for just image. I can see if you live on the side of a Mtn and never go more than 40 miles from home it being the vehicle for you but sorry I spend a lot of my time on the highway and I need more real world on road performance/versatility from my daily driver. And your right that Jeep's quality is inconsistent at best. Its people who don't understand these shortfalls prior to buying a new Wrangler that fuel the never ending market of nice used Wranglers and the never ending herd of people anxious to live the image...
What Ram/FCA needs to do is chop 5 inches from the engine bay of the 1500. That way their 40.3" leg room crew cab with a 6'4" bed will fit in a 235" long standard garage! Then they'll have a full size that is mid sized and easier to park in city's too. That will bring the RAM in line with the overall length of the Colorado. The need to keep accomadating the hemi V8 engine compartment is getting long in the tooth because the younger generation is not stuck on having to have a V8. Ecodiesel and the 2016 Pentastar are proving that V6's can get most pulling and hauling jobs done! Then FCA won't have to worry about an entire new midsize line and factory. Colorado and Tacoma say they have 6'2" beds, but when one measures from the top of the box it's 6'0". So the midsizers are getting too close to a 5.5' box. I still want a truck that can haul stuff so these midsizers are cutting cornings I don't want to live without neither in the rear cab or in the box! People that really need to haul and pull heavy loads can then move onto the 2500 size truck.
Build it and they will come.
Git R Done!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdVB0utpl0s
You make EXCELLENT points Angelo about the silliness of the midsized trucks and how close they are to in size yet don't bring the capabilities of or savings/efficiency to make them advantageous compared to what you get win a full size V6 half ton. Especially in room and capabilities. The very old and the very young with money to burn are the bread and butter of the midsized world. Honestly I would love to see a return of smaller trucks that actually do give real advantages in price and efficiency. A shortened full size is an interesting idea without sacrificing cab or much bed length. I think the biggest problem is it would probably look odd to many and there is no bigger sin in the automotive world than not looking good no matter how much sense the vehicle might make.
Jeep is a truck(Body on Frame). Now they need to bring back a pickup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsQ_jr8bvWg
Good point Clint. So much time is spent on websites discussing front ends that just don't matter for getting things done. I've held off on getting a new truck for tooo long, but believe that someday someone in marketing will finally show the V6 engine take will be high enough to simply stop accommodating the V8 option and make the full size truck I've described. The V6 take rate is easily over 50% now from data I've seen on these websites. If you look at the engine bay length of cars/trucks made in the 70's, now that's ridiculous. We'll look back at the engine bays of trucks someday and say they were ridiculously long. It's just going to take a little longer time to get people accustomed to V6's.
Jeep remains the strongest SUV brand in the US
by Bill Cawthon on 2015-09-03
The Cherokee, Compass, Patriot and Wrangler all set new records.
http://news.allpar.com/index.php/2015/09/jeep-is-strongest-suv-brand-29866
"The V6 take rate is easily over 50% now from data I've seen on these websites."
Posted by: Angelo Pietroforte | Sep 4, 2015 12:11:19 PM
Can you show me the web site?
Angelo Pietroforte - I suspect that outrageously long snouts are a result of crash regulations. My F150 has at least a 6 inch gap between the front of the rad and grill. Probably pushing 12 inches once one goes to the front of the plastic bumper horn covers. All of the trucks appear to be similar in construction.
The current Wrangler gets blasted by every mainstream auto publication on the rack. It's even been seen on the "do not buy" list. It gets negative remarks across the board for it's ride quality, amenities, handling, and comfort. YET...it's one of the best selling SUVs in the nation and it has the highest resale value of any vehicle sold in the U.S. Sales keep increasing each year.
The point?
Obviously people don't care what sissy auto journalists have to say. Jeeps sell. Period. It is foolish to think that Jeep won't be able to sell a pickup truck unless they can offer something like GM and Toyota and Nissan are already offering. The fact is that Jeep WILL sell a ton of pickups because they are NOT like the others.
Making the nose shorter is the dumbest thing I've heard of all year. Maybe you like going to the stealer ship and blowing loads of money to get things fixed if they fail. Me I want room to make repairs easier if they arise.
HEMI V8, Here's one article: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/04/automobiles/more-pickup-buyers-opt-for-v6s.html?_r=0.
I still respect Hemi designs being that I have an '89 M3 and '91 Prelude both with Hemi 4 cylinders.
Lou_BC, Yes the crash tests regulations have crossed my mind. Van and cars don't leave such a huge gap but then again, they don't accommodate a V8 options.
RAM in my opinion is in the best position to create this "midsized full-size", i.e shortened snout garageable full size because their 40.3" leg room crew cab full size 6'4" box is currently at 237.9" overall. Whereas Ford and GM are at 243.7" and 239.6" respectively. Ford and GM have 6'6" boxes and 3" and 4" more driver legroom respectively, not to mention 3" more crew cab legroom with the F150, hence its' 243.7" overall.
Johnny Doe,
I agree making front ends smaller would make it harder to work on things, but come, on how much room do you need. I have worked on '70 Mustang Mach 1's with 351ci V8 Cleveland engine with Hooker headers crammed into the engine bay right next to the shock towers, '89 M3, '92 Prelude, and in comparison, a V6 truck engine bay would undoubtedly be a cake walk, and nothing in comparison to what some people have to deal with. I've found 1/4" drive set tools essential to working on these smaller engine bay compartments. Can't do the job without them. And of course more patience too goes a very long way in dealing with smaller engine compartments. So please think of the every day parking ease you would get from a midsized fullsized before putting down someones suggestions so acutely.
Im not the idiot that lives in a city, where people live and park on top of each other. I also learned how to drive. Why make stuff smaller and harder to work on if you don't need to. It down make a damn lick of sense to me. Your link to HEMIV8, sure v6s are going to raise as that it pretty much all that Ford offers LOL! Go smoke another dirty joint hippie
it don't*
I'd love to see a Wrangler pickup.
It will need a couple inched of lift, which shouldn't be hard with live axles all round.
The interior does need some addressing as the interiors of our Wranglers are of a lower standard than the Chinese vehicles we are getting.
A diesel, the VM2.8 or even the 3 litre V6 like the one fitted to the JGC and Ram would be nice.
johnny doe - "Im not the idiot that lives in a city"... Nope, you are the one that lives in the country. "Dueling banjos" is your anthem.
Naw lou bc I don't live in the south east US "Dueling banjos" is probably a thing down there though.
Johnny Doe,
Don't ask me to find the data, but I've read and one can see through traffic congestion that most of the worlds population lives near city's because that's where the jobs are and the trend is only going to increase because of the world's population growth trend. So smaller may not make sense to you, but to many, it really does. If I didn't live in a metropolitan area most of my life, I might have more of your same prospective. I've garaged my vehicles all my life, and they have lasted longer because of it. I have also not had my cars repaired at a repair shop after their warranty's are over, and I am the original owner of the '89 M3 too. And my mechanic skills are quite good having been able to get 320kmi out of a 1984 Mazda B2000 and now polishing up on AC systems and compressor rebuilds since they are the last area my skills have lacked. Really a 1/4 drive set is quite capable of loosening and tightening most of the bolts in a more compacted engine compartment.
Too many assumptions based on too little real evidence. Every statement is a guess based on the current version of the Jeep Wrangler and quite bluntly ignores that appearance alone could make a big difference. If it looks like the Wrangler in the front and something like a pickup truck in the back, and I mean a real pickup, not that JK8 mod kit shown above, then very probably it will be a success. By no means should it have the rounded lines and smooth sides of a conventional pickup truck of today--that's simply not Jeep. It might adopt some of the styling factors of the Renegade--but only IF it were built as a true compact based off the Renegade itself.
No, odds are that unless it looks a lot like the 2005 Gladiator concept, it will be an abject failure. It needs the flat-floor box with no wheel arches. It needs the 'narrow' inside and outside box shape--as long as it's at least 4 feet wide. It needs at least five feet of open bed. What it doesn't need is full four-door passenger capacity. Let it carry the back seat of the 2-door Wrangler, if any at all. The old J-10 style? Full sized and would conceivably compete with other full-sized pickups. The old Commanche? Based, as then, on the Cherokee with similar lines. Neither one would be all that popular I'm sure. For me, it would be the '05 Gladiator or nothing. I'll look at the Hyundai then.
The May 2014 New York times link above on V6 take rate talks about Ford's take rate at 70%, while Rams is at 30%, and further, when the take rate becomes 80%, 4 cylinder full size trucks will appear Consequently, for RAM, removing the Hemi entirely would be probably become a show stopper short term. However, other articles have discussed how there can be many improvements to the Ecodiesel. My opinion is that a 3.5-3.8L Ecodiesel could be a potential engine option that finally puts the Hemi to rest, but still appeases those who want to haul heavy in a 1500. My concern is that the 4 cylinders would be inline, as with a Frontier diesel, and not help reduce the engine compartment. I just passed by a gas station in San Jose, CA where diesel was $2.64 a gallon and regular 20cents more. Of course, having such a high premium on Ecodiesel undoubtedly is not helping with their take rate.
Mind you that in 1995 the US population was 250million and is now 300million. So smaller size vehicles are becoming increasingly more of an important issue.
@RoadWhale - if they only build a 2 door model or something with lame 2nd row seating it will be doomed to failure. Toyota stopped making a reg cab Tacoma. GM hasn't even offered one in the new small twins.
It needs decent seating for 4 to be successful.
How many new 2 door Wranglers do you see?
"How many new 2 door Wranglers do you see?"
About 30% around here. But that's also my point. While the 4-door Wrangler is extremely popular, the 2-door still sells in sufficient numbers to keep them in production.
Now, answer me this. How many of the big Brute Double Cab JKU mods do you see? Other than custom builds for TV reality shows, I've never seen any, even at a Jeep shop that specializes in some pretty extreme AEV mods on the lot.
It's a jeep thing, guess I don't understand!
Posted by: Angelo Pietroforte | Sep 4, 2015 1:46:24 PM
Please stop trying to take my V8 away Mr Gore. Weren't you the same lame brains that killed the Muscle car?
Thanks for sharing the article. Simply states what I already knew. I need a V8 pick up. :--)
These numbers would only apply to Ford. The take rate for Hemi V8's at Ram are #1 vs V6. I 6 probably number two.
Really a 1/4 drive set is quite capable of loosening and tightening most of the bolts in a more compacted engine compartment. Posted by: Angelo Pietroforte
HAHAHA! Um okay if you say so super high skilled oil changer dude HAHAHA! I want to watch you with a 1/4 driver loosen rusty old Exhaust manifold bolts.
HEMI V8, Just expressing my opinion that RAM could create a whole new market segment: midsize garageable full-sizer by simply reducing engine compartment length by 5". I'm sure GM will keep offering V8's for you to buy. But you might find this link interesting since the lower profile engine bay might make for a less snouty shortened front, not to mention potential the new line of V8's mentioned in the article. http://www.pentastars.com/engines/future.php
Johnny Doe,
The 2016 Pentastar has an integrated exhaust manifold.
http://www.autoblog.com/2015/09/02/fca-pentastar-v6-2016-upgrades/ Mentioned just under Form heading in lengthy article.
Smaller engines have smaller exterior bolts. Garaged vehicles generally don't have as many rusted bolts. My 4 cylinder hemi's don't have exhaust manifolds. Just headers. The M3's can be removed with a 10mm wrench because the bolts are 10mm. The Prelude hemi header uses 12mm but is horizontally opposed and up front. I never said reduce the width of the RAM, I only said reduce the length of the engine compartment, so I'm sure you'd still have a ton of space to remove things from the top and sides with even a 3/8 drive set.
Angelo Peitroforte,
I agree with you on the sockets sets required.
We (my guys) will only use 1/2" drive when torqueing, and that is 100ftlb and above.
When we start to get into the 300ftlb arena 3/4" drive is what is used.
Anything above 500ftlb torque multipliers are used or a 6' extension on a 3/4" drive setup, when a small job arises.
Most work that is done for us is with 1/4" drive, then torqueing.
For around the home to work on your car or to have a handy toolset in your truck I use a 3/8" drive, sort of the does most everything size.
this reminds me of how they keep the ranger idea alive by every so often saying it will come back. This may be the fourth time over the years ive heard this about a jeep truck. I welcome it. Years ago I would have purcased one if it was not $68'000 CAD like the jk8's. But at this point I no longer care. This idea was presented in 2005 w the gladiator. Their time has come and gone. Good luck making one worthy of the jeep name and efficient enough to be a popular seller.
@all who commented on v6 half tons
I am now a firm believer in v6 gassers in half tons these days. I recently switched from 5.0l f150 crew cab 6.5 ft bed to 4.3 silverado dbl cab. Pulls everything I ever did w the v8 but avg's 22.5 mpg on my combined mileage vs 15mpg. I actually think it has more torque down low. Feels
Feels like an engine capable of working hard but still efficiently. Does not feel sporty like the 5.0l. I believe a naturally aspirated v6 like the 4.3 can offer the avg pickup user what they require for ability. The v8 is nice to have i guess but I can see how the future market may drop them. Especially such high revving ones like the 5.0l.
Side note 3.0 ecodiesel and 2.7 ecoboost are very impressive where they make good power. They are very viable options for someone looking to spend their money wisely on a half ton.
Following this story during the last several years reveals all you need to know about the leadership at Chrysler. They've been trying to gauge interest in this "jeep pickup" idea for quite a while, several long years anyway.
Chrysler's biggest problem, apart from perceptions about quality, is their horrible "time-to-market" performance. When was the last time you saw them beat the rest of the automakers at bringing a new idea to the showroom? Maybe it's coil springs on a half ton truck, although it's also true that GM had some trucks built that way 30 years ago.
Anyway, don't hold your breath waiting for a Jeep inspired truck.
What they should do, in my opinion, is sell an off road friendly regular cab 1500 RAM with Jeep badging, a Jeep inspired front fascia and a rugged all vinyl interior with some Realtree camo seat covers. Steel wheels with dog-dish covers.
As long as you're going retro, revive the old direct injected 4.7 motor in the process. Add a rear-disc delete option (drum brakes), power seat delete, all steel dashboard (air bag delete), OEM gun rack, true-dual exhausts.
I'd be first in line.
For now, I get the idea that this will not be a Jeep 'inspired' truck, it will be a true Jeep truck built on the same platform as the Jeep Wrangler itself. It has already been proven that it can be done with the TJ-based Brute and the JKU-based Brute Double Cab, both by American Expedition Vehicles.
Most Jeep buyers also won't accept a Jeep fascia on a Ram truck; it simply wouldn't be a Jeep, it would be a fake Jeep. We already hear catcalls and outrage with every change the CJ/Wrangler receives, claiming, it's "not a Real Jeep." So your idea, Papa Jim, would be derided across the country and around the world.
A real Jeep has an advantage over full sized and even most mid-sized pickup trucks: it can go places those larger trucks cannot. When you're making your way through the forest to your favorite deer blind, the Jeep can go between trees that the bigger truck may have to go a long ways out of its way to go around. It can go through creek beds with relatively steep banks that the full sized truck will need to find a flatter area. Yes, a Wrangler-based pickup will have a lower departure angle than the Wrangler itself, but still not as extreme as a full-sized pickup. I've witnessed this myself at places like Roush Creek in Pennsylvania and the Pine Barrens in New Jersey.
Road Whale,
What about the Dodge Nitro look for the front end?
That would give it a "trucky" appearance that is palatable.
Road Whale,
Underneath will still be Jeep.
@Big Al Oz
Curious as to what you work on that requires 300ftlb, 500ftlb? Must be big semi diesels engines? The V8 and V4 gassers I've been around all my life get by with the 1/2 drive torquers as you say. You have quite a range of needs!
@Alberta_85
I'm very close to people who are adamant that there is no substitute for cubic inches(ci). A brother, a race boat motor builder friend, and others that are in their 50's. Me I'm not their yet, but grew up learning to wrench on their muscle cars. Then I have a nephew who bought a 4cylinder turbo'd Genesis that's quite impressive and impressed his father too. But my brother just can't get over the fact that the next Ford GT is twin turbo'd V6. Times are changing, and as far as spinning high RPM's goes, I agree with you, that's what Mustangs and Camaro's are for, and for most of what most people need a truck for, that old model has already changed. We even have a friend that turned low 14's (1/4 mi time) in a 289ci '70 Bronco, but that again is not a pickup truck. I can understand how it would be fun to have a fast truck, but the larger market is in use-ability.
@all Jeeps and Bronco's are unique, and the Green Gladiator in this article has a unique look that is very understandable to drum up a passionate following as seen here. Me, I'll enjoy looking at whatever new rugged Jeep FCA comes out with, but will continue to wait for a more midsizeable full-size.
Angelo,
I work from inch-ounces to over 1 500ftlb. Huge range of torques.
I'm in aviation.
For my vehicle I will have a small set of 1/4" and a relatively comprehensive 3/8" drive set with breaker bar, deep and shallow sockets, and even a step down.
I carry a small set of 6 Stanley screw drivers, open enders, and of course my Leatherman's, along with a shifter (Cresent wrench) vice grips and a range of 4 pliers, the usual hammer and length of steel incase I hit an animal and need to pry some body work.
Big All Oz.
Very interesting. Is that for jumbo and military jets? What bolt requires 1500ftlb. I too am an instrument rated flyer of Cessna 172's. The BMW M3 required a 1/4 drive for the torx bolt at the intake manifold gasket. 3/8 drive was going in crooked in the tight spot and started to strip out the head so I was forced to buy 1/4 drive set and love it.
Johnny Doe and Hemi V8
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2015/06/chrysler-pentastar-v6-significantly-enhanced-for-2016.html
Link shows that it should be quite easy to remove rusted exhaust pipe bolts from this integrated exhaust manifold even using 3/8 drive. See picture 5. I know this V6 300hp 300ftlb torque engine is probably never going to be your first choice, but one has to admit that those are some pretty good specs for a normally aspirated non-turbo'd gaser. That's only 6hp less than what a '65-'66 Shelby GT350 was putting out. But I believe the Pentastar torque is better since back then they didn't seem to spec torque. Attending a Mustang day at Sears point raceway was something to behold, but even though I'm Ford at heart, I'm open to any manufacturer that can leapfrog their competitors.
Side note 3.0 ecodiesel and 2.7 ecoboost are very impressive where they make good power. They are very viable options for someone looking to spend their money wisely on a half ton.
Posted by: Alberta_85 | Sep 5, 2015 12:57:49 AM
Never driven a 2.7 eco boost. I did drive an Eco Diesel from Ram at the L.A. Auto show. Had good low end torque. (420) I would have loved to have gotten on the freeway to merge. Did test drive a 2014 Power Wagon. Rode a little rougher than my modded 1/2 ton. Nothing I couldn't handle. Had plenty of pic me up.
@Alberta85. I'm 1st generation Italian-American , and I'm excited to see some European efficiency/compactness come in in the form of an Ecodiesel. I've waited and waited to see an Ecodiesel on the road in the greater San Jose, CA area, being that FCA has said it was oh so popular, but to my regret, I haven't seen a single badged one on the road, so I haven't even bothered to go down to the dealership. It's premium of $2800 above the Hemi (and $4500 above the Pentastar) is showing that it's just too high, even with diesel at $2.64/gal with gas at <$3. It seems FCA knew that the VM Motori production output capability was just not very high so they decided to put the premium so high. And probably they need to recoop some R&D costs.
@Angelo: The reason you're not seeing all that many ecodiesels where you are is because too many American drivers remember the first US attempt to put a diesel into their cars--a total flop because they tried to re-purpose American gasoline engine blocks to run on diesel fuel and they simply didn't have the torque or the horsepower for American needs and their reliability was overall crap. If you wanted diesel, you had to buy a pickup truck with a big Cummins or Cat diesel which was typically gross overkill for anyone not needing that kind of power.
Things have changed over the decades, but some parts of the country still have a problem with diesels as daily drivers. Apparently, you're living in one of those regions. Somebody there needs to buy one and make sure it's seen on a regular basis. They need to show that it doesn't need to be smoky, big or loud to be a decent engine for an everyday driver. If you want that EcoDiesel, then go get it! Go to your dealership and order one, if they don't already have one in stock. Instead of waiting for everyone else, take the lead and show your neighbors that today's diesels are not yesterday's soot generators.
@Road Whale,
Yes I know all the history. But thanks anyway! The greater Silicon Valley area in general doesn't have a problem with diesel. I see many diesel F250,2500, VW Jetta's etc. In fact, a 25yr old told me yesterday that he's seen 3 Ecodiesels in the Pleasanton, CA area which is ~ 15mile east of San Francisco bay area. He said that some people just buy trucks and have no idea what they can pull. I think he mentioned someone trying to pull a 23' ocean boat with the ecodiesel with not so good results. His fathers Cummins I-6 ~5.7L 2500 Ram does a great job though with their ski boat, not even feeling the load. But I told him an 18' ski boat sounds much lighter than a 23' ocean boat. I told him, a 3.0L diesel is not going to pull everything, but would probably do a better job than his 4.7L 2004 RAM1500. He agreed. Yes, my neighbors and people in general need to be educated, and I feel I'm helping do that since I know more than most about specs and capabilities, and hope to continue to learn.
With that said, my whole premise for injecting into this articles' comments is because a 40.3" legroom RAM crew cab with a 6'4" box won't fit in my 235" long garage, and parking outside is none existent in my San Jose, Ca housing complex. So my whole premise for writing, which you'll have to see the details in the above links, have to do with the suggestion of shortening the front of a RAM (or pickup trucks in general), like it or not. I'm a frugal consumer, and I am in no mood to pay the price premiums some of these manufacturers are charging especially for something that doesn't quite fit my needs (again you'll have to read my suggestions from much further up). But I appreciate your enthusiasm.
Welcome to the club, Angelo. Now you know why I took the name Road Whale™ and refer to full sized pickup trucks as Road Whales™.
The comments to this entry are closed.