Jeff Strickland

Is it just me, or does the Scrambler appear to be a standard TJ with a
crop-top?



"Mort" <jmorton@on.aibn.nospamcom> wrote in message
news:Yg%Sa.5862$tJ4.338966@read1.cgocable.net...
> I just puked when I saw the pics of the Compass. Auto Week says that
> DCX greenlighted it.
>
http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content...._code=02964255
>
> Mort
>

serg

am i on crack? no, i don't think so....i was referring to the compass...
u like that thing?

"Big Daddy" <DontBother@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:3f1daa93$0$73625$a0465688@nnrp.fuse.net...
> serg wrote:
>
> > omg that thing is @#^%#$^ ugly!
> > and what about that new scrambler? isn't the bed a little too short?
> > man-jeep is going to hell...
>
> Are you on crack?

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Probably just individuals customizing their Jeeps until they look
like the ones in the Philippines:
http://www.apple.queensu.ca/CJ3B/World/Philippines.html
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Big Daddy wrote:
>
> The wheelbase appears to be just slightly larger, but other than that, yes.
> I remember seeing CJ-8's with back seats instead of a truckbed. Was this
> aftermarket, or did AMC/Jeep sell them that way as an option?

Thomas W.

No, Jeff. It's longer. There are some other sites with pictures from
other angles. Here is a shot from the back 3/4.

http://www.edmunds.com/future/2005/j...photo..0.Jeep*

Jeff Strickland wrote:
> Is it just me, or does the Scrambler appear to be a standard TJ with a
> crop-top?

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

http://www.jeepn.org/members/html/twaldron.html
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Lon Stowell

OK, now compare that to this old ****** Knight.
http://clubs.hemmings.com/clubsites/...ery/96cex1.htm
or this:
http://clubs.hemmings.com/clubsites/...lery/it_01.htm

From that back angle it looks like an old 50's era hot rodder's
pickup. Problem is that I would suspect most of the old geezers
would not be in the target market and not sure it looks cool
enough to attract kids.

Thomas W. wrote:

> No, Jeff. It's longer. There are some other sites with pictures from
> other angles. Here is a shot from the back 3/4.
>
> http://www.edmunds.com/future/2005/j...photo..0.Jeep*
>
> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>> Is it just me, or does the Scrambler appear to be a standard TJ with a
>> crop-top?
>

Big Daddy

serg wrote:

> am i on crack? no, i don't think so....i was referring to the compass...
> u like that thing?
>
> "Big Daddy" <DontBother@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:3f1daa93$0$73625$a0465688@nnrp.fuse.net...
>> serg wrote:
>>
>> > omg that thing is @#^%#$^ ugly!
>> > and what about that new scrambler? isn't the bed a little too short?
>> > man-jeep is going to hell...
>>
>> Are you on crack?

I must have misread your post. I thought you meant the Scrambler is ugly.
The Compass is a joke. There is no way they should call that thing a Jeep!

serg

yeah, i can't believe the direction jeep is going...better hang on to my
cj7...

"Big Daddy" <DontBother@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:3f204d59$0$74102$a04e5680@nnrp.fuse.net...
> serg wrote:
>
> > am i on crack? no, i don't think so....i was referring to the compass...
> > u like that thing?
> >
> > "Big Daddy" <DontBother@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:3f1daa93$0$73625$a0465688@nnrp.fuse.net...
> >> serg wrote:
> >>
> >> > omg that thing is @#^%#$^ ugly!
> >> > and what about that new scrambler? isn't the bed a little too short?
> >> > man-jeep is going to hell...
> >>
> >> Are you on crack?
>
> I must have misread your post. I thought you meant the Scrambler is ugly.
> The Compass is a joke. There is no way they should call that thing a Jeep!

E.L. Lambert

> The wheelbase appears to be just slightly larger, but other than that, yes.
> I remember seeing CJ-8's with back seats instead of a truckbed. Was this
> aftermarket, or did AMC/Jeep sell them that way as an option?

The second row seats (capacity for 4 total passengers) were definitely
a factory option. Not sure about the 3rd row seats. (Until recently
I would have sworn that was an original option, but some other folks
on this message board have proclaimed pretty loudly that the 3rd row
seat, as well as the full hardtop, was aftermarket-only.)

Regardless of origin, I have seen a CJ8 with full length hard top and
three rows of seats (capacity for 6 passengers,) so it can be done.

Michael White

Thomas,

Yes, the bed looks a little longer in this picture. But it still looks like
a 4' bed. If the fender flares are 3' at the bottom (like the CJs), there
might be just enough there for another foot. My '82 Scrambler has about a
5' 2" bed with the hard top on (top's off now :).

That being said, I do like the rear opening glass. And it looks as if they
sacrificed bed space for interior space. When I put the hard top on my
'82, it's, er, cozy in the cab - the seats are nearly up against the rear
window. And the wheelbase looks much longer on this newer one, which
should give a better ride than any other XJ/CJ/YJ out there.

I'm definitely considering one, but I don't know if I'll get rid of the '82.
Looks like I'm going to have to buy a new house :).
--
Michael White "To protect people from the effects of folly is to
fill the world with fools." -Herbert Spencer, 1891

Thomas W. (obviousThomas@rubicons.com) wrote on Wednesday 23 July 2003 08:32
pm:

> No, Jeff. It's longer. There are some other s ites with pictures from
> other angles. Here is a shot from the back 3/4.
>
>
http://www.edmunds.com/future/2005/j...photo..0.Jeep*
>
> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>> Is it just me, or does the Scrambler appear to be a standard TJ with a
>> crop-top?
>

Thomas W.

Yep, it is about a 4' bed. The rollbar is inside the cab so you probably
have more interior room in the new one, but less bed. I know how tight
the old CJ8 cabs are with the hard top on. If I were you and could swing
it, I'd not let loose of your CJ8 and just add this Scrambler to the
'collection'. :)

Michael White wrote:
> Thomas,
>
> Yes, the bed looks a little longer in this picture. But it still looks like
> a 4' bed. If the fender flares are 3' at the bottom (like the CJs), there
> might be just enough there for another foot. My '82 Scrambler has about a
> 5' 2" bed with the hard top on (top's off now :).
>
> That being said, I do like the rear opening glass. And it looks as if they
> sacrificed bed space for interior space. When I put the hard top on my
> '82, it's, er, cozy in the cab - the seats are nearly up against the rear
> window. And the wheelbase looks much longer on this newer one, which
> should give a better ride than any other XJ/CJ/YJ out there.
>
> I'm definitely considering one, but I don't know if I'll get rid of the '82.
> Looks like I'm going to have to buy a new house :).


--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

http://www.jeepn.org/members/html/twaldron.html
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________