|
Re: new wrangler - ug
Thanks.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ billy ray wrote: > > Please see the section "What the Liberty could have been (Bob Sheaves)" > > http://www.allpar.com/model/jeep/liberty.html |
Re: new wrangler - ug
Thanks.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ billy ray wrote: > > Please see the section "What the Liberty could have been (Bob Sheaves)" > > http://www.allpar.com/model/jeep/liberty.html |
Re: new wrangler - ug
Thanks.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ billy ray wrote: > > Please see the section "What the Liberty could have been (Bob Sheaves)" > > http://www.allpar.com/model/jeep/liberty.html |
Re: new wrangler - ug
Nate, many similar complaints were made about the TJ at its introduction.
Coil springs like Land Rover? Say it ain't so. I think people that buy Jeeps to use them off-road buy them for more than just the "Jeep heritage." People that would buy it just for the "heritage" would fall into the category of posers that never take them off-road, and I know you aren't one of those, so I wonder why "heritage" seems to be more important to you than "capability." People that buy a vehicle for off-road performance, however, I don't think will be disappointed with the new Wrangler. You are basing your negative opinion on the fact that the designers considered at one time IFS, even though the final design keeps the solid axle? Talk about picking nits. Some people just don't like change. "Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:44ece398$0$34080$815e3792@news.qwest.net... >i just got done watching the superlift show (TIVO caught it as a random >recording, i dunno what channel it comes on normally) on the testing of the >new '07 wrangler. while there are many improvements i would have liked to >see on the tj (4 doors/better seats/etc), unless 7 grille slots is all it >takes to be a jeep these days this one is gonna flop amongst those who buy >jeeps based on jeep heritage. one of the designers talked about how they >argued IFS vs. solid axle throughout the design (which tells me that IFS >will always be on the horizon until "dr. z" eventually forces it on the SWB >jeep). with all the fancy gadgets like 4 wheels sensors to control the >fancy brake - (almost) lockers i get the impression that "dr. z" is trying >to morph the SWB jeep into a land rover wanna-be (particularly ironic since >the first land rover started out as a jeep!). > |
Re: new wrangler - ug
Nate, many similar complaints were made about the TJ at its introduction.
Coil springs like Land Rover? Say it ain't so. I think people that buy Jeeps to use them off-road buy them for more than just the "Jeep heritage." People that would buy it just for the "heritage" would fall into the category of posers that never take them off-road, and I know you aren't one of those, so I wonder why "heritage" seems to be more important to you than "capability." People that buy a vehicle for off-road performance, however, I don't think will be disappointed with the new Wrangler. You are basing your negative opinion on the fact that the designers considered at one time IFS, even though the final design keeps the solid axle? Talk about picking nits. Some people just don't like change. "Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:44ece398$0$34080$815e3792@news.qwest.net... >i just got done watching the superlift show (TIVO caught it as a random >recording, i dunno what channel it comes on normally) on the testing of the >new '07 wrangler. while there are many improvements i would have liked to >see on the tj (4 doors/better seats/etc), unless 7 grille slots is all it >takes to be a jeep these days this one is gonna flop amongst those who buy >jeeps based on jeep heritage. one of the designers talked about how they >argued IFS vs. solid axle throughout the design (which tells me that IFS >will always be on the horizon until "dr. z" eventually forces it on the SWB >jeep). with all the fancy gadgets like 4 wheels sensors to control the >fancy brake - (almost) lockers i get the impression that "dr. z" is trying >to morph the SWB jeep into a land rover wanna-be (particularly ironic since >the first land rover started out as a jeep!). > |
Re: new wrangler - ug
Nate, many similar complaints were made about the TJ at its introduction.
Coil springs like Land Rover? Say it ain't so. I think people that buy Jeeps to use them off-road buy them for more than just the "Jeep heritage." People that would buy it just for the "heritage" would fall into the category of posers that never take them off-road, and I know you aren't one of those, so I wonder why "heritage" seems to be more important to you than "capability." People that buy a vehicle for off-road performance, however, I don't think will be disappointed with the new Wrangler. You are basing your negative opinion on the fact that the designers considered at one time IFS, even though the final design keeps the solid axle? Talk about picking nits. Some people just don't like change. "Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:44ece398$0$34080$815e3792@news.qwest.net... >i just got done watching the superlift show (TIVO caught it as a random >recording, i dunno what channel it comes on normally) on the testing of the >new '07 wrangler. while there are many improvements i would have liked to >see on the tj (4 doors/better seats/etc), unless 7 grille slots is all it >takes to be a jeep these days this one is gonna flop amongst those who buy >jeeps based on jeep heritage. one of the designers talked about how they >argued IFS vs. solid axle throughout the design (which tells me that IFS >will always be on the horizon until "dr. z" eventually forces it on the SWB >jeep). with all the fancy gadgets like 4 wheels sensors to control the >fancy brake - (almost) lockers i get the impression that "dr. z" is trying >to morph the SWB jeep into a land rover wanna-be (particularly ironic since >the first land rover started out as a jeep!). > |
Re: new wrangler - ug
Nate, many similar complaints were made about the TJ at its introduction.
Coil springs like Land Rover? Say it ain't so. I think people that buy Jeeps to use them off-road buy them for more than just the "Jeep heritage." People that would buy it just for the "heritage" would fall into the category of posers that never take them off-road, and I know you aren't one of those, so I wonder why "heritage" seems to be more important to you than "capability." People that buy a vehicle for off-road performance, however, I don't think will be disappointed with the new Wrangler. You are basing your negative opinion on the fact that the designers considered at one time IFS, even though the final design keeps the solid axle? Talk about picking nits. Some people just don't like change. "Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:44ece398$0$34080$815e3792@news.qwest.net... >i just got done watching the superlift show (TIVO caught it as a random >recording, i dunno what channel it comes on normally) on the testing of the >new '07 wrangler. while there are many improvements i would have liked to >see on the tj (4 doors/better seats/etc), unless 7 grille slots is all it >takes to be a jeep these days this one is gonna flop amongst those who buy >jeeps based on jeep heritage. one of the designers talked about how they >argued IFS vs. solid axle throughout the design (which tells me that IFS >will always be on the horizon until "dr. z" eventually forces it on the SWB >jeep). with all the fancy gadgets like 4 wheels sensors to control the >fancy brake - (almost) lockers i get the impression that "dr. z" is trying >to morph the SWB jeep into a land rover wanna-be (particularly ironic since >the first land rover started out as a jeep!). > |
Re: new wrangler - ug
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:o86dnXe4v7PNhXPZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com. .. > Nate, many similar complaints were made about the TJ at its introduction. > Coil springs like Land Rover? Say it ain't so. i feel coils springs were a natural evolution without changing the overall spirit of the vehicle. in fact, i feel they made the jeep even more capable than ever before. > I wonder why "heritage" seems to be more important to you than > "capability." it isnt "more" important, but capability is what built jeep heritage. without the heritage, its just another 4x4. > You are basing your negative opinion on the fact that the designers > considered at one time IFS, even though the final design keeps the solid > axle? Talk about picking nits. the majority of my negative opinion is based on the overall size of the vehicle. jeep was heading in the right direction......the rubicon release was a huge boost, and the unlimited was also an awesome addition......but this new wrangler is just to big to be a SWB jeep. -- Nathan W. Collier http://UtilityOffRoad.com http://7SlotGrille.com http://InlineDiesel.com http://BighornRefrigeration.com http://ConcealedCarryForum.com http://1911Carry.com http://GlockCarry.com |
Re: new wrangler - ug
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:o86dnXe4v7PNhXPZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com. .. > Nate, many similar complaints were made about the TJ at its introduction. > Coil springs like Land Rover? Say it ain't so. i feel coils springs were a natural evolution without changing the overall spirit of the vehicle. in fact, i feel they made the jeep even more capable than ever before. > I wonder why "heritage" seems to be more important to you than > "capability." it isnt "more" important, but capability is what built jeep heritage. without the heritage, its just another 4x4. > You are basing your negative opinion on the fact that the designers > considered at one time IFS, even though the final design keeps the solid > axle? Talk about picking nits. the majority of my negative opinion is based on the overall size of the vehicle. jeep was heading in the right direction......the rubicon release was a huge boost, and the unlimited was also an awesome addition......but this new wrangler is just to big to be a SWB jeep. -- Nathan W. Collier http://UtilityOffRoad.com http://7SlotGrille.com http://InlineDiesel.com http://BighornRefrigeration.com http://ConcealedCarryForum.com http://1911Carry.com http://GlockCarry.com |
Re: new wrangler - ug
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:o86dnXe4v7PNhXPZnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com. .. > Nate, many similar complaints were made about the TJ at its introduction. > Coil springs like Land Rover? Say it ain't so. i feel coils springs were a natural evolution without changing the overall spirit of the vehicle. in fact, i feel they made the jeep even more capable than ever before. > I wonder why "heritage" seems to be more important to you than > "capability." it isnt "more" important, but capability is what built jeep heritage. without the heritage, its just another 4x4. > You are basing your negative opinion on the fact that the designers > considered at one time IFS, even though the final design keeps the solid > axle? Talk about picking nits. the majority of my negative opinion is based on the overall size of the vehicle. jeep was heading in the right direction......the rubicon release was a huge boost, and the unlimited was also an awesome addition......but this new wrangler is just to big to be a SWB jeep. -- Nathan W. Collier http://UtilityOffRoad.com http://7SlotGrille.com http://InlineDiesel.com http://BighornRefrigeration.com http://ConcealedCarryForum.com http://1911Carry.com http://GlockCarry.com |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:19 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands