|
They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
|
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote:
>See the link and tell us what you think: > >http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html There is also a 2700 series 2500 = 2.4 l 2700 = 2.7 l |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote:
>See the link and tell us what you think: > >http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html There is also a 2700 series 2500 = 2.4 l 2700 = 2.7 l |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote:
>See the link and tell us what you think: > >http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html There is also a 2700 series 2500 = 2.4 l 2700 = 2.7 l |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
Slick. Too bad there isnt a 4.0.
Carl "QX" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message news:9pu2k2l75gcviuui2r2padtdl80famo59e@4ax.com... > On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote: > >>See the link and tell us what you think: >> >>http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html > > There is also a 2700 series > > 2500 = 2.4 l > 2700 = 2.7 l |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
Slick. Too bad there isnt a 4.0.
Carl "QX" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message news:9pu2k2l75gcviuui2r2padtdl80famo59e@4ax.com... > On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote: > >>See the link and tell us what you think: >> >>http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html > > There is also a 2700 series > > 2500 = 2.4 l > 2700 = 2.7 l |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
Slick. Too bad there isnt a 4.0.
Carl "QX" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message news:9pu2k2l75gcviuui2r2padtdl80famo59e@4ax.com... > On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote: > >>See the link and tell us what you think: >> >>http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html > > There is also a 2700 series > > 2500 = 2.4 l > 2700 = 2.7 l |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep 2500
Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof.
How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? Jeff DeWitt Carl wrote: > Slick. Too bad there isnt a 4.0. > > Carl > > "QX" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:9pu2k2l75gcviuui2r2padtdl80famo59e@4ax.com... > >>On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote: >> >> >>>See the link and tell us what you think: >>> >>>http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html >> >>There is also a 2700 series >> >>2500 = 2.4 l >>2700 = 2.7 l > > > |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep 2500
Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof.
How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? Jeff DeWitt Carl wrote: > Slick. Too bad there isnt a 4.0. > > Carl > > "QX" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:9pu2k2l75gcviuui2r2padtdl80famo59e@4ax.com... > >>On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote: >> >> >>>See the link and tell us what you think: >>> >>>http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html >> >>There is also a 2700 series >> >>2500 = 2.4 l >>2700 = 2.7 l > > > |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep 2500
Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof.
How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? Jeff DeWitt Carl wrote: > Slick. Too bad there isnt a 4.0. > > Carl > > "QX" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:9pu2k2l75gcviuui2r2padtdl80famo59e@4ax.com... > >>On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote: >> >> >>>See the link and tell us what you think: >>> >>>http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html >> >>There is also a 2700 series >> >>2500 = 2.4 l >>2700 = 2.7 l > > > |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
What about the convertible:
http://www.----------.com/temp/CherokeeConvertible.jpg God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. > How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? > > Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
What about the convertible:
http://www.----------.com/temp/CherokeeConvertible.jpg God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. > How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? > > Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
What about the convertible:
http://www.----------.com/temp/CherokeeConvertible.jpg God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. > How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? > > Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop.
Jeff DeWitt L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > What about the convertible: > http://www.----------.com/temp/CherokeeConvertible.jpg > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > >>Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. >>How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? >> >>Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop.
Jeff DeWitt L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > What about the convertible: > http://www.----------.com/temp/CherokeeConvertible.jpg > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > >>Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. >>How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? >> >>Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop.
Jeff DeWitt L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > What about the convertible: > http://www.----------.com/temp/CherokeeConvertible.jpg > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > >>Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. >>How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? >> >>Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
I would require the Comanche frame.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. > > Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
I would require the Comanche frame.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. > > Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
I would require the Comanche frame.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. > > Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee
is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. How did they attach it to the cab? Jeff DeWitt L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > I would require the Comanche frame. > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > >>Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. >> >>Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee
is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. How did they attach it to the cab? Jeff DeWitt L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > I would require the Comanche frame. > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > >>Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. >> >>Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee
is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. How did they attach it to the cab? Jeff DeWitt L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > I would require the Comanche frame. > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > >>Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. >> >>Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
I would guess they attached the cab to the frame the same way Ford,
Chevy or Dodge did. God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee > is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. > How did they attach it to the cab? > > Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
I would guess they attached the cab to the frame the same way Ford,
Chevy or Dodge did. God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee > is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. > How did they attach it to the cab? > > Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
I would guess they attached the cab to the frame the same way Ford,
Chevy or Dodge did. God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee > is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. > How did they attach it to the cab? > > Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
But unless I'm wrong the cab on a Comanche was unit body like a
Cherokee, but the box had to sit on a frame. A regular pickup (Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Studebaker) and a full size frame with the cab and box attached to it, and the carucks like the El Caminio and the Brat were really cars with the rear modified to function more or less like a pickup box but the platform underneath remained unchanged. Jeff DeWitt L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > I would guess they attached the cab to the frame the same way Ford, > Chevy or Dodge did. > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > >>Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee >>is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. >> How did they attach it to the cab? >> >>Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
But unless I'm wrong the cab on a Comanche was unit body like a
Cherokee, but the box had to sit on a frame. A regular pickup (Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Studebaker) and a full size frame with the cab and box attached to it, and the carucks like the El Caminio and the Brat were really cars with the rear modified to function more or less like a pickup box but the platform underneath remained unchanged. Jeff DeWitt L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > I would guess they attached the cab to the frame the same way Ford, > Chevy or Dodge did. > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > >>Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee >>is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. >> How did they attach it to the cab? >> >>Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
But unless I'm wrong the cab on a Comanche was unit body like a
Cherokee, but the box had to sit on a frame. A regular pickup (Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Studebaker) and a full size frame with the cab and box attached to it, and the carucks like the El Caminio and the Brat were really cars with the rear modified to function more or less like a pickup box but the platform underneath remained unchanged. Jeff DeWitt L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > I would guess they attached the cab to the frame the same way Ford, > Chevy or Dodge did. > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > >>Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee >>is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. >> How did they attach it to the cab? >> >>Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
If you poke around you can find the page in English. The Chinese made a
number of improvements to the XJ. "Jeffrey DeWitt" <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in message news:wAx0h.10$HD6.8@tornado.southeast.rr.com... > Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. How > come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? > > Jeff DeWitt > > Carl wrote: >> Slick. Too bad there isnt a 4.0. >> >> Carl >> >> "QX" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:9pu2k2l75gcviuui2r2padtdl80famo59e@4ax.com... >> >>>On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>See the link and tell us what you think: >>>> >>>>http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html >>> >>>There is also a 2700 series >>> >>>2500 = 2.4 l >>>2700 = 2.7 l >> >> |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
If you poke around you can find the page in English. The Chinese made a
number of improvements to the XJ. "Jeffrey DeWitt" <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in message news:wAx0h.10$HD6.8@tornado.southeast.rr.com... > Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. How > come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? > > Jeff DeWitt > > Carl wrote: >> Slick. Too bad there isnt a 4.0. >> >> Carl >> >> "QX" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:9pu2k2l75gcviuui2r2padtdl80famo59e@4ax.com... >> >>>On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>See the link and tell us what you think: >>>> >>>>http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html >>> >>>There is also a 2700 series >>> >>>2500 = 2.4 l >>>2700 = 2.7 l >> >> |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The Chinese Jeep 2500
If you poke around you can find the page in English. The Chinese made a
number of improvements to the XJ. "Jeffrey DeWitt" <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in message news:wAx0h.10$HD6.8@tornado.southeast.rr.com... > Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. How > come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? > > Jeff DeWitt > > Carl wrote: >> Slick. Too bad there isnt a 4.0. >> >> Carl >> >> "QX" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:9pu2k2l75gcviuui2r2padtdl80famo59e@4ax.com... >> >>>On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:18:48 -0700, QX <nomail@nospam.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>See the link and tell us what you think: >>>> >>>>http://www.jeep.com.cn/jeep2500/about/out.html >>> >>>There is also a 2700 series >>> >>>2500 = 2.4 l >>>2700 = 2.7 l >> >> |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Picture the frame starting at the front bumper. From there they have
a treated high strength extension back to just forward of the motor mount, At that point, it becomes a normal boxed frame back to the fire wall. At the firewall, the cab floor becomes the top of the box and the pillars, firewall and rear of the cab all jion in to give it flex strength. Behind th cab, the lowere U-channel contimues with a cap plate welded to make a boxed member. The bed just rides on top of that. In reality, it's only a real unibody for the length of the cab - the rest is pretty much normal railed frame. On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 01:42:52 UTC Jeffrey DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote: > Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee > is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. > How did they attach it to the cab? > > Jeff DeWitt > > L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > > I would require the Comanche frame. > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > > >>Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. > >> > >>Jeff DeWitt -- Will Honea |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Picture the frame starting at the front bumper. From there they have
a treated high strength extension back to just forward of the motor mount, At that point, it becomes a normal boxed frame back to the fire wall. At the firewall, the cab floor becomes the top of the box and the pillars, firewall and rear of the cab all jion in to give it flex strength. Behind th cab, the lowere U-channel contimues with a cap plate welded to make a boxed member. The bed just rides on top of that. In reality, it's only a real unibody for the length of the cab - the rest is pretty much normal railed frame. On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 01:42:52 UTC Jeffrey DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote: > Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee > is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. > How did they attach it to the cab? > > Jeff DeWitt > > L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > > I would require the Comanche frame. > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > > >>Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. > >> > >>Jeff DeWitt -- Will Honea |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Picture the frame starting at the front bumper. From there they have
a treated high strength extension back to just forward of the motor mount, At that point, it becomes a normal boxed frame back to the fire wall. At the firewall, the cab floor becomes the top of the box and the pillars, firewall and rear of the cab all jion in to give it flex strength. Behind th cab, the lowere U-channel contimues with a cap plate welded to make a boxed member. The bed just rides on top of that. In reality, it's only a real unibody for the length of the cab - the rest is pretty much normal railed frame. On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 01:42:52 UTC Jeffrey DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote: > Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee > is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. > How did they attach it to the cab? > > Jeff DeWitt > > L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: > > I would require the Comanche frame. > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: > > > >>Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. > >> > >>Jeff DeWitt -- Will Honea |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep 2500
And Pickup Variant
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n...okeePickup.jpg "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message news:4542A840.2129E607@cox.net... > What about the convertible: > http://www.----------.com/temp/CherokeeConvertible.jpg > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: >> >> Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. >> How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? >> >> Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep 2500
And Pickup Variant
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n...okeePickup.jpg "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message news:4542A840.2129E607@cox.net... > What about the convertible: > http://www.----------.com/temp/CherokeeConvertible.jpg > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: >> >> Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. >> How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? >> >> Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep 2500
And Pickup Variant
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n...okeePickup.jpg "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message news:4542A840.2129E607@cox.net... > What about the convertible: > http://www.----------.com/temp/CherokeeConvertible.jpg > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- > > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: >> >> Sure looks like one to me, except for the weak engine and the sunroof. >> How come we never got sunroofs in our XJ's? >> >> Jeff DeWitt |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Chevy Nova
"Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-6X007z2KiZKF@anon.none.net... > Picture the frame starting at the front bumper. From there they have > a treated high strength extension back to just forward of the motor > mount, At that point, it becomes a normal boxed frame back to the > fire wall. At the firewall, the cab floor becomes the top of the box > and the pillars, firewall and rear of the cab all jion in to give it > flex strength. Behind th cab, the lowere U-channel contimues with a > cap plate welded to make a boxed member. The bed just rides on top of > that. In reality, it's only a real unibody for the length of the cab > - the rest is pretty much normal railed frame. > > On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 01:42:52 UTC Jeffrey DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> > wrote: > >> Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee >> is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. >> How did they attach it to the cab? >> >> Jeff DeWitt >> >> L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: >> > I would require the Comanche frame. >> > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O >> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ >> > >> > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: >> > >> >>Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. >> >> >> >>Jeff DeWitt > > > -- > Will Honea |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Chevy Nova
"Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-6X007z2KiZKF@anon.none.net... > Picture the frame starting at the front bumper. From there they have > a treated high strength extension back to just forward of the motor > mount, At that point, it becomes a normal boxed frame back to the > fire wall. At the firewall, the cab floor becomes the top of the box > and the pillars, firewall and rear of the cab all jion in to give it > flex strength. Behind th cab, the lowere U-channel contimues with a > cap plate welded to make a boxed member. The bed just rides on top of > that. In reality, it's only a real unibody for the length of the cab > - the rest is pretty much normal railed frame. > > On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 01:42:52 UTC Jeffrey DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> > wrote: > >> Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee >> is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. >> How did they attach it to the cab? >> >> Jeff DeWitt >> >> L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: >> > I would require the Comanche frame. >> > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O >> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ >> > >> > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: >> > >> >>Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. >> >> >> >>Jeff DeWitt > > > -- > Will Honea |
Re: They are still producing the Cherokee (Sort of). The ChineseJeep2500
Chevy Nova
"Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-6X007z2KiZKF@anon.none.net... > Picture the frame starting at the front bumper. From there they have > a treated high strength extension back to just forward of the motor > mount, At that point, it becomes a normal boxed frame back to the > fire wall. At the firewall, the cab floor becomes the top of the box > and the pillars, firewall and rear of the cab all jion in to give it > flex strength. Behind th cab, the lowere U-channel contimues with a > cap plate welded to make a boxed member. The bed just rides on top of > that. In reality, it's only a real unibody for the length of the cab > - the rest is pretty much normal railed frame. > > On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 01:42:52 UTC Jeffrey DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> > wrote: > >> Never thought about this before but that's kind of weird. The Cherokee >> is unit body, but the Comanche must have had at least a rear sub frame. >> How did they attach it to the cab? >> >> Jeff DeWitt >> >> L.W.(Bill) ------ III wrote: >> > I would require the Comanche frame. >> > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O >> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ >> > >> > Jeffrey DeWitt wrote: >> > >> >>Looks like someone was having fun with Photoshop. >> >> >> >>Jeff DeWitt > > > -- > Will Honea |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:31 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands