Any info on redesigned Wrangler for '06?

It would make sense for Chrysler to finally dump the tired, old inline-6 since Daimler doesn't use that neanderthal in any other vehicle.

that "tired, old inline 6" is one of the best engines EVER made....

I am by no means a guru, but if the inline 6 is such a "neanderthal", why do BMW and others still use this type of engine?

LOL!

Don't know much about engines do you?

The 'only' reason Chrysler would dump it is because it lasts too long. Like the old slant 6, they wouldn't die either so Chrysler stopped making them.

One of my 'old tired' 6's has 300K on it and still burns less that a liter between oil changes.

Mike

86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

Jack Carter wrote:

BMW's six isn't tired and old.

I saw two of these set up with 4"+ suspensions and 35's at Moab, they looked fabulous. Stock, to me they just look like, well...no good.

Just like solid axles, the automotive press thinks an old inline iron 6cyl is a dog. Problem is the millions on the road running faithfully for hundreds of thousands of miles, whereas the potyential aluminum V6 replacements are junk at low mileages, and cost a fortune to rebuild.

I had the opportunity to talk with a "Jeep engineer" during the Moab Easter Safari. She said she was not allowed to talk about future projects. She did say they were looking at a 10 year life for the TJ. When I asked her point blank was the new TJ going to have solid axles or not she just shrugged her shoulders. Reading her body language did not make me optimistic about the future of Jeep. Just look at the new Grand Cherokee and Liberty, both with independent front suspension.

But I'm not worried, my 98 TJ is just a baby. It should last at least another

20 years and by then it will be a classic.

Dean http://www.m>I've been holding out trading/selling my 98 TJ to see what the new

That's an old pic from years ago. But don't tell me that's the fate of the Wrangler. That's f'ugly as hell.

Unfortunately there's a very good chance the '06 TJ replacement will use the Liberty's independent front end. They'll BS their way through it if this happens, but in my view that will be the end of Jeep as we've known it.

Oh, I can see the real argument they will make: weight. Compare the weight of an aluminum V6 to the inline 6 tractor engine. Every ounce they cut (theoretically) will boost the gas mileage. Same rationalization for all the plastic and little bitty gas tanks. I'm sure that many will agree that with proper maitainance and driving patterns we could probably do just as well but it's like the carb engines - who knows how to really tweek a carb anymore (and I never did find one that wasn't a running battle over time).

Functionality is the last thing on the design sheet...

My 4.0L is not tired! Great engine. You must own a Libby.

-jeff

Bill likes to bring that pic out as if it is fact when this question comes up. Check out the spec list for the '05 Rubicon in another thread.

It also wouldn't be able to pull as much as the old iron. That being said, the BMWs and Benz's are the highest Lemon Law vehicles around. Why would this be a good thing?