When will the 2005 Wranglers be available?
Feb 22, 2004
42 Replies
1964 1/2 had 289 with generator
1965 had alternator I think that was pretty much the only difference - they didn't change the grill until '66
formatting link
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O> mailto: snipped-for-privacy@aol.com
formatting link
Imagine rupturing your gas tank on the last day of the trail.. what a bummer..
Buying a '64 model in '65 is either a used car, or a new car that was an overstock. There is no confusion here at all.
Buying a new '65 model in the last quarter of '64 has been happening for as long as I can remember. My father was the general manager at some car dealerships when I was a kid, and this is just the way it has always worked.
There are Marketing Considerations that make the car makers do it this way. When the next year's models are purchased in the last quarter of the previous year, there isn't much confusion among the buying public, but I agree that there is some confusion when the next year's model goes on sale in April of the previous year (as what happened in the case of the Mustang that I described earlier). There is always a one-upmanship thing that is going on among the automakers. The first one to market with next year's model has the edge over the others.The fact that you are confused makes absolutely no difference to them; it's a "bean counter" thing.
Just saw one of these at the Milwaukee Auto Show yesterday. The folks manning the Jeep booth claimed that it was also wider. It didn't look it to me, so I have my doubts. It is going to be called the Wrangler Unlimited.
In addition, it had the Dana 44 rear, Dana 30 up front, 4 wheer disc brakes, and auto tranny. The "babe" on the turntable platform, while giving the rundown of options said that it would have the automatic transmission. This seemed to imply to me that it wasn't an option, but rather standard for this "package".
In addition, she mentioned that the soft top had an option where you could simply fold back the front part for a sunroof feature.
OK, taking a look at Jeep's website, I see that they now have preliminary specs online:
Unlimited Sahara Rubicon wheelbase 103.4" 93.4" 93.4" track F/R 58/58" 58.5/58.5" 59.5/59.5" cargo cap behind rear seat 23.42cuft 11.9cuft same rear seat removed 74.4cuft 47.1cuft same rear folded+tumbled 53.41cuft (not listed)
If it is "wider" (whatever the sales folks meant by that), it is probably due to the tire/rim combination that they chose for it.
The site lists maximum trailer weight w/4.0L engine as 3500 pounds.
Hmmm, looking up the specs for a Cherokee (a _real_ Cherokee, not the "wannabe"):
1998 Cherokee 2 door Sport (mine) wheelbase 101.4" track F/R (I have to look this up in my old books, since I can't find it online right now) cargo cap 32.9cuft (69cuft - rear seat folded)Looks like the cargo capacity and wheelbase on the new Wrangler Unlimited is greater than that of my 1998 Cherokee. Interesting.
It looks like that's as close as we're going to get to having the real Cherokee back. Since I have a 2-door Cherokee, the lack of 2 extra doors doesn't matter to me... :)
Actually, I was quite blindsided by this introduction. When I heard that Jeep was going to be producing these stretched Wranglers, I must admit that I was confused. Their current "direction" seems to be pointing towards IFS and high-revving-rubber-timing-belt-infested V6 engines wrapped in "cute ute" body cladding. Could this mean that Daimler is actually listening to their Jeep customers?
Somebody pinch me, I think I'm dreaming again...
-John
There was one at the Detroit auto show last month. It's not wider than the standard Wrangler.
The manual trannys will come out later, possibly later in the model year; this was a marketing decision rather than technical, similar to when the Liberty was introduced...D-C believes they will sell better with autos.
That's because the soft top is so big it can't be folded down...you either fold back the front section or remove it altogether.
- * * Matt Macchiarolo formatting linkformatting linkformatting link
While the *said* it was wider, the specs do not prove that statement. By the specs, it is a half inch narrower. But, you are right, it is probably from the tire/rim package they are using.
In the olden days, the Unlimited was called a Scrambler.
bought it for $800.00 first part of 1971...........
That figures.
I wonder how much heavier the Unlimited's hard top is compared to the standard TJ's?
-John
I gave it to my son when he turned 13 (he will be 23 in May). We stripped the paint, pulled the engine/tranny, etc, etc & after 2 weeks of half assed (although with extreme effort) body work, he became disillusioned. It has been sitting in the drive way since then. Each & every summer I promise my wife that we will "do some bonding" & together, we will make it streetable again. It's got a lot of rust,now - but I am pretty sure that we might, at least get a real good start at it this summer. This is actually something that she wants to do - so it's hard to pass up the opportunity for quality time.
Bonding with Bondo?
:-)
- * * Matt Macchiarolo formatting linkformatting linkformatting link
& the Mustang is still in the drive way @ the old house.............still in the process of moving.
sure hope we get good adhesion...............
Proper surface preparation technique is essential...
- * * Matt Macchiarolo formatting linkformatting linkformatting link
Hey, it's toaster, not brick!
Join the Discussion
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Didn't find your answer?
Ask the community — no account required