By on January 20, 2015

2014-Jeep-Wrangler-Sport-Front-Three-Quarter2

Are you ready for a hybrid Jeep Wrangler? The 2017 model may likely be just that to help the icon navigate through tighter fuel economy standards.

According to Auto Express, brand boss Mike Manley says hybridization is a possibility for achieving fuel efficiency in the upcoming Wrangler, while also ensuring that it keeps its looks and improves its on-road prowess. Such a hybrid would be more focused on off-roading and the issues that could come up:

Where you have to be careful with the Wrangler is range. If you are eight hours and four miles into a trail, there is not a hybrid that we could do which could provide the battery support. The way that combination is calibrated would be more unique for a Wrangler than it would, for example, a Grand Cherokee.

Other options for greater fuel economy include diesel power, as well as usage of aluminum and high-strength steel in the Wrangler’s construction.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

67 Comments on “Manley: 2017 Jeep Wrangler Could Be A Hybrid...”


  • avatar
    Drzhivago138

    How about all of the above?

    • 0 avatar

      Yes, diesel, aluminum unibody, hybrid, volt-style drivetrain that uses the onboard diesel generator powerplant to charge the battery pack but it’s direct drive above certain speeds. It makes sense, and you could have a fancy four-wheel drive electric motor torque-dial-in system.

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        Well, I wasn’t really thinking all on the same model (have a diesel, a hybrid, an aluminum, an IRS/IFS model, etc.), but when you put it that way…

      • 0 avatar
        anti121hero

        Ew no. I want steel and a straight six and solid axles.

        • 0 avatar
          sportyaccordy

          There are plenty of these turds and old Cherokees humming along paved roads on underutilized off road tires. Or in my neighborhood, 22s on low pros.

          Jeep Wrangler. The folly of man.

      • 0 avatar
        Sigivald

        How much would that cost?

        Because I submit that as a real-world production car that matters, even if there’s a subset of people who might be notionally interested at Any Price.

        (The more interesting thing to me is that, while hybrids on a rock-crawling trail might not work so well…

        Would rock-crawlers even be buying that model? Would Jeep care?

        What, something like 95-99% of Wranglers never see any terrain more difficult than a dirt road, no?

        A plain ol’ hybrid would probably sell pretty well to people who Always Wanted A Jeep but aren’t actually ever going to run the Rubicon (or equivalent), and aren’t going to spend 8 hours going four miles.)

        • 0 avatar
          karvanet

          Would Jeep care, yes they would. The Wrangler defines the brand.
          “In a world where only 15% of SUV owners ever go off road, Jeep says 60% of Wrangler owners do; for Rubicon models, its 80%. Those percentages are the industry’s highest, says Kevin Metz, Wrangler brand manager. (Next highest, he says, is the Hummer H3, at 30%.)”

          I know when I go on runs with the local off road club Jeep Wranglers form the largest percentage of attendants, and I’m not talking about old ones, there are lots of JK’s out there.

          Jeep has lot’s of crossovers and regular SUV’s for sale, the Wrangler needs to stay the off road standard.

          • 0 avatar
            mkirk

            But wait…I read on TTAC that only posers purchased Wranglers and none of them ever go off road.

            I used to take my Land Cruiser offroad regularly and Jeeps were by far and away the most common sight on the trails I ran followed by old Toyota pickups.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Hybridization would be okay for the portion of the buyers that don’t wander off-road. The problem is added weight and added complexity. A diesel engine would make more sense for those that actually venture off-road.

            I wonder what Jeep brand considers off-road?

            or most buyers?

  • avatar
    Car Ramrod

    If any of these ideas we’ve read about in the last several months are utilized, the current gen Wrangler is going to have fantastic resale.

    • 0 avatar
      Pig_Iron

      +1

      The CJ and on, are the ultimate big boy Meccano sets, probably followed by 4X4 pick-ups, and Mustangs. The Wrangler may end up being just another failed marketeering exercise. I hope not.

  • avatar
    danio3834

    The quote seems to indicate that a Hybrid Wrangler is not very likely. Aside from cost and application problems, it would greatly upset the jihad.

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    Just put a diesel in it and call it a day. How hard can this be?

  • avatar
    heavy handle

    FCA deliberately releases a “the next Wrangler could be…” bombshell every two or three weeks, and everybody has an opinion on whether or not it would make it a true Wrangler.

    Great way to drum-up free publicity. Whatever they release in 2017, they can claim that the “listened to what Wrangler customers have to say.” My guess is that the 2017 Wrangler will be as boring as a new Audi: only a few OCD people will be able to spot the differences at first glance.

  • avatar
    afedaken

    Hmm.

    Battery Pack.

    SEALED Electric Hub Motors.

    Instant torque.

    I can see both the rock crawlers, and the mudders liking these developments. And if it gets us a few MPGs, well there isn’t a Wrangler on this planet that couldn’t benefit from that!

    • 0 avatar
      Sigivald

      Sure.

      And more importantly, the vast, vast majority of Wrangler buyers, who are neither crawlers nor mudders, would like the fuel economy bonus.

      (There’s a reason the default gearing isn’t the 3.71 rear, and that’s because the default Wrangler buyer runs on pavement 100% of the time.)

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      +½ Hub motors simply can’t offer the torque that a centrally-mounted motor could offer. One larger motor at each axle would offer better torque and a better ride at lower cost.

    • 0 avatar
      Domestic Hearse

      I was just going to suggest this. Electric motors at all four corners. Though it’ll happen when purple monkeys fly out of all our tailpipes.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    The right kind of hybrid (with four individual hub motors and an ICE serving as generator) could be the best off-roader ever made. Imagine instant, wheel-by-wheel ability to apply torque in either direction.

    Unfortunately, the CHANGE SCARES ME crowd probably won’t allow it.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      While you’ve got a great idea, dal, each motor would add from 25-45 pounds of un-sprung weight to each wheel, making the ride far more rough and jolting. Twin motors, one on each axle, could offer the same effect with electronic locking and probably improve the efficiency as well. You also wouldn’t need a manual transfer case as you could get the electronic equivalent far more easily with fewer moving parts. Parasitic drag from all those driveshafts and additional gears is at least part of why the Wrangler gets such poor fuel economy.

      • 0 avatar
        Luke42

        This is a Jeep Wrangler. With solid axles. Unsprung weight comes with the territory.

        OTOH, an IFS/IRS Wrangler with hub motors (same as or less unsprung weight as the solid axle Wrangler?) would be my personal cup of tea. Just so long as it has the timeless hackability and aftermarket support of the Wrangler. I personally have no love for solid axles on anything faster than a Kubota tractor.

        …But I have picked out a Wrangler as my midlife crisis adevture-convertible, for reasons that are completely and thoroughly irrational. :-)

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      If one considers the size of a Jeep Wrangler, where are they going to put the batteries?
      Solid axles need undercarriage space for articulation.

      Anything that hangs down will need skid plates and affect departure angles.

      Independent suspension frees up undercarriage space but then it would no longer be a Jeep that anyone wants.

      An electric motor at each wheel sounds good but it would add complexity and cost.

      Jeeps are popular just like pickups because they are platforms that are easy to modify and have a vast array of aftermarket accessories.

      I agree with krhodes1:

      Just put a diesel in it and call it a day.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        “If one considers the size of a Jeep Wrangler, where are they going to put the batteries?
        Solid axles need undercarriage space for articulation.”
        — So drop the solid axles and give it fully independent suspension (already in their playbook).

        “Anything that hangs down will need skid plates and affect departure angles.”
        — The battery pack itself could become a while underbody skid plate.

        “Independent suspension frees up undercarriage space but then it would no longer be a Jeep that anyone wants.”
        — Don’t bet on it. Independent suspensions have already proven themselves in off-road driving around the world.

        “An electric motor at each wheel sounds good but it would add complexity and cost.”
        — True. A single motor on each axle would be more efficient and less complex. Cheaper, too.

        “Jeeps are popular just like pickups because they are platforms that are easy to modify and have a vast array of aftermarket accessories.”
        — and will continue to be as long as people want to modify them. Even the current Cherokee has a number of both factory and aftermarket mods already.

        “I agree with krhodes1: ‘Just put a diesel in it and call it a day.\'”
        — It still needs help with highway mileage and a diesel alone ain’t gonna cut it.

  • avatar
    Luke42

    I like the idea of a hybrid Jeep Wrangler a lot.

    One feature request: make an electrical power takeoff patel be an easily available feature. [email protected] and [email protected], please. Then I can run power tools, or a travel trailer’s A/C unit, off of it.

    Suddenly the Jeep becomes a portable power plant which can bring the benefits of civilization ANYWHERE.

    P.S. Yeah, it’s probably be cheaper to just lash a generator to the back bumper. I don’t care! :-)

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    I think a gasoline engine would suffice.

    Most who buy a Wrangler don’t rock crawl. They just want others’ to think they are cool. So, have a diesel for rock crawling types and a gas/elect for the ‘hey, look at me doesn’t my Wrangler match my braclet” types.

    With it’s relative popularity, agricultural design/construction and overall cheapness the Wrangler is the ideal vehicle to convert into a hybrid.

    FCA can have a very unique product if they can succeed.

    Moving to aluminium is a waste of money, consumer money, especially when its shaped like a brick, like the F-150. Changing to F-150 to aluminium was a waste of resources.

    It in reality only saved one mpg.

    • 0 avatar
      afedaken

      ONE MPG for my Wrangler would be a net 10% increase. I’d LOVE to get that much more! And corrosion resistance.

      The filipino in me says go with a stainless body, which would get me out of the rust repair game, but doesn’t offer the weight savings.

      • 0 avatar
        danio3834

        You’re netting 10mpg in a Wrangler? Ouch. What year, engine, trans, mods?

        • 0 avatar
          afedaken

          89 YJ. 4.2L. Carbs, Points, Mechanical Fuel Pump. I did “nutter” out the “computer” which the P/O failed to do after installing a Weber.

          No other real mods to speak of, but 160,000 miles.

          Honestly, it could use new plugs, wires, cap, rotor… Well new everything.

          Most pressing when I bought it at 140,000 was the suspension, so its had new front and rear shocks, drag link, a steering stabilizer, ball joints, and most of the other steery/bouncy bits. Now I only get “death wobble” when I hit BIG pot holes at speeds you shouldn’t take in a Wrangler anyway.

          After 27 years, it could probably use new springs too but hey, it’s a Wrangler. It’s not like I’m going to bottom out on something.

          The latest wrinkle to rear its ugly head would be a blockage in the fuel system. Started to stall out on me. I blew the lines clear with the compressor and it would be fine for a few more miles, then starve and die out again. Since it’s been cold and rainy/icy here in the Philly suburbs, I’ve put off dropping the tank till the weather improves.

          In the mean time, a hastily plumbed in radiator overflow tank is connected to the fuel pump and return, giving me a hair over 6 miles of range…

          …but since my daily commute is all of 4 miles, most days I’m on a Diamondback Sorrento hardtail MTB with me as the engine rather than firing up the Wrangler or the Solstice.

          I like my jeep. It’s cheap to insure (OLD), it’s completely paid off (OLD), it (usually) starts up when I turn the key, doesn’t strand me (too often), it isn’t (completely) rusty, and it’s (crudely) simple enough to maintain that even someone like me with no real formal training (ex-service writer, now in IT) and a smattering of hand tools (Screwdriver, crescent wrench, and hammer) can keep it running.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            Reminds me of the rusty but trusty ’90 XJ that I use to plow my property. Although mine is a 4.0L with fuel injection that never fails to start and run on varnished gasoline.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      “Changing to F-150 to aluminium was a waste of resources. It in reality only saved one mpg.”

      — If that much. On the other hand, they also installed a critically small, critically-weak engine into that thing which forces the driver to run in turbo boost far more than it should. The 3.5 EcoBoost with a 6-speed or 10-speed transmission would probably do somewhat better (could safely change the final drive ratio to something high enough it could let the engine run at more comfortable economy rpms.

      But as you say, the simple overall bulk of the F-150 in frontal area is its biggest drawback and with the Wrangler shaped like a brick, it shares that drawback. The F-150 did see some improvement through its aerodynamic restyling with the previous generation–far more than the aluminum body provides. Still, it does give the F-150 a little better in-town economy. Still, the last time an F-150 carried a 165c.i.d. engine, it weighed a full thousand pounds less than this new aluminum-bodied version. So going aluminum does help–but it’s not a panacea to what’s really hurting the F-150’s fuel mileage.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    Strangely, every single new model of the Jeep CJ family has been born with complaints of, “It’s not a real Jeep” ever since the name changed from CJ to Wrangler. The new model then proceeds to prove that it is superior from the factory than any of its predecessors and sometimes even better than the averagely-modified versions. I experienced this same complaint with my ’08 JKU where TJ owners told me, “It will never handle this trail without a 2″ lift”, at which point the JKU proceeded to successfully negotiate said trail.

    Yes, the new Wrangler is likely to be extremely different. Through the changing of several existing components, it is expected to lose hundreds of pounds of weight and very likely receive engine/transmission changes that when all are combined might improve on-road economy by 25%. The one major drawback with the current Wrangler is that it is an aerodynamic brick–an engine/tranny combo capable of over 30 highway mpg in a Caravan can’t even manage 22 highway in the Wrangler; that boxy shape just has to go!

    Let’s go off into La-La land for a moment and consider that the current Jeep Wrangler is over twice the size and near three times the weight of the original CJ yet still gets about the same or a little better economy than said original. What if the Wrangler were shrunk back down to CJ size and about half its current weight? Also, what if its many squared-off edges were more rounded, while keeping the overall visual design of the old CJ? Would it still be a Wrangler? (Actually, it would probably be the Renegade.) Additionally, fully-independent suspensions have proven themselves in multiple off-road races where solid axles have broken and crippled the car.

    And what about that hybrid powertrain? Is it really such a ridiculous idea? Staying in La-La Land, what if it used a Tesla-style belly pan with electric motors for both front and rear axles? What if it did use a diesel as an off-road recharging engine? You wouldn’t need a big engine to power a decent generator and the torque of a true electric drive would surpass almost anything offered by a liquid-fueled engine in the same vehicle. Suddenly you have a vehicle capable of withstanding almost any of the worst trails while running almost completely silently so that you can actually enjoy the nature around you. If the battery pack and wiring is sealed properly, you wouldn’t even need to worry about flooding as you forded streams hood-deep.

    Personally, I suggest a wait-and-see attitude until the next model actually comes out and find out for ourselves exactly what they’ve done to it.

  • avatar
    jdash1972

    How about a narrower track Jeep that might actually fit on a logging trail? One that weighs 800 lbs less and is powered by a 4-cyl engine. Engine torque isn’t an issue when you have low range.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    So I see half the people in this thread are suddenly experts.

    Guess what impracticality sells, this vehicle is pure profit, and if Chrysler is smart the only thing they’ll do is drop the diesel into it as an option. The diesel will do more for efficiency than changing the body, putting four wheel independent suspension, and a hybrid system combined. Cheap sells, the diesel as a $3,200 option ( same as trucks) is the only sensible change that needs to be made. Unlike all the CUVs the wrangler isn’t a fad, the wrangler is a timeless design that holds resale very well. By changing the formula it makes the wrangler as desirable as a 2002 Buick rendezvous.

    Sorry electric drive motors are expensive on everything they’re in, and developing a system that can absorb heavy shock and water resistance for 250k miles of drive time is a pipe dream for anything under $60,000.
    Independent suspension would completely destroy the sales after an initial 2 year new model fad.
    The mileage on these isn’t terrible for what they are. It seems more people are worried about what the sticker says than what the actual mileage is. No one complains an explorer gets 19 MPG, but when a Jeep with infinitely more capability gets “only” 18 MPG it’s somehow blasphemy. You get efficiency or you get capability, and if you want to eat your cake too, you get a diesel.

    It’s truly the perfect vehicle to manufacture, it creates obscene profit, sales seem to only go up, and the buyers refuse major changes. I see this as an effort to gauge the market, and the market is clearly rejecting the Mustang II

    • 0 avatar
      RobertRyan

      Hummer,
      They already have diesels in the Wrangler here in Australia . Need to address the other shortcomings like it’s not so wonderful, performance on road

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        No one in the US cares about how these things handle/drive on the pavement. You are pretty out of touch with what the american consumer wants and what sells in this country. We are not Australia and never will be. Just because it works there doesn’t mean it is gonna work here.

        Hummer is spot on with his assessment of this vehicle.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      The current Wrangler does seem to be printing money. That’s presumably why they delayed the updated version.

      Personally, I want a vehicle that looks like the Wrangler and has the hackability/aftermarket support of the Wrangler, but is a modern vehicle. Modern safety safety and efficiency are important to me.

      It seems to me that it would make sense to introduce a new Wrangler-like model for guys like me, and keep printing money by continuing to sell the JK/JKU with incremental updates.

      Then again, I don’t know how much maintaining an obsolete (but popular) platform costs. I guess we can ask Ford about how well Panthers went.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        Well I see 3 ways to do that
        1) Weld the body onto the Cherokee platform and have the support of the wrangler body parts, and the not so extent Cherokee running gear parts. Would probably also get the cherokee bumpers that are a few inches off the ground.
        2) build a brand new vehicle that only looks similar to the wrangler. The people that will buy these are buying for the looks, no aftermarket exists and it will be very unlikely to exist outside some stick on chrome.
        3) Realize that there is no other choice.

        The wrangler aftermarket is the largest aftermarket of any 4×4 in America, this exists because of enthusiasts. The Camry has very large sales, but it’s aftermarket is no better than any other car selling 1/4 as many units. Either buy a welder and 3D printer and learn how to use them well, or deal with the drawbacks of the wrangler.
        Even if they change the wrangler in its entirety, the replacement will not be able to take over the void, and the aftermarket surely is not going to risk producing parts for a vehicle that is disliked by the entire basis of the consumers of their products.

        • 0 avatar
          Luke42

          “Either buy a welder and 3D printer and learn how to use them well, or deal with the drawbacks of the wrangler.”

          I do like 3D printers, and I’ve enjoyed tinkering with them. But the affordable ones just aren’t ready for these sort of uses yet. As for welding, I’m looking forward to learning it for its own sake.

          But, I don’t need a Wrangler for any PRACTICAL purpose, though, I’ll probably just pass and wait until someone gets around to building what I’m looking for. I easily can wait a decade and a half before my sons are teenagers. After all, the cars I already own are amazingly well suited for my practical purposes.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          You know, Hummer, Jeep enthusiasts said that about the YJ with its square lights–yet now it is hailed as a classic example of Jeepdom. They said the same about the JK, yet it is now the JK that is the dominant model on even the most extreme trails. Most certainly the next version will be different and most certainly there will be a lot of argument as to whether or not it is, “A real Jeep”, but just as with the JK, the aftermarket components will come and the longer it remains in production, the more extreme will come the mods.

          Even the current Cherokee already has both Mopar and third-party aftermarket mods are available–and that’s only about a year after hitting the market.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            The YJ and even to an extent the JK were not major changes. Not even sure why you included the YJ it’s so similar. The JK simply does the same job as the CJ except make the entire offroading process more expensive and riding better. It’s pretty obvious the axles, ground clearence, and aftermarket sell the wrangler.

            The Cherokee obviously has Mopar accessories every manufacturer tries to upsell accessories for their cars. Third party accessories for the cherokee are limited, to the same extent as the patriot.

            Why suggest changing the wrangler to fit your needs when the Cherokee is obviously the perfect fit for you. This is what’s wrong with everything, instead of suggesting a new product we have to change existing products that have a successful formula. Just because a product possess a successful nameplate doesn’t mean any POS product you put under that name will share the success.

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            @Hummer,

            The Cherokee is not a convertible. There are plenty of modern 4×4’s with solid roofs, and it’s hardly unique there.

            Also, the Cherokee is likely to look dated in a few years, which reduces its appeal as a long-term weekend tinkertoy.

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            P.S. If I wanted to do the 4×4 thing exactly the way everyone else does, I would have done it that way already.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            I will agree about the YJ, but that did not stop the purists from making the argument. However, the JK is significantly different; it is much larger than any of its predecessors to the point of being almost twice as large as the original with the JKU almost 3x as large.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            If anything the larger JK brought ChryCo more sales.
            The best way to smooth out two solid axles is coil springs and weight. Unfortunately that meant a $60 2 hour lift was no longer possible. I do remember there was quite a few up in arms, but the main point that kept the customer base, the axles were still there, and to this day that’s what keeps a good number of them.

            Luke
            I fully agree, it will look dated, just as much of what we have availible today.
            Looking at your wants in the vehicle, efficiency, your going to need to change either your wants, or your vehicle tastes. Efficiency and timeless looks rarely coexist, especially today.* Ground clearence, visibility, durability, a strong aftermarket, and basically capability means your not getting efficiency.
            As for Modern, the Wrangler is plenty modern technologically, it’s capability may come from a tested and true older design, but that’s what makes it timeless.

            *Unless you get a diesel.

            Also an AWD rogue convertible with a custom made bumper perfectly fits what you want, most of all its unique.

            Modern design can be thanked for the loss off convertible SUVs, and the outlook doesn’t look positive.

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            An AWD Renegade with convertible and diesel really would tick all of my boxes!

            Electric or hybrid powertrains in a convertible Renegade would probably do it, too, just so long as Jeep doesn’t make it difficult for the hackers and the aftermarket to take a swing at modifying it.

            BTW, one of the nice things about my Prius is that, after a decade of engineers and backyard mechanics taking it apart, aftermarket hackers have mostly figured it out. But it didn’t have to take 10 years to figure this stuff out — there’s a lot Toyota could have done to provide documentation about the programming of drivetrain components, though. If Jeep would be open with the aftermarket folks about the hybrid components, that’s what I really want from a Jeep over the long haul.

            I’ve been a Linux tinkerer (and professional) since 1998, so I’m really accustomed to “my stuff” being open for me to hack on it. The Wrangler is the closest I’ve seen to this level of openness and flexibility in the car world, which is a major reason for my fascination with it.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            We’re on totally different pages, which is fine, what makes me happy may be someone’s form of torture, and what makes you or anyone else happy is unique to you/them.

            Aftermarket to me means stronger, above OEM in quality, and is ready to take a severe beating without breaking.
            I may want to switch in a stronger drive train component, a 350lb steel bumper, 38 inch tires, or more cooling capacity for my axles.
            I want the comforts of a daily driver with the capability of a weekend toy that gets me far away and gets me back.
            I believe you want efficiency with the capability to go through well travelled trails. Which is fun, no doubt.

            I don’t want to say something impossible, but I don’t believe that any vehicle will ever be able to amount the volume of aftermarket support of the wrangler, no way, no how. That takes decades of sales, decades of recognition, tons of sales to enthusiasts that buy the vehicles with intent on having fun. If the wrangler suddenly lost its axles, lost the removable doors, and much else, a very large following would simply leave it. No more than anyone wants a Rogue convertible, no one will want to be seen in a convertible jeep that sold out its heritage for a better ride.
            Modern 4×4 cannot amass the attraction, it’s not cheap enough. The wrangler is the Everyman offroad toy, anyone with a few grand can make something amazing, and equally amazing capability wise.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @Hummer: It’s still possible to get a cheap 2″ lift. It’s also possible to get insanely ridiculous and one well-known Jeeper has four JKs in his stable.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        Maintaining the “obsolete” Panther and Ranger was flat out printing money for Ford. The Panther and Ranger would have continued on if regulations wouldn’t have required some significant investment to keep selling them. Design and tooling fully amortized, production optimized and good selling prices meant their profit margin was high.

  • avatar
    Carlson Fan

    Considering what “chick” mobiles these things are I think they should offer a “Barbie” edition that comes in pink w/vanity mirrors in the visors and a center console make-up case. Optional shoe rack that mounts behind the back seat would also be a nice touch.

    • 0 avatar
      jdash1972

      Men would buy most of them, especially with the makeup case. It’s going to need 12 iPod ports, blue tooth and extra vanity mirrors cuz you can’t go off-road without that stuff.

    • 0 avatar
      afedaken

      They DO offer them in Pink. And Electric! No bluetooth though.

      http://smile.amazon.com/Fisher-Price-Wheels-Barbie-Jammin-Wrangler/dp/B00IVDVX72/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1421854763&sr=8-1&keywords=barbie+power+wheels+jeep

  • avatar

    I predict hydraulic hybrid systems and composite bodies.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • theflyersfan: I remember when these first came out and how GM was taken to the mat with such a cynical cash grab on a...
  • armadamaster: Tyranny…
  • SPPPP: It’s nice to hear from someone who actually owns one. I had made a comment on this story before, which...
  • armadamaster: How many different “small” trucks does Ford have to make to do what the old Ranger did by...
  • Lou_BC: I always get a kick out of seeing pickups with the Cadillac Escalade nose clip installed. Cadillruck.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber