Manley: Jeep Wrangler Truck Perfect For Brand, Business Case Not There

by Cameron Aubernon

Published: January 15th, 2015

The B&B’s only bet for buying a Jeep Wrangler pickup at the moment is to buy a Wrangler, then send it to a third-party for conversion. CEO Mike Manley says he’d love to have such a beast in his brand’s portfolio, as well, but there’s a hitch.

According to CarAdvice.au.com, Manley says that while “every international market” would take a Wrangler pickup, and that the idea “fits the portfolio exactly,” the business case for the truck still isn’t there.

Part of that case involves Ram: a Wrangler truck would do gangbusters on the showroom floor — the Wrangler made up 25.3 percent of the record 692,248 Jeep products sold in 2014 — but at the expense of the designated truck brand, an issue that has persisted for some time.

#Jeep #MikeManley #PickupTrucks #Ram #Wrangler

Cameron Aubernon

Seattle-based writer, blogger, and photographer for many a publication. Born in Louisville. Raised in Kansas. Where I lay my head is home.

More by Cameron Aubernon

Comments

Join the conversation

8 of 86 comments

Vulpine on Jan 15, 2015

Honestly, a Wrangler-based pickup would be a big seller. Jeep could get away with it by simply making the bed a little shorter and narrower--such as 6'x 4.5' straight-walled inner bed with the external fenders Jeep is noted for on the Wranglers today. It would be different enough to probably not cannibalize too many RAMs while offering an effective mid-sized truck that would legitimately compete with the Colorado/Canyon, Tacoma and Frontier.

Like Reply
- DenverMike on Jan 15, 2015
  
  There's just not enough meat on the midsize pickup "bone", to justify an expensive Jeep pickup. And an expensive pickup for just 1 passenger? It's the 2nd row seating that sells Wranglers and other SUVs. But a bed instead? So why isn't there a LR Discovery 2-seater pickup? I'll bet all the European Vulpii are dying for one! Except Wranglers are strictly lifestyle. To some degree, midsize pickups are very lifestyle dependent too, but they're also highly reliant on fleet, trades, gov, utilities, cheapskates and bottom feeders.
  
  Like
Tinn-Can on Jan 15, 2015

I would buy a wrangler pickup, I would never buy a dodge ram... Stick your bidmess degree up your butt...

Like Reply
Gardiner Westbound on Jan 15, 2015

I had a '71 Jeepster Commando pickup. Used it for everything. Loved it to pieces. If they produce the Jeep Wrangler pickup I'll be at the Chrysler dealer's door on Day 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeepster_Commando

Like Reply
Big Al from Oz on Jan 16, 2015

I do think there would be a global market for a Wrangler midsize cab chassis. Pricing is it's biggest downfall. It couldn't be made in the US as the cost would be prohibitive to compete against the more refined and cheaper global pickups. If made in India or China I do think it would be a competitive vehicle. The Wrangler is a very agricultural vehicle. I would remove the Pentastar and only supply the VM 2.8 diesel of a large FCA 4 cylinder gas engine. For quality it would compete against the Tata and other Chinese pickups etc. So it would have to be sold relatively cheaply. I do know I'll get some flack, but remember Tata and Mahindra make some agricultural vehicles as well, the Wrangler isn't the only one around.

Like Reply
- See 2 previous
- Vulpine on Jan 16, 2015
  
  The Wrangler wouldn't necessarily be competing against those "more refined" trucks; it's basic purpose is as an off-road vehicle for getting to more inaccessible locations that the average pickup truck can't reach. I'll grant that modern pickups are far more capable in many ways, but the shorter wheelbase and typically higher ground clearance and approach/departure angles give the the ability to go places larger trucks simply can't reach. I've witnessed this myself by watching a full-size crew cab try to take some of the off-road trails at Rousch Creek in Pennsylvania; there were some parts of the trails it simply could not navigate because of its size. This might not make much of a difference in some areas, but when you get into more technical, rocky or heavily-forested areas the shorter length and higher un-modified clearances will make a difference. I do agree that the Wrangler doesn't need a huge engine, but I'm not opposed to the Pentastar. On the other hand, a smaller diesel producing more torque at lower RPMs would be just as effective and likely more economical when off-road range is critical (a 23 gallon tank when you're only getting 20mpg means an only 400 mile range. That same tank with a 30mpg diesel would give you over 600 miles.) Then again, with diesel over $1/gallon more expensive than even mid-grade (89 octane) gasoline, the range becomes more important than the cost. Meanwhile, the Mahindra company was sold a license to build on the Willys/Kaiser Jeep platform in perpetuity and is in many ways today more a Jeep than the Jeep itself.
  
  Like
- Big Al from Oz on Jan 16, 2015
  
  @Vulpine, I'm not describing the US market, as I don't think the US market will support enough Wrangler pickups for production. Remember a Wrangler pickup would have to be manufactured in a NAFTA country. The Wrangler you speak of is from a US perspective. In a developing nation many roads are just tracks. This is where a Wrangler pickup would survive. The problem then is can FCA provide the required support. I don't think so. Maybe in China or India it can. As popular as the Wrangler is it is still kind of a niche product for the off road set, or wanna be off road set in the US and Australia. The Pentastar Wrangler is actually a pig on fuel. I do know on a test done here in Australia it used 14 litres per 100km. Even a diesel Landcruiser wagon gets around 11-12 litres per hundred.
  
  Like
- Vulpine on Jan 17, 2015
  
  @Big Al from Oz In general, I have to disagree with your conclusions even though I agree with your individual points; nobody really expected the 4-door Wrangler to be such a success, either. "It's not a 'real' Jeep" was the theme of the day. And yes, I will agree its fuel mileage could be better. On the other hand, at a steady 45mph its economy with the existing engine should be about 4 gallons per 100 miles or about 8 litres/100km. That's what I've achieved even with my older, non-Pentastar version. The Wrangler's abysmal aerodynamics are a big part of why fuel economy is so poor. That said, we're already aware that the next version of the Wrangler will be slightly more aerodynamic. It's also expected to be somewhat lighter, though that's going to have to come more from materials used than from any paring down of hardware components. Granted, losing the solid axle housings could help it lose a hundred pounds or so, you're certainly not likely to see it go on the kind of diet the F-150 took and get the same results. I also don't think using a turbocharged engine is the best solution either, as it would be too easy to get yourself in trouble if boost kicks in on a technical bit of trail. A Jeep pickup would have one advantage though; it wouldn't NEED to be a 4-door and in all actuality the people most likely to want a Jeep pickup would simply want a 2-door with a part-time back seat in the manner of the Gladiator imaged above. Eliminating the weight of a full-time rear seat and putting in basically a padded bench with a pair of seat belts could save another 40-50 pounds. Losing the back half of the roll cage could have a similar effect. On the other hand, stretching the frame one foot would put some weight back on. That then leaves everything down to the engine and honestly today's smaller engines put out more power than even when the Pentastar first came out. My Jeep runs fine at 200 horses, so something like Fiat's Tigershark at 185 horses might serve the model well, though I'll grant it's not likely to have as much torque without a 6-speed or better tranny attached. Considering the Renegade Trailhawk boast 20:1 crawl ratio with a Tigershark and a 9-speed, that may really be all the engine a Wrangler needs. (Make it the standard with the Pentastar optional might help it fit into CAFE).
  
  Like