By on July 5, 2016

no_grand_wagoneer

If you were expecting Jeep’s upcoming Wagoneer and Grand Wagoneer to be range-topping standalone models, think again.

According to Automotive News, the new additions to the lineup will simply be upscale versions of the next-generation Grand Cherokee. Consider your retro-tinged dreams squashed.

Speaking at Fiat Chrysler Automobiles’ Chelsea Proving Grounds, Jeep brand chief Mike Manley said that the two names were more trim designations than models:

“The Wagoneer name represents, historically, the pinnacle of premium for the Jeep world,” he said. “But in the same way as you may have an Overland and a Summit, you have different trim levels. So you could imagine the use of Wagoneer to denote a really premium vehicle, and Grand Wagoneer takes it to the very next level. If you were to use that as your naming strategy, that’s exactly how I would use the trims.

Forget the blunt-nosed full-sizer that impressed buyers before the term “SUV” was even coined — the upcoming Wagoneer could just as easily have been called the Grand Cherokee Ultra-Lux. (LX Plus?)

Jeep, also known as FCA’s money tree, is currently busy shuffling production to make way for the Wagoneer, Grand Wagoneer and Wrangler pickup. The first two models trims should arrive when the next-generation Grand Cherokee bows in late 2018 or 2019.

This isn’t the first time Jeep tainted the name of the beloved Wagoneer. In 1993, the brand took the name of the recently killed model (1963–1991, R.I.P.) and grafted it onto a second-model-year Grand Cherokee outfitted with fake wood grain body cladding, calling it — yup — the Grand Wagoneer.

That model, which wasn’t really a model, much like the future Wagoneers won’t really be a model, lasted one year.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

89 Comments on “FCA Cop Out: Looming Jeep Wagoneer, Grand Wagoneer are Just Fancy Grand Cherokees...”


  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    That is a cop-out. If nothing else, you would think FCA would want to leverage the longer Durango architecture on a brand with more-equity. People already pay out the wazoo for the Grand Cherokee; imagine what they’ll pay for a larger, seven-seat version of it.

    But maybe the company doesn’t want to stack the deck against itself with yet another large, RWD, fuel-inefficient car.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Right. Add JGC styling to the next gen Durango, call it Wagoneer and charge $50K for it. Easy money.

      Instead, they’ll take the meager investment dollars and throw them at another Alfa model no one is asking for.

      • 0 avatar
        Sloomis

        I thought I had read several times that that was the actual plan – get rid of the Durango because it doesn’t fit the Dodge “performance brand” image FCA was trying to create, and use it as the basis of a Wagoneer instead.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          Maybe they can call it: Nitro.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Charge 50k for it? The Grand Cherokee can already get up to 70k, I have to imagine they’re going to want 85k for this pile.

        • 0 avatar
          Johnster

          Exactly.

          Plus, the Durango hasn’t met its sales targets, while the Grand Cherokee has. Combined with the Jeep cachet, a 3-rows-of-seats Wagoneer or Grand Wagoneer based on the Durango seems like a no-brainer.

          • 0 avatar
            SSJeep

            Which is weird because the Durango is an all-around competent crossover and is certainly the brawniest blob in the crossover marketplace. With the V8 it hauls and tows like no other crossover. I think it may be more of a nameplate thing – people have bad memories of the ~2002 Durangos that would start falling apart entirely too early in their lifecycles…

          • 0 avatar
            Johnster

            Not only is it weird, but you can get some pretty good deals on Durangos in my neck of the woods. A Durango with a V6 and 4-wheel drive is a pretty sweet ride.

    • 0 avatar
      danio3834

      “People already pay out the wazoo for the Grand Cherokee; imagine what they’ll pay for a larger, seven-seat version of it.”

      Nothing in this article suggests this won’t be the case.

      • 0 avatar

        Yeah the way I read the same article on Allpar, the Wagoneer will be a super high trim of the GC (possible with it’s own body parts like bumpers) and the Grand Wagoneer, will be a stretched 3 row of the same.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      Agreed, Kyree. Was really hoping for a newer, larger model that would offer at least a little retro-Wagonneer look to it. But then, without the seven-slot grill, it may be that outsiders wouldn’t recognize it as a Jeep model, hmmm?

  • avatar
    210delray

    Not really a surprise here. FCA isn’t exactly flush with cash to bring out a new model, so they just slap on new (old) trim level names!

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      True, but they could add current Grand Cherokee appearance to the Durango, since it already has three-row seating available, and call it a Wagoneer.

      Slap an SRT8 Hemi under the hood and call it a Grand Wagoneer.

      I’d bet they sell every one they can make.

    • 0 avatar
      TrailerTrash

      Honestly, other than the remarkable job they did with the Pacifica, what really have they done with anything new?
      90 percent of their offerings are just old stuff with upgrades.

      Jack Baruth hinted that he liked the 200.
      I dunno, since I have actually never driven it…but to me it seems a lower choice of all the cars available in its class.

      I suppose the diesel 1500 wold be something I would consider…but is this motor really new or just an import?

      • 0 avatar
        npaladin2000

        What about the Cherokee? 500x? Renegade? Giulia? Stelvio? Levante? Ghibli?

        • 0 avatar
          TrailerTrash

          ya…so?
          exactly what I was sayin.
          Nuthin.
          Its a company walking the plank. They have Dodge and Chrysler and Jeep in the USA and ONLY Jeep is pulling sales.
          The Pacifica is the only really good new car.
          The Cherokee is good…I think. I didn’t like it when tested and I thought the trans sucked and cargo was very small and confining. Another vehicle designed to do what very few owners will do.
          I wonder why the very same trans in the Pacifica felt so good.

          • 0 avatar
            npaladin2000

            Well, at least you’re living by your screenname. The 500x is selling like hotcakes all over the world, the Renegade is leading its segment in sales in the US, the Levante is a real Maserati, whatever you might think of the idea, and I do believe that when the Giulia is finally released it’s going to form the basis for so many additional RWD models it’s going to make your head spin. But you keep waiting for your next BOF dream machine.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        “Honestly, other than the remarkable job they did with the Pacifica, what really have they done with anything new? 90 percent of their offerings are just old stuff with upgrades.”
        — You forget the Cherokee itself.
        — And the Renegade.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          I’m not sold on the Pacifica being a “remarkable job.” Jonas Salk did a remarkable job on Polio. NASA did a remarkable job putting man on the moon. Einstein did a remarkable job with that whole relativity thing.

          But FCA introducing a competent but not outstanding minivan to a market it used to own? Not so remarkable.

  • avatar
    ajla

    Seems kind of stupid to have Dodge carry the company’s 3-row CUV banner with the Journey and Durango.

    I’d think that at least Jeep-izing the Durango would be a no brainier.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      I’m not sure a banner fits inside a Journey with the third row up.

    • 0 avatar
      Wodehouse

      Not a surprise. FCA needs to be investing all they can afford on developing a fully competitive/class leading Dodge Journey replacement before coming up with a new stand-alone Wagoneer…

      …and, hopefully, a Dodge (new Caliber?) version of the 500X.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        There’s no evidence FCA is developing any new models for Dodge. It’s a dead brand walking. Once the last Challenger/Charger is sold in 2 years, they are closing up shop.

        • 0 avatar
          Adam Tonge (bball40dtw)

          There isn’t much evidence that FCA is developing ANY new models outside of things that are in the process of being released or the new Wrangler.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Alfa Romeo, on the other hand, will have a full lineup of cars, SUVs, pickups and yachts. Also planes and mouthwash.

        • 0 avatar
          danio3834

          “There’s no evidence FCA is developing any new models for Dodge.”

          Because you can’t see them doesn’t mean they aren’t happening.

          • 0 avatar
            MrGreenMan

            You are correct that they have adopted the strategy of showing things when they’re ready for production. Apparently they couldn’t get a Michael Bay movie to hype their stuff four years before dealer delivery.

          • 0 avatar

            Danio is correct. We are all thinking of the NSX, which “came out” about two dozen times over four years before you could buy one…speaking of which, has anyone ever seen the new NSX in the wild ?

            Or an Alfa ?

  • avatar
    SlowMyke

    I hope the door hits Sergio in the ass really hard in a couple years. He’s done some things pretty well for Chrysler, but good grief does he ever use the media to keep his circus going every which way possible. I can’t imagine shareholders enjoy all this nonsense.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      The only thing shareholders worry about is the growth of their investment.

      • 0 avatar
        SlowMyke

        Which generally seems ok for the short term, thanks to Jeep. But now that Jeep is apparently joining the sideshow, I think I’d be cringing a bit. Jeep is still a money printing machine for FCA, but this comes as a chink in the armor.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          I agree. That’s why I wrote that the shareholders are only interested in what their investment does.

          At some point there will be diminishing returns. There is only so much milk you can squeeze out of this cash cow.

          Some analysts predict that Fiatsler will go under, get bailed out again.

          Others think that maybe some Chinese carmaker will take over Fiatslers’ carcass, lock, stock and barrel, when that day comes. Something along the lines of Volvo.

          The way I see it, Sergio can pull the wool over some people’s eyes all of the time.

          It’s unlikely that Sergio will keep coming up with product diversions and redirection for very much longer.

          At some point the jig is up and Fiatsler will have to schit, or get off the pot.

          My guess is ~ when the next recession will hit in 2018, and new car sales will take a dump again.

          • 0 avatar
            SlowMyke

            Yeah pretty much. If I were a shareholder, I’d be paying very close attention to these stories looking for that tipping point.

            I have an irrational love for Chrysler as a whole, so all this crap bobothers me. But with each additional FCA story, I’m learning to care less.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    While I didn’t expect it to be a completely new model, but instead an extended GC, I also didn’t think it would simply become a trim level. This to me is another sign FCA is in trouble.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      I agree. I expected it to be a new model though, something perhaps based on whatever replaced the Durango, or the new Maserati SUV.

      I have said all along that they’d better make it a special car for what they’re going to ask for it – and it shouldn’t be just a trim or share parts with the GC.

      Ruined hopes and dreams, as usual per Chrysler.

      • 0 avatar
        npaladin2000

        You were expecting them to rebadge a MASERATI as a JEEP? Dude, what are you smoking, and can you pass it over? :) Never ever gonna happen, Maserati needs to remain as bespoke as possible to maintain its market position.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          No, that’s not what I said.

          Use the Maserati platform as basis for a fancy Jeep Grand Wagoneer. Not a rebadge.

          • 0 avatar
            npaladin2000

            As far as Maserati buyers are concerned, it’s the same thing. Unless it’s exclusive and bespoke they’re going to lose a lot as far as brand image and market position.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            So these Maserati buyers, they’re informed and astute, and care enough about platform sharing to abandon the brand, but the window switches from the 200 in their Quattroporte are alright?

            Please clarify.

          • 0 avatar
            npaladin2000

            No one notices window switches. But they do notice powertrains.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Power train /= platform.

            And when was the last time a Quattroporte owner touched their platform? Compare that to the last time they touched their window switches.

            You’re out of your depth in this argument, and you have zero ground on which to stand.

          • 0 avatar
            npaladin2000

            You try explaining to the new Maserati buyer why he’s got a Hellcat under the hood then.

            I know BTSR would love it, but generally Maserati buyers wouldn’t. Now, how’s VW doing again?

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Let’s try again. We are talking about platform sharing. You understand this sentence, yes? That means the foundations underneath the car. The chassis.

            You switched topics to power trains, which are engines and transmissions. This is not the same thing as a platform. Do you understand?

            Then you threw in VW. We’re talking about FCA. So when you can reel it in, let everyone know. Please justify how window switches affect customer perception less than a platform.

          • 0 avatar
            npaladin2000

            WINDOW
            SWITCHES
            ARE
            LESS
            NOTICEABLE
            THAN
            POWERTRAIN.

            Do I need to draw you a picture? Along with platform sharing comes parts sharing, one of the major components of which are the various powertrain components like engine and transmission. I didn’t switch topics at all.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            You don’t seem to be able to control yourself, so I’m going to stop responding to you. Audi and VW share platforms all day long, the power trains are entirely different. Good day.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Porsche would never be so foolish as to market an SUV that shares its platform with a lowly VW or Audi.

          • 0 avatar
            npaladin2000

            And VW would never be so foolish as to cheat on fuel economy tests.

            (BTW, VW owns Porsche, not the other way around. And VW WOULD be dumb enough, yes).

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Until recently, the best selling Maserati was the Merak. Care to guess where that powertrain came from?

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            This guy *really* doesn’t get it.

            The point isn’t about how VW is doing; it’s whether the marketplace accepts Porsches that leverage VW platforms. Given that the two best selling Porsches today are the Cayenne and Macan, I’d say the answer is a resounding ‘Yes”.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Maseratis share a common platform, which is itself already a (heavily) modified version of a Chrysler platform. So the idea of Maserati using something that was borrowed from Chrysler in order to provide a platform for Chrysler doesn’t quite make sense.

            “Audi and VW share platforms all day long, the power trains are entirely different.”

            It’s pretty much the opposite. The Audis have platforms designed for longitudinal engine layouts, while VWs are transverse. Different platforms, but a lot of the drivetrains are shared. (For example, last I checked, the 2.0 liter turbo that serves as the base engine in many US Audis is also available in some VWs.)

  • avatar

    AS LONG AS IT SELLS…

    It’s all good.

    I love my JGC SRT.

  • avatar
    bills79jeep

    Guarantee $2 gas for 8 or so years, and FCA might make a true Wagoneer. I understand the reluctance, given their cash issues. Instead, they can tack on at a top trim level where everything is high margin. Unfortunately for us, 99% of the real, actual, car buying public doesn’t care about saying true the history of the model. If they did, there wouldn’t be a 4 door Wrangler. And the Renegade would be a trim, not a model. I see this as FCA trying to milk more money out of one of their top sellers.

    If they did make one – would it be a 3 row unibody that competed with the Pilot, Explorer, Traverse, etc.? Or would they gun for the big boys and make a BOF SUV to go after the Suburban/Tahoe/Denali crowd? Interesting question – sound’s like we’ll never know.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Durango can target the Tahoe. Let the (Grand) Wagoneer target XC90/Q7/RR/GLS.

      • 0 avatar

        XC90 is a nice interior on top of a ridiculously conceived engine sold for sub-Mercedes prices.

        Jeep can’t compete with their interiors unless they trim with nothing but leather, alcantara and mouse fur.

        Jeep isn’t about luxury.

        It’s about utility and power.

        There won’t be any skinny eurochicks with their feet up atop their foldover makeup case and powder mirror in a Jeep- while their husband chauffeurs them around trying to figure out how to keep his country afloat when the big boys are Brexiting – leaving less of other people’s money to spend.

        EVER.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          Thanks for clarifying. I now know that the Overland, High Altitude and Summit edition JGCs are all about utility and power, even though they all come with V6 engines standard.

          • 0 avatar
            arun

            I’d say they are about power, considering that most of their competitors come with 4 cylinder/ turbo-4 as standard.

        • 0 avatar
          SlowMyke

          @BTSR – There’d be a Pacifica with seven slots up front if Sergio didn’t think the Jeep loyalists would revolt. He’s got no regard for brand history or rules if they stand in the way of making money.

      • 0 avatar
        bills79jeep

        “Durango can target the Tahoe” Except that it currently doesn’t target the Tahoe in price, sales, market perception, or architecture. But OK.

        • 0 avatar
          Kyree S. Williams

          Yeah, the Durango is RWD optional-V8-powered unibody that mostly competes with V6 FWD unibodies.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Fair enough. Durango is unibodied now (the first gen was pickup truck based). I’m still not a fan of the whole “I’m a real man because I bought a real truck, as evidenced by its BOF” mentality. Especially when 90% of people who define SUVs like that still credit the Durango’s platform-mate – the JGC – as an SUV.

            Let me ask this: If you intended to buy a Tahoe, but then were told you could get a competing FCA product for half price to fill that need, what else would you get?

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      If 99% of the buying public doesn’t care about the “Wagoneer” name then why bother bringing it back in the first place? The marketing wank doesn’t work if people don’t already have some conception of the name.

      Plus, how much luxury room is there above the current Summit trim level anyway?

  • avatar
    bodayguy

    They’ve been working on this for like nearly a decade and NOW it’s just a trim level?! Are you kidding?
    Durango based was the rumor all along. Heck, they supposedly showed a select group of dealers a test version in Vegas a year ago or something. Huh? Unbelievable.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Booooooooooooooo, hisssssssssssssssssssss (throwing rotten vegetables).

    Although if this means they won’t kill the Durango then I’m kind of OK with it. Except why bother making the Grand Wagoneer badges?

    I’ll keep my fingers crossed for a Canyonero trim for the Durango.

  • avatar
    Stumpaster

    It will come with the upgraded 1.4turbo engine and red brake calipers.

  • avatar
    npaladin2000

    In other news, sales of Preparation H to disappointed fanboys is WAY up. :) Guys, were you really expecting a whole separate model? Seriously? They’re going to take the ancient Journey platform and turn it into a high-end SUV? Anyone could have seen this coming a mile away. Somehow I think they might stretch it some, try to make a 3-row SUV, but the Commander didn’t do all that well either, so maybe not. But No one really expected a separate model except youse guyse. :D

    Besides, if they’re really going to build a Grand Wagoneer, it should be based on the RAM 2500HD. :)

    • 0 avatar
      rudiger

      Yeah, I was going to suggest that the Commander fiasco still has a significant impact on Jeep producing any new, full-size models.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      No, it would have been a stretched Grand Cherokee, or essentially what the Durango is already. This was in conjunction with the news that FCA would discontinue the Grand Cherokee.

      • 0 avatar
        npaladin2000

        Discontinue. A Jeep. This does not compute. Not even in Twisted Sweater World would anyone do something so stupid as to discontinue part of Super Duper Cash Cow Jeep (TM). Unless it’s the Patri-yuck/Compost twins anyway.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      The Commander was solidly midsized, they figured they could get an extra $5-7k for it if they called it fullsize, that was clear to fail when it started.

  • avatar

    Great news! More money for Alfa vaporware!

  • avatar
    Astigmatism

    I mean, yes, this is disappointing, in the sense that the pimping of any iconic brand name is disappointing. But in the car sense of things, really, who cares? The people who drove Grand Wagoneers back when driving a Grand Wagoneer meant something are all driving imports now that Mercedes et al. have responded to the demand, and no Jeep was going to lure them back into a Chrysler/Jeep showroom. And if you really want a Grand Wagoneer, then these guys ( http://grandwagoneer.com/ ) will do you one up nice, better than any vehicle Chrysler would have done. It’s still iconic, still gorgeous, and better looking than any stretched and bloated Grand Cherokee or Durango derivative would ever have been.

  • avatar
    anti121hero

    Hey that 93 zj grand cherokee based wagoner was really cool! Those had some seriously comfy seats

  • avatar
    el scotto

    Why should I buy a Jeep Wagoneer instead of a Suburban?

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    The carpetbaggers from Fiat are just phoning it in now.

    • 0 avatar
      JustPassinThru

      My impression as well. Sergio-with-the-Sweater is good at cutting crony government deals – that’s how he GOT all of Chrysler. When it comes to actually running the business, he shows some deficits.

      Jeep is, and was, a unique opportunity. First it’s heritage/legacy. Sneer at it; fine; but buying a car/truck is primarily an emotional choice. And Jeep has a history like few others…a stand-alone company for three decades, than as it was absorbed into AMC, it basically BECAME AMC. The AMC engines which were adopted to the SJs eight years after they were designed, BECAME Jeep engines – especially the Rambler six, later known as the Jeep Six.

      It was the backbone of the company and one worth enough for Lido to gamble Chrysler’s future, just after paying off loan guarantees, to buy it.

      And the appeal just keeps on growing…in this era where there’s two kinds of blobs, the four-door-sedan blob and the SUV/CUV blob…Jeeps have stood out. NOT EVEN because of actual hardware, but because of their legacy. And when they take a Wrangler and fab a SJ Cherokee-like front-end on it…Jeep fans go WILD.

      And Sergio-in-the-Sweater doesn’t want to build any such thing. BADGE-ENGINEER it! We can sell a few more, and save thousands…sure!…and build more Alfas!

      Eventually, potential Jeep customers are going to realize that the Jeep line went the way of the Thunderbird, which became just an intermediate car; or the Mustang, which became just a different-trimmed Torino or later, a Fox-body; or any number of other great successes which were bean-counted into sales failures. And what’s Sergio-with-the-Sweater going to do, then? Beg the Billary government for MORE money? Sell the mess to Hyundai? Or the Chinese?

      Sergio is the Peter Principle personified.

  • avatar
    heavy handle

    Mr Manley is preoccupied with what people want to buy in the next few years, not what they weren’t buying 25 years ago.

    The Grand Wagoneer that people (here) say they want would be slightly less popular than the Navigator. In other words, maybe 10,000 units per year.

    A Grand Cherokee-based Wagoneer will beat that, and it will be a lot more profitable.

    For all the talk about how FCA is dying, they’ve been having record profits quarter after quarter, with strong growth in all regions. They must be doing something right.

    GM, on the other hand, totally depends on pickups profits in the US to subsidize all other markets and segments.

    • 0 avatar
      thegamper

      But when the ultra profitable pickups and SUV’s fall out of favor (Say due to a spike in gas prices, not totally unheard of), at least GM will have other markets and segments to pick up a portion of that slack. FCA would be out of business. If FCA truly is to become exclusively a Truck and SUV maker, they better have more small pickups and SUVs. I am thinking that the Renegade and Compatriot will probably not float the company through a few tough sales years. They need small and midsized pickups, more small CUV’s.

      The lack of investment in “new” products and platforms across all segments will eventually come home to roost. It is unfortunately a matter of time. So I hope Sergio finds his soulmate in another automaker and ties the knot beforehand.

  • avatar
    Ryoku75

    You expect new models from Chrysler? Hah!

    This is the same company thats made a dozen fruitless Fiat 500 variants.

  • avatar
    thegamper

    I was under the impression that the Wagoneer was to be a true 3 row vehicle. Huge opportunity missed, every soccer mom in the country would plunk down for Wagoneer with usable 3rd row. Dumb.

  • avatar
    Drzhivago138

    Disappointing, but ultimately not surprising.

  • avatar
    Manta9527

    There has been a recent development since this article was posted to this site. Today, a Jeep spokesman has confirmed that while the Wagoneer and Grand Wagoneer will be based on the Grand Cherokee platform, they will be separate models, as opposed to being merely trim levels of the Grand Cherokee itself. The full story can be found in the following articles:

    Autoblog: Jeep Wagoneers will be separate from Grand Cherokee line
    http://www.autoblog.com/2016/07/06/jeep-wagoneers-separate-grand-cherokee-line/

    Motor Authority (Update: Jeep Wagoneer and Grand Wagoneer to be standalone models)
    http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1104846_update-jeep-wagoneer-and-grand-wagoneer-to-be-standalone-models

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • speedlaw: Tucked into the Tax Bill passed in the recent times, deductions for autos went way up, purchased through a...
  • speedlaw: Agreed. Caddy’s only path to success is to be exclusive, not selling parts bin cars with more...
  • el scotto: @Dartdude Our Federal Government, thankfully, is not like Apple computer corporation. I have an iPhone 3...
  • el scotto: @SCE to Aux; I can think of three stand-alone Cadillac dealers. Lockhart Cadillac in Greenwood and Fishers...
  • Ol Shel: You should choose a car from a company that’s never had a recall, like: Nash, Duesenberg, Datsun,...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber