"John Sevey" <seveyj@no.spam.like.substance.wi.rr.com> wrote in message
news:v2u_b.28897$Dg1.19794@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> mic canic <dbrider@cac.net> wrote:
> > they will be introducing a new longer wrangler this spring that has more
rear
> > seat foot room and more storage room behind the seat and wish i brought
home
> > the new model highlites sheet for it it will be the same as the other
> > wrangler's from the front to the rear of the doors but changes after
that ,but
> > this version will be a 2 door stiill but with a longer wheel base.while
they
> > finalize the 4dr. the towing cap. will go from 2500lbs to 3500lbs there
is
> > more but i just can't remember
>
> 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.
>

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.



> 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

In the olden days, the Unlimited was called a Scrambler.

 

"John Sevey" <seveyj@no.spam.like.substance.wi.rr.com> wrote in message
news:v2u_b.28897$Dg1.19794@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> mic canic <dbrider@cac.net> wrote:
> > they will be introducing a new longer wrangler this spring that has more
rear
> > seat foot room and more storage room behind the seat and wish i brought
home
> > the new model highlites sheet for it it will be the same as the other
> > wrangler's from the front to the rear of the doors but changes after
that ,but
> > this version will be a 2 door stiill but with a longer wheel base.while
they
> > finalize the 4dr. the towing cap. will go from 2500lbs to 3500lbs there
is
> > more but i just can't remember
>
> 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.
>

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.



> 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

In the olden days, the Unlimited was called a Scrambler.

 

bought it for $800.00 first part of 1971...........

--
Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
'98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
O|||||||O
'92 Explorer '65 Mustang


"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:4039B9ED.33966C45@***.net...
> Hi Carlo,
> What year did you pick up your Stang?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Carlo wrote:
> >
> > 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
> >
> > --
> > Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
> > carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
> > '98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
> > O|||||||O
> > '92 Explorer '65 Mustang

 

bought it for $800.00 first part of 1971...........

--
Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
'98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
O|||||||O
'92 Explorer '65 Mustang


"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:4039B9ED.33966C45@***.net...
> Hi Carlo,
> What year did you pick up your Stang?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Carlo wrote:
> >
> > 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
> >
> > --
> > Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
> > carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
> > '98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
> > O|||||||O
> > '92 Explorer '65 Mustang

 

bought it for $800.00 first part of 1971...........

--
Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
'98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
O|||||||O
'92 Explorer '65 Mustang


"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:4039B9ED.33966C45@***.net...
> Hi Carlo,
> What year did you pick up your Stang?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Carlo wrote:
> >
> > 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
> >
> > --
> > Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
> > carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
> > '98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
> > O|||||||O
> > '92 Explorer '65 Mustang

 

Hi Carlo,
I paid five thousand for my '57 Bird in '63 about a grand more than
it sold new for. When your Stang came out the people with the little
birds traded them for it, bummer it took years for it to appreciate back
to their classic value. I hope you can drive yours, I'm too
uncomfortable, fearing someone might hit it.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Carlo wrote:
>
> bought it for $800.00 first part of 1971...........
>
> --
> Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
> carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
> '98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
> O|||||||O
> '92 Explorer '65 Mustang
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:4039B9ED.33966C45@***.net...
> > Hi Carlo,
> > What year did you pick up your Stang?
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
> > Carlo wrote:
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
> > > carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
> > > '98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
> > > O|||||||O
> > > '92 Explorer '65 Mustang

 

Hi Carlo,
I paid five thousand for my '57 Bird in '63 about a grand more than
it sold new for. When your Stang came out the people with the little
birds traded them for it, bummer it took years for it to appreciate back
to their classic value. I hope you can drive yours, I'm too
uncomfortable, fearing someone might hit it.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Carlo wrote:
>
> bought it for $800.00 first part of 1971...........
>
> --
> Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
> carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
> '98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
> O|||||||O
> '92 Explorer '65 Mustang
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:4039B9ED.33966C45@***.net...
> > Hi Carlo,
> > What year did you pick up your Stang?
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
> > Carlo wrote:
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
> > > carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
> > > '98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
> > > O|||||||O
> > > '92 Explorer '65 Mustang

 

Hi Carlo,
I paid five thousand for my '57 Bird in '63 about a grand more than
it sold new for. When your Stang came out the people with the little
birds traded them for it, bummer it took years for it to appreciate back
to their classic value. I hope you can drive yours, I'm too
uncomfortable, fearing someone might hit it.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Carlo wrote:
>
> bought it for $800.00 first part of 1971...........
>
> --
> Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
> carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
> '98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
> O|||||||O
> '92 Explorer '65 Mustang
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:4039B9ED.33966C45@***.net...
> > Hi Carlo,
> > What year did you pick up your Stang?
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
> > Carlo wrote:
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlo F. Serusa, Jr. RPh
> > > carlo.jr at comcast DOTnet
> > > '98 Sahara TJ - '89 YJ - '79 Scout II
> > > O|||||||O
> > > '92 Explorer '65 Mustang

 

Matt Macchiarolo <mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon> wrote:

<snip>
>>In addition, she mentioned that the soft top had an option where you could
>>simply fold back the front part for a sunroof feature.

> 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.

That figures.

I wonder how much heavier the Unlimited's hard top is compared to the standard
TJ's?

-John

 

Matt Macchiarolo <mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon> wrote:

<snip>
>>In addition, she mentioned that the soft top had an option where you could
>>simply fold back the front part for a sunroof feature.

> 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.

That figures.

I wonder how much heavier the Unlimited's hard top is compared to the standard
TJ's?

-John