Jeep Wrangler Forum banner

Jeep creature comforts and the dimensions?

2K views 8 replies 3 participants last post by  Universe93B 
#1 ·
Anyone have any information on improved creature comforts or specs? I heard from other posts that the Jeep's width is going to be more narrow, because they are going to reduce the side mirror size. This is probably more for aerodynamics than anything else. I'm assuming the length would be the same for the 2 and 4-door?

Anything else like blind spot monitors etc? My true hardcore Jeep fans were shaking their heads a while ago when heated seats turned up as options!
 
#2 ·
Your assumptions wouldn't be born out by the info so far. Also, who measures width at the mirrors...?... especially when they're removable. :D
That being said, I suspect an actually mild widening (likely an inch or so), and lengthening likely ~2-4+inches. To accomdate features as well as provide a better platform from which to base the pick-up.

Length is likely to increase if only because of the transmission. It's highly unlikely that they would compromise the limited interior space by the 6+ inches required to put in the longer drivertrain. There's like going to be a balance, but it'll likely be at least 2+ inches longer in order to fit everything in without major compromises.

As for the blind spot monitoring, yeah, it'll likely be there because while rear view camera is manditory in a just over a year, the others increase your iihs rating, and become mandatory before the JL's expected end of life. Don't really care about them either way, they functioned OK on our GC and our Cherokee, and if they can incorporate them on the Renegade then it's no sweat adding them to anything.
I suspect we also see more airbags, and the side ones are likely no longer optional (because if the base sport doesn't have them, the iihs doesn't test with them).

The one possible add-on I will likely hate, especially if it's as difficult to disable as on other platforms (be they FCA or Mercedes or whomever) will be that annoying start/stop engine feature (which the Pentastar has always supported as do the VM diesels) which I've found is simply getting in the way of safe & effective driving more than doing any real good.
 
#3 ·
Early reports suggested the Wrangler would be downsizing. I imagine that is still the intention, but whether or not it is possible remains a mystery. There are ways to fit the longer drivetrain in the Wrangler without having to lengthen the wheelbase, and I see no reason to make the vehicle any wider. Remember, there will already be additional interior space since the roll bar will no longer be fitted to the inside of the vehicle (most likely).

Worst case scenario, they might lengthen the 2-door by a couple of inches, but since the 4-door already has the length it needs, they might just leave it as is. I imagine there will be 3 frame size. The smallest size will be for the 2-door SUV. The mid-size will be for the 4-door SUV and the 2-door truck. The largest size will be for the 4-door truck. I don't really know what the truck configurations are going to be like, but I am pretty certain they will have at least a larger platform for the 4-door truck rather than trying to lengthen the 4-door SUV.

I really hope blind spot monitoring is an option and not a standard offering. If you become complacent and rely on the blind spot monitors, you will eventually get into a crash, and I don't need the extra expense on something that I will never use. Same goes for side airbags. I don't think Jeep is too concerned about iihs ratings. It hasn't hurt them in the past.
 
#4 ·
I think you're confusing CR and iihs, Jeep still has to address their Poor rating in the tests every year, and it doesn't look good seeing Fail and Poor in those areas. But more importantly they will become a requirement. They were supposed to start phasing them in Sept 1, 2009 over 5 years, but like the rear-camera that got pushed out a few years. I'm not sure what the new requirement will be (was hard just keeping track of the rear-camera delays), but as it's an optional feature now, it seems certain that it will be a standard feature in the future.
Lane departutre I'm not copncerned about , having used it for years it's a 'Meh' feature after the novelty wears off, and can be disabled. But I'm not worried about me, I'm worried about all the morons out there that can't figure out how to not collide with the rest of us.

As someone who's had someone run a light and t-bone me, I'm OK with the front collision avoidance and the side airbags, although I know that it's not for everyone. To me, all those combined features add to maybe a $500-700 sticker increase once you achieve economies of scales with them being everywhere. The side impact airbags are currently $400 option on the very VERY few that get them now, so it just gets cheaper when everyone has them. Half the driving aids can be obtained from an $89 dashcam, so again, not sure the true cost to the manufacturer. And the way I look at it is if they design for it now, then even if it's option before moving to mandatory, then it's baked into the design and not some duct-taped add-on afterthought.

As for the dimesnions, I don't disagree they can make the 4dr smaller (2dr less so) , but I don't think that's likely considering the platform. I don't think they will use the entire additional ~4-6 inches in the test mules, but I doubt they can recoup all of that without impacting dynamics as well as severely restricting the ability to change geometry/lift. The engine bay/firewall divide is one side, and if you add length there, in order o recoup it elsewhere then you need to shorten the cab length, thus either reducing occupant or cargo space. Neither of those two things amount to perceived improvements, even just as a surface mention in a review on boringdailydrivers.com or whatever. It even impacts the utility of the Wrangler as a weekend escape vehicle if you reduce the size of the cargo space, and also the 'overland' concept that is popular abroad. I know I would love an additional 2 inches in length... and also 2 more inches for the Wrangler.. :D

The JK is already plenty skinny, and adding an inch or so in cab width wouldn't change the profile much since the tyres/fenders are already a few inches outside the tub. Something of a mild hexagonality to the added width would make sense, thus not impacting the trail width but providing more space to work with.

I don't want to see bloat, but I suspect they've widened it by an inch or so, and likely lengthened it by a similar amount. I really don't see a compelling reason to turn the interior into an Ariel Atom or Mountain Climbing tube-tub, just as I don't see the need in making a Suburban-ized Wrangler either.
 
#5 ·
If they widen the Wrangler, it better be so they can fit a Hemi better ;)

But I see your point with the tires. If done right, they could widen the body without making the track wider. They just need to make sure you can fit 35x12.50 tires in there without having to reduce the backspacing of the wheels, thus increasing the track width. I have an old '95 Bronco on 35s, but I don't think the wheels stick past the fenders. Jeep could do something similar I guess, but it is going to be hard to reduce the weight of the vehicle by making it bigger and putting in a heavier transmission.

I am not sure how front collision avoidance would have helped your situation if you were hit from the side. Airbags would have been helpful, but like I said, that could be an option. Even if it doesn't raise the price that much, it makes the vehicle that much more complicated. Besides, it's a Jeep. What if you have been driving that day with the doors off? Side airbags wouldn't have done a damn bit of good in that scenario, so there is even less reason to make it a standard offering since many people will be driving with the doors off anyway.

What I meant about iihs ratings is that even with its current ratings, Jeep is still managing to sell every Wrangler it builds, so I don't think it would really make much of a difference.
 
#6 ·
I am not sure how front collision avoidance would have helped your situation if you were hit from the side.
More for the other guy instead of continuing to try and run the lights it might have applied brakes. But again to me it's like ABS, Airbags, etc. The cost should be greatly reduced when spread over the fleet.

Besides, it's a Jeep. What if you have been driving that day with the doors off? Side airbags wouldn't have done a damn bit of good in that scenario, so there is even less reason to make it a standard offering since many people will be driving with the doors off anyway.
I don't know if side airbags wouldn't have done anything, they're currently integrated into the seat for that very reason, but they are rather small and primarily for head restraint. As iihs hasn't tested them in any scenario because they're optional, I don't know what they'd do with the doors off to the test subject, probably better than without I would think, even if that's just 3.25% better and insignificant overall. Dunno. However they definitely could be improved, and will be required eventually as standard.

What I meant about iihs ratings is that even with its current ratings, Jeep is still managing to sell every Wrangler it builds, so I don't think it would really make much of a difference.
Of course one of the differences is that they are about to almost double their non-overtime capacity, even without the pickup line. So that "more demand than production can match" might not be the case with the early JLs and may need to offer desired feature to reach their target of 350,000 units per year sooner. Again it's a balancing game, because a higher base MSRP might mean losing some entry level consumers, but more features may attract other consumers, etc.

Like I said though, all these regulations moving items from optional features to standard requirements will pretty much make the issue a moot point. Although nothing is written in stone yet of course.
 
#8 ·
Interestingly enough Automotive News' view on the recent spy photos tend to come to a similar conclusion regarding the length although it's wheelbase not necessarily cab length;

2018 Jeep Wrangler

"The next-gen Wrangler’s windscreen appears to have a steeper rake than the current version, which would give the rolling brick better aerodynamics. The off-roader’s wheelbase also appears longer than the current four-door’s 116 inches."
 
#9 ·
The 4-door Wrangler is already big enough - I wouldn't like anything bigger for off-road purposes. I hope the designers know that. An inch or 2 more for the 2-door version wouldn't be tragic. Adding width to the door frame is okay, without extending the width on the fender flares/tires.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top