I can see why Jeep has drug their feet on a new truck . . .

[AMC-MJ]

86' - 92' MJ & XJ production numbers . . .

XJ;

1986 - 107,225 AMC

1987 - 139,295 AMC

1988 - 187,136 AMC

1989 - 207,216 AMC/Chrysler

1990 - 151,230 Chrysler

1991 - 151,578 Chrysler

1992 - 137,826 Chrysler

 

MJ;

1986 23,251 AMC

1987 12,884 AMC

1988 16,062 AMC

1989 10,375 AMC/Chrysler

1990 5,412 Chrysler

1991 5,188 Chrysler

1992 3,142 Chrysler

 

AMC/Cryco merger 87'-89' Jeep was taken over last anywho, Was the Jeep SUV always way more popular ?

 

Now i can see why Jeep is dragging there feet on producing a new pickup :fs1:

Mike

[MJCARENA]

Thats why there are so many XJ's in the junk yards.

[AMC-MJ]

Well i guess the MJ will be a collectible long before the XJ will if it ever dose . . .

 

Mike

[mvusse]

The MJ was the only unibody truck on the market at the time. The competition was all body on frame, and thus a lot less expensive. Yes, the Comanche looked cooler, but an S10, Ranger or Dakota could be had for 3/4 the money. On top of that, Chrysler didn't want to compete against itself with two comparable pickup trucks.

[Carl'sMJ]

The MJ was the only unibody truck on the market at the time. The competition was all body on frame, and thus a lot less expensive. Yes, the Comanche looked cooler, but an S10, Ranger or Dakota could be had for 3/4 the money. On top of that, Chrysler didn't want to compete against itself with two comparable pickup trucks.

 

I've never understood Chrysler's reasoning for not wanting the two comparable pickups (Comanche vs. Dakota) competing against eachother... Chrysler would have benefitted from a purchase of either truck and may have even snagged a few extra customers that were inclined to buy a Jeep just beacause it's a Jeep in the process... Terrible marketing in IMHO.

[jpnjim]

Two words,

Extended Cab.

 

Not having an extended cab option killed the MJ,

cheap regular cab pickups (especially cheap COMPACT regular cab pickups) had a very low profit margin.

 

Manufacturers make their money by selling vehicles loaded with options,

but most people wanting a loaded pickup wanted those options in an extended cab pickup.

 

Not many people were after A/C, PW, PL & high end trim levels in a regular cab truck,

so the MJ competed near the bottom of the pickup barrel (& for more $$ than the competition)

 

Low numbers, along with the low profit margin killed the MJ.

Why make an oddball variation on the Cherokee, that you actually make less profit margin on,

especially when Cherokees were flying out of the showroom, and Comanche's were not.

 

 

It's funny,

the highest profit margin Jeep of all back then was the Grand Wagoneer.

 

Even though that also sold in very low numbers, the price tag was almost all profit, since all the tooling had been bought & paid-for for 20+ years.

They said the Chrysler Exec's were really sad to see it go, since most of them were using Waggy's as they're executive 'cars'.

 

The GW went away for the same reason the XJ went away 10 years later,

company image.

XJ's were still high profit vehicles, right up till the last one rolled off the assembly line,

but they wanted fresh & new, and both the XJ & the GW had made the Jeep line look old & dated.

 

 

Stupid Chrysler/Daimler,

selling Jeeps based on fashion & style, instead of utility, design & profit margin. :fool: :roll:

[AMC-MJ]

:nuts: CryCo :bowdown: AMC

You can definitely see the transfer of ownership of Jeep from AMC to CryCo., AMC MJ stayed in the double digits tho it did float up n down a bit . . . The XJ spiked and then slowly faded off as well . . . prolly due to styling the MJ & XJ were starting to look outdated by the early 90's . . .

 

Mike

[AMC-MJ]

The GW went away for the same reason the XJ went away 10 years later,

company image.

XJ's were still high profit vehicles, right up till the last one rolled off the assembly line,

but they wanted fresh & new, and both the XJ & the GW had made the Jeep line look old & dated.

 

 

Stupid Chrysler/Daimler,

selling Jeeps based on fashion & style, instead of utility, design & profit margin. :fool: :roll:

 

:yes: I was typing that while you beat me to it :(

 

:cheers: I think they should have updated the MJ off the Grand Cherokee :cheers:

 

G-C rolled out in 93' had a G-MJ rolled out say 95' in an extened cab with I-6 and V-8 power plants :thumbsup:

 

Apparently Jeep Green lighted a wrangler base Pickup truck finally :fs2: starts production late 2011 :thumbsup:

Mike

[btm24]

god i hate the look of the new jeep pick up. i do not believe that the new jeep pick up will last very long because i don't think it will be very good at being a "truck".

 

Brandon

[88pioneer]

What new jeep pick up. They aren't making one

[Incommando]

XJ's become very profitable due to the long long product run vs. the length of time it took to recover the original costs of the stamps/design/etc....

 

I thought the pick-up was a go again (for now?)

 

Starting with the FSJ in '63, Jeep SUV's always outsold jeep pick-up's From day one, jeep pick-ups were more limited in options than the big three competitors. No 1-ton, for example.

[mvusse]

The only Wrangler based pickup I know of is the JK8. Only available to NATO forces and Israeli military. Not for the general public. A magazine did manage to get a hold of 50 knock-down kits that stayed in the US. They sold for more $$$ than I bought my house for.

 

That info is a bit dated, though.

 

AFAIK the Dakota is being killed off as it's not selling too well anymore, and will be replaced by a Fiat based unibody p/u.

[btm24]

The only Wrangler based pickup I know of is the JK8. Only available to NATO forces and Israeli military. Not for the general public. A magazine did manage to get a hold of 50 knock-down kits that stayed in the US. They sold for more $$$ than I bought my house for.

 

That info is a bit dated, though.

 

AFAIK the Dakota is being killed off as it's not selling too well anymore, and will be replaced by a Fiat based unibody p/u.

 

really no more dakota? to bad ive allways like that truck :(

 

Brandon

[Matt1971]

My first vehicle that I bought all my own was a 92 Jeep Cherokee sport, I wanted an MJ but they didn't have any and said they werent' getting anymore. I was upset with that, but I did love driving my XJ 4x4. When I found my current MJ I just couldn't pass it up, I still always wnated one. It ws the best looking compact truck IMHO ever made. Now just need to get it converted to 4x4 :brows:

[AMCJeepMJ]

My understanding is the XJ not keep up with federal safety mandates is what led to its discontinuation. Cheaper for Chrysler to whip up a new body than to make the modifications on the old one so Uncle Sam can be happy. And yes, compared to most SUVs on the market it was rather boxy, square, and outdated in apperance.

 

I'd still drive one despite its safety 'shortcomings' compared to modern light trucks and cars.

 

An XJ 4by is on my short list of vehicles for when my girls are old enough to drive (1 year away for one of them), along with another square, the Volvo 240 wagon (had 3 of them and they're grrrrrrrrrrrreat!). A Miata also makes the list.

[mvusse]

Same here. 96 rust free 2wd XJ will become my daughter's (now 14). But a 16 year old driver behind the wheel of a VERY responsive throttle (reflashed PCM) rear wheel drive SUV in snow is an accident waiting to happen. Plan is to have completed a 4wd conversion with the full time (242) transfer case by then.

[AMC-MJ]

2012 Jeep truck:

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/09/so ... -2012.html

 

A version of a Jeep pickup shown to Chrysler dealers during a recent dealers meeting in Orlando, Fla., has been greenlit for production, according to PickupTrucks.com sources

 

Industry sources have told us that production of the Jeep pickup is expected to start in the third quarter of 2011, with the pickup badged as a 2012 model. It’s said to be based on the four-door Jeep Wrangler JK Unlimited platform but with a two-door regular cab configuration with extra space behind the front seats for storage.

 

Dated 9/16/10 there was also another place that was dated 10/2?/10 but i couldn't find it . . . My guess is it'll be the JT concept :dunno: :hmm:

 

 

Mike

[86bamamj]

2012 Jeep truck:

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/09/so ... -2012.html

 

 

I like it. With the spare on the side, it pays hommage to that late 50 Willys truck look.

[Comanche County]

IIRC, MJs never had a stand alone production facility. MJ production required a halt/delay in XJ production, the actual money maker of the two.

 

I believe the XJ was killed solely by the new head of the company that came on in 2000ish who wanted to update the image....the XJ had turned into the next generation FSJ Waggy...dated compared to the rest of the industry SUVs of the time.

[Sir Sam]

IIRC, MJs never had a stand alone production facility. MJ production required a halt/delay in XJ production, the actual money maker of the two.

 

I believe the XJ was killed solely by the new head of the company that came on in 2000ish who wanted to update the image....the XJ had turned into the next generation FSJ Waggy...dated compared to the rest of the industry SUVs of the time.

 

New crash standards came into effect for 2002, this is probably the only real reason that the XJ ended production when it did. The 5 year run of updated XJ's would have been at an end anyway, it needed updating to be kept fresh in the lineup. If you haven't noticed these days vehicles are lucky to make a 5 year production run. The industry is changing, the lead time to new product development has been cut dramatically by the use of CAD tools. With all manufacturers ramping up product R&D the competition has gotten stronger and stronger. Much like evolution but on a high speed timescale each generation brings better and better design, improved reliability, safety, economy etc. For manufactures that fail to update products and replace products quickly they risk becoming extinct.

 

If you need any evidence of this just look at new vehicle generation, nearly every single one gets a "facelift" version about halfway through production, this way they can squeeze a little more life out of that generation of vehicle. the KJ got it in 05, the WK got it in 08, the JK is getting it for '11, ford's new mustang already has a body facelift.

[aabmike]

I think they should have updated the XJ to the 2500 version to keep up with the times!!

 

[btm24]

I think they should have updated the XJ to the 2500 version to keep up with the times!!

 

 

same with the mj :roll:

 

Brandon

[Incommando]

The XJ's replacement, the KJ (which is still the Cherokee everywhere but N America, IIRC) is a much safer vehicle that weighs nealry 1,000#'s more than the usually poorly crash rated XJ. The solid build of the KJ is a big improvement, as was handling, braking, & steering response. Considering that Jeep's numbers show that about 8% of original Cherokee owners ever went offroad shows that, market wise, these were great moves.

 

I love my MJ, and like XJ's, but there is no comparison to the KJ for road manners.

[jpnjim]

The Liberty may, or may not be a fine vehicle,

but it's introduction at the demise of the XJ set it up as an XJ replacement in the minds of many.

 

As an XJ replacement, in my opinion,

it failed.

[Incommando]

How did it fail?

 

Although the longevity is still being proven, the 3.7L is a more powerful engine HP-wise with the same peak TQ at about the same RPM as the 4.0 & th e 3.7 is much "revier."

 

My KJ came factory with a 241 t-case: what XJ ever came that way?

 

I get 23 mpg highway: stock powertrain XJ's match it?

 

if you got an early 2wd 4cyl KJ, you may have had a D35. But about 98% of KJ's got a 29-spline 8.25 rear. Can't say that for XJ's.

 

KJ's NEVER came with whitewall tires.... :rotf:

 

The turning radius, stopping power, and handling are head and shoulders above the XJ. Did I mention the turning radius? And the handling? off road the KJ can go around things that will have the XJ backing up and trying again.

 

the KJ chassis is much more rigid than the floppy and rust prone XJ.

 

Stock vs stock, the KJ is as capable as any XJ and is better equipped. You can actually get in and out of the rear and be comfortable while in there.

 

The KJ is harder & more expensive to mod, but that usually only occurs with the 2nd or third owner.

 

The KJ WAS the replacement for the XJ. A long long overdue replacement. Again, it is the Cheorkee in Europe, S America, Asia, and Australia. For $150 I can change all of my Liberty badges to factory Cherokee badges.

 

I loved that so many jeep people embraced the Patriot as an XJ replacement when it first appeared...and it is an econobox dodge.

 

As far as its mission for the company...the KJ rocked. Just like the Xj rocked in its mission for the company in 1983. Thankfully no vehicle will be band-aided and expected to last for 20 years anymore.