If Chrysler dies what would happen to the Jeep brand?

[fordktpjoe]

I wish the jeep line could go back to its respective owners (Bantam or Willy's) But those companies died out a long time ago. I don't think that Ford however will be caught dead buying out jeep.

Bantam didn't actually produce any Jeeps for the war effort. They DID supply 1,500 "concept" vehicles that the U.S. Army ordered for testing from them, along with 1,500 from Willys, and another 1,500 from Ford.

Willys won the contract, and made 359,849 units for the war effort, and Ford made another 227,000. All were to willys drawings.

Bantam wound up making Jeep trailers, and most of their concept vehicles were shipped to Russia on Lend-Lease.

As an aside, Ford had the opportunity to acquire the Jeep brand when it came up for sale back in the mid '80s, but declined because they thought it would cut into their Bronco sales.

If they're smart (which apparently they're NOT) they'll snap it up as soon as it's offered up, IF it's offered up.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

If they're smart (which apparently they're NOT) they'll snap it up as soon as it's offered up, IF it's offered up.

It seems to be a cursed brand, whoever gets it dies.

On a fun side note it was Ford that came up with the trademark Jeep grille that Chrysler plasters everywhere they get a chance... Ford felt that the original welded flat iron slat grille was overly complicated. Ford's grille had 9 slots rather than the current 7 though.

Ford sued Willy's to get the Jeep name after WWII but lost.

 

[Jason]

Actually, Jeep is an icon like it or not. All these companies buy Jeep to try and give themselves some market share, mismanage themselves into oblivion, yet Jeep lives on.

 

[Jason]

http://www.automotivechronicles.com/articles/2006/apr/03/index.php

 

[Loud Ranger]

as long as i can still get parts for my 94 Grand cherokee im happy. ive never had to buy any parts from the dealer so i should be okay.

 

[4x4fun]

my 2 c, jeeps are a novelty. you get bad gas mileage, little cargo room, and there $$$$. only enthusiast really set out to get a jeep, hence all the 4 door and long wheel bases ect. that have just came out. if you going to "eat" mpg. it better be able to do something; if you cant fit anything in it, it better have 30mpg. WHY would people spend 25-30g's for some thing that rides like a truck sucks gas and is useful as a Honda. Any company that gets jeep better do something good with it. they had the jeep truck concept. id buy that!

 

[OilPatch197]

as long as i can still get parts for my 94 Grand cherokee im happy. ive never had to buy any parts from the dealer so i should be okay.

The aftermarket market is HUGE for the Jeep, have no fear. The Jeep is like the VW beetle, huge aftermarket, even if it did "get the axe" there will be aftermarket parts for a long time(and maybe even "kit" jeeps!)

Jeep is an icon like it or not.

and so WAS Pontiac!!!

 

[Jason]

The aftermarket market is HUGE for the Jeep, have no fear. The Jeep is like the VW beetle, huge aftermarket, even if it did "get the axe" there will be aftermarket parts for a long time(and maybe even "kit" jeeps!)


and so WAS Pontiac!!!

IS and WAS are different words. Pontiac lost icon status in the late 70's. Jeep still is to this day.

 

[Mechanickid]

Umb you can buy kit jeeps.

 

[JohnnyO]

I read a while ago that the govt might make GM take Jeep. Don't know if that's still a deal or not. When Daimler-Benz bought Chrysler a big reason they did it was to get Jeep. Except for Jeep and the minivans, everything else Chrysler built was crap that no one wanted and still doesn't.

 

[Evan]

Jeeps will always be made, due to the power and value of the Jeep name. It's just a question of who will be making them.


[Begin Rant]
I have no problem with Jeeps, but you have to spend thousands of dollars on parts to get a 1990s Cherokee up to par with a stock 1990s Explorer:

SYE kit
Manual hub conversion
8.8 rear swap
297 front shaft swap
Low-torque camshaft

In the end, why not just get an Explorer and get a real frame as well?
[End Rant]

To be fair, a new Explorer is a POS compared to a new Jeep.

 

[Jason]

Jeeps will always be made, due to the power and value of the Jeep name. It's just a question of who will be making them.


[Begin Rant]
I have no problem with Jeeps, but you have to spend thousands of dollars on parts to get a 1990s Cherokee up to par with a stock 1990s Explorer:

SYE kit
Manual hub conversion
8.8 rear swap
297 front shaft swap
Low-torque camshaft

In the end, why not just get an Explorer and get a real frame as well?
[End Rant]

To be fair, a new Explorer is a POS compared to a new Jeep.

I have never seen a Cherokee with switchable hubs. All the ones I owned were live axle, which is superior (strength wise) to any hub you can buy. Some were available with the Dana 44 rear, better than an 8.8 and even the Chrysler 8.25 has proven to be stout. Torque was never a problem considering the 4.0 made nearly 80% of it's peak torque (235 ft lbs on later models) right at idle.

I hate to say it here, but the explorer has never had anything on the Cherokee except passenger space and an available v-8.

I had a Cherokee with a rough country 6 in lift, and 33's that NEVER had a bit of flex out of the unibody. Not even on the rocks. Unibody may traditionally suck, but the Cherokee was plenty sturdy. It only became an issue when you got in an accident as it drove up repair costs.

I don't know about you, but I don't worry about accidents when buying a vehicle.

 

[Evan]

I have never seen a Cherokee with switchable hubs. All the ones I owned were live axle, which is superior (strength wise) to any hub you can buy. Some were available with the Dana 44 rear, better than an 8.8 and even the Chrysler 8.25 has proven to be stout. Torque was never a problem considering the 4.0 made nearly 80% of it's peak torque (235 ft lbs on later models) right at idle.

I hate to say it here, but the explorer has never had anything on the Cherokee except passenger space and an available v-8.

I had a Cherokee with a rough country 6 in lift, and 33's that NEVER had a bit of flex out of the unibody. Not even on the rocks. Unibody may traditionally suck, but the Cherokee was plenty sturdy. It only became an issue when you got in an accident as it drove up repair costs.

I don't know about you, but I don't worry about accidents when buying a vehicle.

Ok, I have a lot of teaching to do:

Both the Dana 44 and 8.25 are weaker than the 31-spline 8.8 found in Explorers. As for locking hubs, they are a HUGE asset. They allow for a spooled front, 2-wheel low range, and driveability if you toast a front driveline component. I have never broken a hub. I run 35s with locked diffs.

A 90s OHV Explorer engine has better low-end torque than a Cherokee of the same year. The Cherokee has a slightly higher peak torque. Most offroad applications require low-end torque.

the explorer has never had anything on the Cherokee except passenger space and an available v-8.

Besides stronger axles front and rear, an early 90s Explorer has a fixed output on the t-case. A Cherokee does not. Last run I was on a Cherokee guy was disabled right away due to the inferior slip-yoke rear output.

FYI: A body-on-frame setup allows you to do a body lift to keep the CG low while running larger tires. It allows you to easily fit a doubler case under the truck as well. I have seen MANY Jeeps toast their unibody on some of the harder trails I've ran. I frequently see Jeep guys get their rear bumper ripped right off when being winched out...the bolts tear right through the sheet metal "frame".

And most Cherokees had the Dana 35 rear, which is an absolute joke compared to the 8.8. I just don't see how you can say the gen 1 Explorers had NOTHING on the Cherokees as far as offroading hardware goes. Keep in mind, ALL gen 1 Explorers were high pinion front and used 297 joints, not the little 260 joints found in all the Jeep low-pinion axles at that time. Those things look more like u-joints for a radio controlled car.

 

[Jason]

Ok, I have a lot of teaching to do:

Both the Dana 44 and 8.25 are weaker than the 31-spline 8.8 found in Explorers. As for locking hubs, they are a HUGE asset. They allow for a spooled front, 2-wheel low range, and driveability if you toast a front driveline component. I have never broken a hub. I run 35s with locked diffs.

So you are saying they are an asset if you want to spend a bunch of cash on mods? Gotcha.

Stock for stock, the Explorer will lose. Strength in the axles is nice, but the light weight vehicle doesn't require it.

 

[Evan]

So you are saying they are an asset if you want to spend a bunch of cash on mods? Gotcha.

The benefits from 2-wheel low range, and ability to keep going if a front driveline component is toasted require no modification or extra cash spent.

Stock for stock, the Explorer will lose. Strength in the axles is nice, but the light weight vehicle doesn't require it.

I would say they're about the same, stock for stock. Aside from lacking hubs (as a cost saving measure) a stock Cherokee will perform as well as a stock Explorer, if you don't romp on it too hard. But once you start locking axles, lifting, and throwing bigger tires on, the Explorer easily wins, for the reasons I listed above.

EDIT: Keep in mind I'm talking about the early 90s models.