Sponsored

Future midsize Ram pickup bed length

Status
Not open for further replies.

Doyles

Member
Joined
May 4, 2016
Threads
1
Messages
18
Reaction score
3
Location
Ronkonkoma
Vehicle(s)
2010 JK Wrangler
Don't know how many here know but FCA has been developing a new midsize Ram pickup. It was spotted testing last year and looks significantly smaller than the 1500.

Maybe the bed length of this thing gives us a clue how long the JT Wrangler pickup bed might be?


6a00d83451b3c669e201bb08e5a8c3970d.jpg


6a00d83451b3c669e201b8d1cc1bb8970c.jpg


6a00d83451b3c669e201b8d1cc1bd4970c.jpg


6a00d83451b3c669e201b7c841d85a970b.jpg


6a00d83451b3c669e201b8d1cc1bc6970c.jpg
Sponsored

 

The Great Grape Ape

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
2,840
Reaction score
4,122
Location
Canadian Rockies
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU AspenX 5spd , 2015 JK Sport 6spd

JTman

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 8, 2016
Threads
8
Messages
84
Reaction score
21
Location
Denver
Vehicle(s)
Wrangler JT to come

The Great Grape Ape

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
2,840
Reaction score
4,122
Location
Canadian Rockies
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU AspenX 5spd , 2015 JK Sport 6spd
Oh, I don't think the two are related. I think there will be the small Ram 'ute' and then the JT going after completely different markets. In fact I think they are overlapping the mid-size truck market at the fringes for segments not already served by the Ranger, Tacoma, Canyon, etc. but where there is significant pent-up demand.

The Toro / 500 will go after the small inexpensive market cheaper than a Ram 1500 but not your traditional midsize/small pickup, more like the old Ford SportTrac and a bit of the Subaru Baja market. It's more soft-road not off-road, and the loads it'll be carrying are a few bags of loam, antique furniture, etc. Not for the tradesman onsite, but for the architect or the interior decorator.

The JT will definitely be more robust and cost more than a basic Ram 1500, and go after people who want a cheaper & smaller version of a Power Wagon (giving up size and some capability), but something that can still go off-road, carry cottage workloads and take the top down, for an adventure hauler.
The JT would definitely require a bed more i n line with a Brute or at least an old school smaller Nissan Frontier, etc.
 

Vegas_Sirk

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Threads
21
Messages
805
Reaction score
456
Location
Boise, ID
Vehicle(s)
2013 JKU
Vehicle Showcase
1
Kill it with FIRE! I think that thing is terrible and hope nothing from it is shared with the JT.

Like Great Grape Ape said I think its for a different market. More competing with the Honda Ridgeline ..... those looking for truck utility but crossover feel.
 

Sponsored

The Great Grape Ape

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
2,840
Reaction score
4,122
Location
Canadian Rockies
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU AspenX 5spd , 2015 JK Sport 6spd
Kill it with FIRE! I think that thing is terrible and hope nothing from it is shared with the JT.
Well, I wouldn't mind the barn door / split rear tialgate of the Toro, but unless they put the spare alonside the truck box then they likely couldn't support a full-size tire on a half-door tailgate.

I would love to see a Ridgeline style multi-mode tailgate with swing-out & drop-down ability, but again location of spare tyre assembly likely hampers that idea/option.

Otherwise I agree, not much inspiring from that Toro I'd wanna see on the JT, but I'm fine with Ram selling them to the softer market to improve their bottom line overall, just never the twain shall meet.
 

Vegas_Sirk

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Threads
21
Messages
805
Reaction score
456
Location
Boise, ID
Vehicle(s)
2013 JKU
Vehicle Showcase
1
Well, I wouldn't mind the barn door / split rear tialgate of the Toro, but unless they put the spare alonside the truck box then they likely couldn't support a full-size tire on a half-door tailgate.

I would love to see a Ridgeline style multi-mode tailgate with swing-out & drop-down ability, but again location of spare tyre assembly likely hampers that idea/option.

Otherwise I agree, not much inspiring from that Toro I'd wanna see on the JT, but I'm fine with Ram selling them to the softer market to improve their bottom line overall, just never the twain shall meet.
I hope the spare goes where it normally is on other trucks ..... under the bed .... I think a spare on the tailgate would be a PIA to deal with when loading loads and would also be in the way hooking up a trailer. The side bed mount just looks ugly IMO. Under the bed its out of the way, and hardcore rock crawler guys can add a bed mount like desert racers do:

2015-ford-f-150-baja-xt-bed-cage.jpg


DSC03306-4-1.jpg


prtiregate2.jpg
 

The Great Grape Ape

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
2,840
Reaction score
4,122
Location
Canadian Rockies
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU AspenX 5spd , 2015 JK Sport 6spd
I hope the spare goes where it normally is on other trucks ..... under the bed ....
Yeah that's not really practical even for non-rock crawlers, but from the perspective of a Jeep it's not about doing what others do, and with the side of the tyres and the minimal space of the bed, I don't see it fitting well near the solid axle and requires relocation of the exhaust.

Most pickups are significantly wider, offering more central space to work with.
Also the JT wheels will be further back than most trucks further reducing the space. Even on concepts like the CrewChief and such all had wheels well back to maintain departure angles.

Now the early shot of a next gen test mule showed a bed that extended well beyond the rear wheels, but as it was being afixed with ratchet straps it's hard to tell if the final JT will have a similar wheel/bed alignment.

As for hooking up to trailers, you will have a rear camera on all vehicles which will be a better & closer look at the hitch than eyeballing it from the cab.
 

Vegas_Sirk

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Threads
21
Messages
805
Reaction score
456
Location
Boise, ID
Vehicle(s)
2013 JKU
Vehicle Showcase
1
Yeah that's not really practical even for non-rock crawlers, but from the perspective of a Jeep it's not about doing what others do, and with the side of the tyres and the minimal space of the bed, I don't see it fitting well near the solid axle and requires relocation of the exhaust.

Most pickups are significantly wider, offering more central space to work with.
Also the JT wheels will be further back than most trucks further reducing the space. Even on concepts like the CrewChief and such all had wheels well back to maintain departure angles.

Now the early shot of a next gen test mule showed a bed that extended well beyond the rear wheels, but as it was being afixed with ratchet straps it's hard to tell if the final JT will have a similar wheel/bed alignment.

As for hooking up to trailers, you will have a rear camera on all vehicles which will be a better & closer look at the hitch than eyeballing it from the cab.
I disagree. I have owned F150s, Chevy S10s, Ford Rangers, and a Ford F250 all have been mounted under the bed without issues. Yea its a little more work to change over to the spare but its by no means hard or problematic.

Anyone really worried about angles should look at the JL instead of the JT as with the bed its automatically going to be longer and have a MUCH worst break over angle. That why I think JT while capable will never be as capable as the JL. The JT will be geared more towards people that need truck utility offroad .... think those with dirt bikes, UTVs, snowmobiles, Overlanders, Campers, etc. It's a lifestyle truck like most other midsize pickups.

You also missed my point about the trailer hook up. Yea a backup camera can help you back up to the trailer tongue, but its the mounting of the trailer on the ball that becomes the issue. Most trailers have a hand crank that you have to spin, which would hit the spare. I have ran into issues with this on a F250 with the tailgate down as well as some aftermarket bumpers on friends trucks.

With the spare mounted on the tailgate you can't lay the gate down for longer items as the tailgate with a spare on it would have to be like the current JK gate the swings to the side. Having a side open tailgate take away a lot of the utility, there are ways around it for example like this:

CA9A3AE1-C811-4D2F-8728-494A4F7B21F8.jpg


As thats my JK with 8ft 2x4s in it. It got the job done but was a pain in the ass, where if I could lay the gate down I could have fit them inside a bed better.

Other issues with the tailgate laying down with a spare mounted it would 1) have a huge cut out in the bumper for the spare to lay in when the gate is down and 2) the weight of the spare would make the tailgate difficult to close for a lot of people. My wife has a hard time closing the rear door on my JK now with my 35" tire, let alone if she had to lift it up to close it.
 

The Great Grape Ape

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
2,840
Reaction score
4,122
Location
Canadian Rockies
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU AspenX 5spd , 2015 JK Sport 6spd
I disagree. I have owned F150s, Chevy S10s, Ford Rangers, and a Ford F250 all have been mounted under the bed without issues. Yea its a little more work to change over to the spare but its by no means hard or problematic.
All are wider than a wrangler and no longer have live axles and Wrangler like articulation.
And it means pre-set tyre size. Just introduces more limitations.

Anyone really worried about angles should look at the JL instead of the JT as with the bed its automatically going to be longer and have a MUCH worst break over angle. That why I think JT while capable will never be as capable as the JL. The JT will be geared more towards people that need truck utility offroad .... think those with dirt bikes, UTVs, snowmobiles, Overlanders, Campers, etc. It's a lifestyle truck like most other midsize pickups.
The JT doesn't need to be the JL, but it needs to be more than a Ranger or Colorado, because it will be WAY more expensive. Making it "like most other midsize pickups" misses the point of it's existence and puts it at a competitive disadvantage. Talk about putting the Jeep name on the wrong product and losing any added value that might have been. Want another 'also ran' in the midsize market to carry 4x8s on the tarmac, put the Ram badging on the Toro and be done with it.

You also missed my point about the trailer hook up. Yea a backup camera can help you back up to the trailer tongue, but its the mounting of the trailer on the ball that becomes the issue. Most trailers have a hand crank that you have to spin, which would hit the spare. I have ran into issues with this on a F250 with the tailgate down as well as some aftermarket bumpers on friends trucks.
Don't have any issues with the current JKU setup and hooking to our Seadoo and Skidoo trailers, must be a regional thing or user error.

If it's as much of a Tarmac truck as you envision it, then save weight and space and forget the spare all together and sell them with a can of tyre goop and a tiny compressor. Such a truck is not about to need a real spare going from Home to Home Depot and back for some patio furniture, and there's always AAA to help the stranded urban trekker. The people who want that vehicle don't want a JT, they want a Toro with a Jeep badge on it so that they can pretend it's Trail Rated, just like a Renegade. They need a Ram, not a Jeep.

From the recent spy photos it looks to maintain the overhang, and may hav space if arranged like the AEV, but that does put limits traditional truck limits on the JT where people were expecting it to be more Wrangler like.
 

Sponsored

Vegas_Sirk

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Threads
21
Messages
805
Reaction score
456
Location
Boise, ID
Vehicle(s)
2013 JKU
Vehicle Showcase
1
All are wider than a wrangler and no longer have live axles and Wrangler like articulation.
And it means pre-set tyre size. Just introduces more limitations.
All the trucks I listed have solid rear axels with leaf springs ... so that would qualify as live axel to me. On the Ram uses coil springs which the JT will probably have as well.

The JT doesn't need to be the JL, but it needs to be more than a Ranger or Colorado, because it will be WAY more expensive. Making it "like most other midsize pickups" misses the point of it's existence and puts it at a competitive disadvantage. Talk about putting the Jeep name on the wrong product and losing any added value that might have been. Want another 'also ran' in the midsize market to carry 4x8s on the tarmac, put the Ram badging on the Toro and be done with it.
It will be from day one just by have a solid front axel, that alone is a huge difference. I don't agree it will be more expensive I just don't think they will offer as many low end entry models but I would bet your going to have comparable mid level options and the Rubicon JT will be comparable in price to a TRD Pro Tacoma.

If it's as much of a Tarmac truck as you envision it, then save weight and space and forget the spare all together and sell them with a can of tyre goop and a tiny compressor. Such a truck is not about to need a real spare going from Home to Home Depot and back for some patio furniture, and there's always AAA to help the stranded urban trekker. The people who want that vehicle don't want a JT, they want a Toro with a Jeep badge on it so that they can pretend it's Trail Rated, just like a Renegade. They need a Ram, not a Jeep.

From the recent spy photos it looks to maintain the overhang, and may hav space if arranged like the AEV, but that does put limits traditional truck limits on the JT where people were expecting it to be more Wrangler like.
Most people that own trucks use them on the Tarmac 90% of the time. I'm not saying the JT is going to be a Tarmac based truck as it won't it will still have solid axels, still have 4wd, still have off-road centric transfer case, removable top and doors, etc. Its going to be nothing like the current offerings in the manner, but it will still need to provide the utility of a truck.
 

The Great Grape Ape

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
2,840
Reaction score
4,122
Location
Canadian Rockies
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU AspenX 5spd , 2015 JK Sport 6spd
It will be from day one just by have a solid front axel, that alone is a huge difference. I don't agree it will be more expensive I just don't think they will offer as many low end entry models but I would bet your going to have comparable mid level options and the Rubicon JT will be comparable in price to a TRD Pro Tacoma.
Canyon/Colorado is already about $3,500 cheaper than a base JK , and $7,000 cheaper than a JKU, the Nissan Frontier cheaper still, the Tacoma starting MSRP is $500 cheaper than the JK.
Now are you saying this JT is going to be cheaper than a JK Sport B let alone a JKU? Entry level for the JT will lilely be $30K putting at the entry level of full-size trucks. So if it doesn't have significantly more to offer other than being just 'another mid-size truck' why bother? Heck the TRD starts at $30K. Now comparing a Rubicon sans bed to a Tacoma TRD Pro gets you the same price range, but that's going on the assumption that the bed doesn't cost more than the additional roof material the bed is replacing.

There is no way that the JT costs less than a JL, and it's unlikely the JL costs less than a JK (though the JK initially did cost less than the TJ).
The JT will be an expensive truck, and if it is 'just another mid-size truck' it will get destroyed in the market that will have other competitors like the Ranger to deal with. Again the Toro is a better option for that fight.

It better have more than just the checklist of items and no ability to use them. For all the compromises it has to deal with on a Wrangler platform that affect towing and and payload, it will need to provide actual off-roading and capabilities worthy of the Jeep emblem, because otherwise it will hurt the brand in the same way people think the Renegade, Compass and Patriot do.

Also just making it a convertible mid-size pickup on it's own doesn't really ring up the sales, as Dodge already knows quite well.
(PS, those sales figures were 3,000 in '89, another 1,000 in '90, and then finally less than a dozen in 1991. I think they're expecting to sell that many a month, not annually, so it better be more than just another truck that can go topless/doorless.)

http://www.motorweek.org/features/auto_world/drivers-choice-on-2nd-thought

Sponsored

 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
 



Top