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
You don't cripple a new decade long vehicle lineup to support less than a 1/3 of a year of an obsolete line, that you were only making to keep production going while everyone waited for the new vehicle so that there wasn't a months long gap of 'No Wranglers' between them.Who in their right mind would buy a JK that gest such bad MPG when the JL can be bought also.
Also demand for the JL will be multiple times more than available vehicles for the first few months while production slowly ramps up, the whole time there are still JKs on the lot for people who can't wait or don't have hat luxury, so there is little fear of there being 'too many JLs out there' hurting JK sales..
Don't even need pricing info on the JL, simply based on the past multiple years of Wranglers with lottle/no differences, the previous year model will get tons of incentives once there is any question of them sitting on the lot. I got almost $10K off the Aspen-X because it was not a brand new custom order like I usually do (because they stopped spraying Baja months earleir).Maybe the JK's will be priced less, there's not a lot of pricing info. available yet.
Sure it does, especially since the JL's annual production capacity is supposed to be significantly higher than the previous JK's, so you need to generate more demand for the new vehicle over a much longer period of time than the outgoing vehicle which was previously produced using overtime.Again if Jeep is being forced to sell the JK and JL together because of retooling at Toledo, it doesn't make much sense that one model would blow away the other in terms of MPGS
Simply put, you concern yourself with the next success of he next 2 million+ vehicles (or 250K+/year) not worry about the ~40K final vehicles that you make while closing down production, those are essentially gravy.
Also, the smart thing for FCA to do is to make those last few vehicles the ones with the highest margins to allow for the most painless deepest cuts to get them off the lots should they still be there by next spring.
I don't see MPG jumping stratospherically in the JL either (though prtrol JK to diesel JL might be quite significant), but it has less to do with concerns regarding sales of the JK than it has to do with physics and 'Wrangler-esque' requirements that keep it from being a Prius.All I'm saying is from Jeep's past record I don't see the MPG's jumping all that much, but I hope they do nevertheless.
What are your guesses as to the JL's 3 power train options in terms of MPGs?
As I've stated before in this thread and others, the 2 main options (Penta/Eco) will do worse than in the GrandCherokee and likely see about 25/30 MPG +/- , the Hurricane will probably over-promise and under-deliver soemewhere in between the two simply because it will likely need to be on boost to make the HP required for the highway.
The principle barrier to efficiency is not the threat to the JK, but the fact that the JL keeps the same boxy shape with a slight bit more rake, the same solid axles, old drive train design, and hasn't made any significant efforts at weight reduction. All of that means that the only slightly more aerodynamic brick still needs about 90-something percent of the energy to continue to push through the wind at highway speed.
Sponsored