Jeep Recon EV Revealed! Off-Roading All-Electric Version of Wrangler Basically...

[Sgt. Glenn]

this seems to me functionally close to saying Jeep isn’t doing a wrangler anymore.

what I mean is, at the point we’re saying “there won’t be a wrangler for mass consumption anymore, there’ll instead only be a specialty vehicle only a few people have a use case for” I would think we could just go ahead and say “the wrangler as we know it is out”
[/QUOTE]


I understand what you are saying. I found it hard to believe that Jeep can give the Wrangler anything close to 300 miles of range. It can be the best electric offroader but they would need to think like Tesla.

Sponsored

 

[rr6013]

Looks cute.

But... I need real cars. Ironic on a Cybertruck forum, I know, but...

-Crissa

What, per say, signal that Recon fails to meet a “real car” need that Cybertruck fulfills? I’d thought Recon to be a transparent exercise aimed at liberated woman, as in independent, from big tires, lift kit and ’roo bars.

 

[Ogre]

this seems to me functionally close to saying Jeep isn’t doing a wrangler anymore.

The Wrangler is and always has been a terrible vehicle for anything save off-roading. It is incredibly inefficient so a Wrangler EV would need near the battery capacity of the F150 Lightning with very little of the utility the F150 brings to the table.

EVs effectively replace higher operating costs with higher up-front costs. A Wrangler—which has high operating costs—would likely be a lot more expensive as an EV because of how inefficient the design is. I suspect that is a big part of why this vehicle is being put forward first instead of the Wrangler.

Well Jeep has long been an aspirational brand. I suspect they sell far more of these glorified station wagons then they do Wranglers. People will buy them with their aspirational Jeep trappings… then never take them off pavement.


I understand why people love the Wrangler, but the vast majority of them are rarely used for off roading and end up just being wasteful gas hogs. Maybe… they should be rethought.

 

[rr6013]

The Recon is not a Wrangler replacement and Jeep is workong on a BEV Wrangler. I was able to ask Mr. Meunier my questions about a fully electric Wrangler. They are giving it a lot of attention.

As i see it, Jeep is giving the Wrangler owners two options. The Recon will appeal to the Wrangler buyer who wants open air and basic offroad capablity.

The BEV Wrangler will not have 300 miles of range and be more of a trailer rig for harder offroad trails.

2003 Rubicon was the pinnacle Wrangler that did damn near anything and would tackle the unreasonable with extra money and upgrades. JEEP gift to its engineers and lucky Boomers.
GenX family-centric drove JEEP to 4door.
Millennials are buying now. JEEP Recon might look reasonable to them coming from Mazda CX-30 high heel AWD. More capable, 4drs and there’s trail rated.
Demographics change, brands follow.

 

[SwampNut]

And then the 2013 second-gen JK blew that out of the water straight from the box. The 2003 generation was a basic building block that needed a lot to make it great.

 

[cvalue13]

I understand what you are saying. I found it hard to believe that Jeep can give the Wrangler anything close to 300 miles of range. It can be the best electric offroader but they would need to think like Tesla.

And I understand yours in return!

I’m even a great example: my last jeep was a 2016, 2 door, manual, soft-top, with half doors

To me, that configuration is the jeep that makes sense - in the 4 years I owned it, it saw its top and doors maybe 3 months total. I bombed around town here and there like a dune buggy, rain or shine.

What doesn’t make sense to me, personally, is spending $80K for a 4 door, auto, hard top, with full doors that never sees the top/doors come off.

But jeep sells the everloving heck out of them, and you can’t hardly find 2dr manual soft tops

 

[Crissa]

What, per say, signal that Recon fails to meet a “real car” need that Cybertruck fulfills? I’d thought Recon to be a transparent exercise aimed at liberated woman, as in independent, from big tires, lift kit and ’roo bars.

It's a render, not a prototype.

-Crissa

 

[Ogre]

It's a render, not a prototype.

-Crissa

Indeed… last I checked you need an actual drivable physical manifestation to qualify as real.

 

[Rick Shepherd]

I don’t know why you guys are so negative. GM does lots of great renders of EVs. They should team up with the Alpha Wolf guys.

The learned it from Nikola.

 

[Ogre]

The learned it from Nikola.

Nice tie in considering this week is Trevor Milton’s trial.

 

[Cybertruckee]

What ever happened to the legacy of the these great designers?

That iconic WWII jeep?

The Land Rover Defender riveted aluminum body?

Ok, Jeep Rubicon?

Hummer 1 (military)?

Oshkosh Joint Light Tactical Vehicle?

Marketing 101. Women buy vehicles designed for men. And no one buys vehicles designed for women -- not even women. Don't ask me why. It's just a fact.

 

[SwampNut]

What ever happened to that iconic WWII jeep looks?

Or, the Land Rover Defender riveted aluminum body?

Ok, Jeep Rubicon?

They evolved based on modern manufacturing capabilities. They weren't made for a "look" they were made based on being easy/fast/cheap to manufacture with the limited abilities we had then. The Rubicon is not a look, it's an off-road package that has been available for around 15 years.

Most women do not find the new Wrangler particularly attractive and 100% of women in my survey think the Gladiator is the ugliest vehicle on the planet. The CT will beat it at that though, again, in my survey of women.

What's a vehicle designed for women? Possibly the Z4 we traded in for the Tesla 3? Oh, the Miata I guess. Nobody bought those at all. Ultimate "chick car" stereotype.

 

[Ogre]

What ever happened to the legacy of the these great designers?

That iconic WWII jeep?

The Jeep was designed to be easy to ship. Much of the original appeal was just nostalgia. Much of the appeal of the entire Jeep brand is nostalgia (And “Patriotism”). Jeep is a marketing company with one interesting niche vehicle—the Wrangler—which is quite good at off-roading and really bad at pretty much everything else.

Aside from the whole shipping angle, I don’t think that has ever been otherwise.

Marketing 101. Women buy vehicles designed for men. And no one buys vehicles designed for women -- not even women. Don't ask me why. It's just a fact.

Because much of what is “designed for women” are actually things designed by men to conform to their stupid stereotypes of women.

I’m not even sure what a car “Designed for men” would be. Is there a cutout in the seat where your junk hangs down?

Cars should be designed for moving people or things. If you move a lot of big things you need a truck. If you move a bunch of people, a van or SUV. Anything gender based is just stupid marketing gimmicks.

 

[Cybertruckee]

Because much of what is “designed for women” ...

I don't know myself, except I know one when I see one -- so obvious if it's screaming soccer mom.

And designed for men would probably maim or you won't mind dying early and being found dead in it.

 

[cvalue13]

The Jeep was designed to be easy to ship.

while fairly simplified to “easy to ship,” that also encompasses quite a lot of other critical capabilities in far flung wartime scenarios

here is a video of 6 (?) soldiers completely disassembling (into all main constituent parts) then reassembling a Jeep, in less 4 minutes total. (Dramatic for parade purposes, but at only 4 minutes one gets the idea of real world implications.)


They could be shipped in these complement parts, assembled on site in no time, and maintenance / component swaps could be almost Lego-like in simplicity.

Sponsored