2017 Jeep JL Wrangler Aluminum Body on Frame or Unibody?

LoPo said:

Greg wouldn't it be hard to adapt the IFS/IRS tech from race cars? The mount points for arms on the buggies are close to center line of the frame...where as production cars have wider frames. Which is why Tacomas and other prerunner/ big travel truck IFS applications have those super wide stances and ultra wide fiberglass fenders.

Sent from my SM-N900V using WAYALIFE mobile app

Click to expand...

They must build it first....so that we can take it apart and make it better :rock:

I am not saying to build our jeeps like the tube chassis race cars as that is next to impossible, just build a tube chassis race car. Right now our EVO DTD rigs have 14"s of travel and the tube buggies have double that travel because of, like you state, the narrow frame width around the center section, but we are talking purpose built race car there. So doing a long travel daily driver IFS (not to be confused with long travel race car with 24"-30" of travel) it could end up being the same width as what happens with our jeeps now; currently we take a narrow, factory track width jeep and throw Dynatrac full length, wide ass axles under them, with shallower backspaced wheels, making the jeep having a super wide stance. But luckily for us, and as Eddie stated earlier when speaking for Mel, as friends do (see what I did there), our jeeps have huge trapezoidal wheel wells and trim-able fenders that allow huge tires to have massive up travel all possible due to that extra inches added to the track width. So even now our jeeps are might be ready to go as is with the huge factory wheel wells (maybe??).

Now back to the frames widths- I am not sure that jeep will narrow the frames around the diff center section due to safety, car mfg's keep frames straight from front to rear and with no hotrod style "channeling". Have you ever realized that passengers either sit inside the frame rails, or at least on top of the frame rails? Its for safety and to not be a part of a crumple zone. The frames within the cabin areas are pretty freaking straight and rigid.

So now if we are only talking street legal daily drivers like our ORE built EVO rigs, compared with the "Tacomas and other prerunner/ big travel truck IFS applications have those super wide stances and ultra wide fiberglass fenders"....well actually they have the same track width, or close to, as our jeeps running full width axles and 3.5" back spaced wheels.

If a Toyota FJ or H2 Hummer can convert to solid (or beam, as Dynatrac classifies them) axles, then it can certainly be done the other way. Just let the big three car mfg's do the majority of the work and then the aftermarket will fabricator shops will finish the job for us.

Sharkey said:

I know this is an apple to hamburger comparison, but I used to run a Polaris Outlaw 550 full IS race quad. I could blast through the rocks all day long and not feel beat up at all. On my older solid rear axle quad, the same trails left me feeling like I took a few hundred shots to the kidneys.

I know, it's not even the same thing as a Jeep. My point is just that I'm excited about the possibilities. Comfort and performance don't have to be mutually exclusive. It may come at a cost, but that's to be expected.

Click to expand...

I am excited too. In fact the guy who won last years KOH unlimited class race, Loren Healey, used his old race car with solid axles because his new car was not ready. Well his new car is IFS, so that should tell you something about the continued rise of IFS in the off road world of racing in multiple environments like Ultra 4 racing (not just strict rock crawling and rock bouncers). If he was willing to continue forward with an IFS car after he just won the Super Bowl of Ultra 4 in a solid axle car, that is a believer in newer, possibly better technology.....

Now that's a very exciting perspective about the incoming rig. Thanks for the info Greg.

I'm all for updating the Wrangler platform. Lighter weight aluminum and IFS is all good with me, as I agree with the sentiment that the next platform will be more capable in stock form that all previous models in stock form. Also, the benefits IFS give in daily driving, and in the desert is more than welcome to me. I believe it wont take long for companies to build long travel kits as they have done for most popular prerunner platforms. Not so sure about the Unibody though. And I hope they keep a more vertical grill!

AllAmericanInfidel said:

....... Not so sure about the Unibody though.

Click to expand...

This is the only true concern about the new version being "more capable" than what we currently have. If it is Unibody, and not Body on Frame, prepare for a flexy, twisting, creaking ride that will eventually have every body panel not aligned and doors that won't close :naw:

I'd be really surprised to see the Wrangler on an aluminum frame before we see if the new F-150 is a sales success or not. Between the 100's of millions to re-tool their facilities to the higher cost of aluminum (which will only increase with more manufacturers using it) it's a huge gamble IMO. Watching the sales of the best selling pickup truck in America would be a great guage to watch to see if consumers really buy into the concept of having a lighter vehicle, with a likely smaller engine to move around the lower weight. All they've been hearing for the last 10/20/30+ years is the marketing slogan "Ford Tough". Well how tough is an aluminum frame? Doesn't really matter, but it does matter what the customer thinks it will be.

I may be unfairly comparing a pick-up truck to the Wrangler and they have very different customers with different needs. But I think when you look at the options available to Chrysler/Fiat for methods to increasing fuel efficiency, ditching the heavy solid axles and putting in a currently-in-production diesel seem like more cost effective methods to hit that mark. It will all come down to what is the consumer willing to pay for.

My :twocents:

I don't see aluminum happening this round. Fleet average mpg has to be 54.5 but not until 2025. That is basically the equivalent of two model generations. I think there will be steps toward lower weight but I can't see them doing it all at once since it doesn't have to be done for another ten years. Not to mention the significant cost increase of going from steel to aluminum. Last time I checked it was almost 40% difference in cost.

OverlanderJK said:

I don't see aluminum happening this round. Fleet average mpg has to be 54.5 but not until 2015. That is basically the equivalent of two model generations. I think there will be steps toward lower weight but I can't see them doing it all at once since it doesn't have to be done for another ten years. Not to mention the significant cost increase of going from steel to aluminum. Last time I checked it was almost 40% difference in cost.

Click to expand...

I think you meant 2025. And one of the stories I was reading said $1.50-2 per pound of weight lost (aluminum vs. steel).

JK_Dave said:

I think you meant 2025. And one of the stories I was reading said $1.50-2 per pound of weight lost (aluminum vs. steel).

Click to expand...

Yes my mistake, 2025.

Either way, it's going to be interesting to see it and its capabilities. Looking forward to it.

dwvninety said:

Interesting article. They are going the way of Land Rovers.

Click to expand...

More like they are converging. Land Rover is supposed to be bringing the Defender back to the US to compete with the Wrangler, and it will make for some interesting competition. Ever since the loss of the solid axle Discovery in 2004 (AWD + locking center diff + aftermarket lockers), Land Rover has been making what amounts to luxury Subarus for the US market :icon_crazy: So just as Land Rover's off road star was fading, Jeep came in like gangbusters with the Rubicon and then the JK.

Imagine how cool it would be if both Jeep and Land Rover had the current Defender model-line diversity at some point after 2017? 4-doors with truck beds/cargo cages with tarp covers – the kind of stuff only AEV and a few other custom shops make in the US today. I drool like an idiot just thinking about it. IF (and that's a very big "if") they don't succumb to the suppository-style school of automotive design that's so common today.

I also hope Toyota picks itself up off the mat, wipes up the bloody corpse of the FJ and comes out fighting. Toyota squandered the heritage of the FJ with the Cruiser. They had so much character and charm available to them, and they just failed miserably.

Like WOL said – I choose to believe good times are ahead :beer:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/go/news...frame-could-go-aluminum-in-2017?src=soc_fcbks

Looks like the body on frame will stick around. Also talks of maybe a new plant to stay in Toledo

Sent from my SM-G900V using WAYALIFE mobile app

Thanks for posting up the article. I saw that article yesterday and had been meaning to do the same. To be honest, I don't think anyone really thought a unibody was in the works but I do have a feeling an aluminum body on steel frame is definitely in the works.

Question: If the Wrangler goes aluminum body, does that mean manufacturers (EVO and PSpyder for example) will have to start making products like rocker skins and corners out of aluminum? I ask because I thought it was generally a bad idea to mount steel to aluminum or vice versa because of the potential for galvanic corrosion.

This article from an Ohio news paper makes it seem like it's a done deal

http://www.morningjournalnews.com/page/content.detail/id/554793/

wayoflife said:

Thanks for posting up the article. I saw that article yesterday and had been meaning to do the same. To be honest, I don't think anyone really thought a unibody was in the works but I do have a feeling an aluminum body on steel frame is definitely in the works.

Click to expand...

If the aluminum body is the plan I just hope that they do leave the building process where it's at rather than moving to another site. I'd hate to see that happen.

Sent from my SM-G900V using WAYALIFE mobile app

Sharkey said:

Question: If the Wrangler goes aluminum body, does that mean manufacturers (EVO and PSpyder for example) will have to start making products like rocker skins and corners out of aluminum? I ask because I thought it was generally a bad idea to mount steel to aluminum or vice versa because of the potential for galvanic corrosion.

Click to expand...

Actually, EVO already makes all their armor and even bumpers in an aluminum version now and yes, galvanic corrosion is something to be concerned with.

piginajeep said:

This article from an Ohio news paper makes it seem like it's a done deal
View attachment 106545
http://www.morningjournalnews.com/page/content.detail/id/554793/

Click to expand...

It's really sad but, what can you do. The TAC is just not geared up for an aluminum body Jeep and the Feds are forcing FCA's hand.

Sessoms14X said:

If the aluminum body is the plan I just hope that they do leave the building process where it's at rather than moving to another site. I'd hate to see that happen.

Click to expand...

It sure would be nice if they could but, everything I've heard points to the fact that it would simply cost way too much money to refit the TAC for the job.

wayoflife said:

Actually, EVO already makes all their armor and even bumpers in an aluminum version now and yes, galvanic corrosion is something to be concerned with.

Click to expand...

Well hell, I knew about the aluminum quarter pounder but didn't know about everything else.:wings:

Sharkey said:

Well hell, I knew about the aluminum quarter pounder but didn't know about everything else.:wings:

Click to expand...

how would one combat galvanic corrosion? Isn't the jeep currently outfitted with aluminum door hinges which flake and corrode like a bastard? :thinking:

Sent from my SM-P905V using WAYALIFE mobile app

I believe rubber gaskets should do the trick. Properly applied paint can help, but paint wears off over time.

You have to prevent contact between the metals by having non-conductive materials sandwiched in the middle.