No Production Gladiator in Our Future

[Variance]

No Production Gladiator in Our Future

Why? Because Chrysler Group CEO Tom LaSorda said so. His decision hinged on a desire to see a high-profit margin gained from the likely niche product.

But hey, at least we got the Compass, right?

Read "Thumbs Down on Jeep Gladiator Production" @ Ward's Auto

[Flybrian]

"ARE YOU NOT BEING BUILT?!?!"

[ocnblu]

I won't pretend to understand the reasoning in play here. The Gladiator is an absolute knockout concept. Why couldn't it have been built on a stretched Wrangler frame? Lamebrained decision not to build this vehicle.

[Flybrian]

Well, LaSorda claims he's interested in high margins off of low investments. The reasoning behind striking this yet building the Patriot and Compass is questionable.

[Variance]

Well, LaSorda claims he's interested in high margins off of low investments. The reasoning behind striking this yet building the Patriot and Compass is questionable.

183576[/snapback]

Well, compact vehicles aren't what one would consider a low-production/narrow-market vehicle.

[ocnblu]

Especially that pissy little Compass. What a waste of Jeep DNA. Must have been strained through the sheets.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

Let's look at the logic behind this earwig-infested deadhead named Tom LaSorda.

Compass: an emasculated front-drive Jeep with a golpher-inspired front faceia and AMC Gremlin-derived glasshouse =

Gladiator: a masculine, hairy-chested, Wrangler-based pickup that could expand Wrangler profits and enter Jeep into a market it shouldn't have abandoned in the first place =

Yeah. As I suspected, LaSorda's on black-tar herion.

Edited August 22, 2006 by YellowJacket894

[Flybrian]

Well, compact vehicles aren't what one would consider a low-production/narrow-market vehicle.

183579[/snapback]

I'd argue the Compass will end up low-selling because of its degaussing looks (men think its feminine, women think its crap), its illogical equipment configurations, highish price, odd-driving CVT, and lack of power. The Patriot (remember, its FWD, too) could've been done by making the NG Liberty lighter with a good 4cyl along with a closed-body Wrangler.

*Actually, the Patriot is okay. Its the Compass that's such a waste.

[Variance]

I'd argue the Compass will end up low-selling because of its degaussing looks (men think its feminine, women think its crap), its illogical equipment configurations, highish price, odd-driving CVT, and lack of power. The Patriot (remember, its FWD, too) could've been done by making the NG Liberty lighter with a good 4cyl along with a closed-body Wrangler.

*Actually, the Patriot is okay. Its the Compass that's such a waste.

183593[/snapback]

No argument here. I'm just saying those two are supposed to appeal to a wider demographic. Wider demographic -> more potential sales -> greater profit opportunity.

Besides, how many people are there clamoring for a Jeep pickup?

[ocnblu]

Probably anyone who saw the concept. Sometimes you don't know you're asking the question until the answer muscles into view.

[Variance]

Probably anyone who saw the concept.  Sometimes you don't know you're asking the question until the answer muscles into view.

183630[/snapback]

But wasn't the SSR the same way (terrific response to concept that would likely be niche product if produced)? We know what happened with that (although a Gladiator certainly be cheaper).

[Northstar]

So Jeep decides to build the ugly Compass but not the pretty-damn-cool Gladiator?

[thegriffon]

I won't pretend to understand the reasoning in play here.  The Gladiator is an absolute knockout concept.  Why couldn't it have been built on a stretched Wrangler frame?  Lamebrained decision not to build this vehicle.

183575[/snapback]

I think you're talking at cross-purposes here. The Gladiator was much bigger and the production version would have been a re-bodied Dakota, requiring a much higher investment than a Wrangler pickup, whose only direct competitor would have been the Land Rover Defender. BTW contrary to what the Wards artice says, the top midsize pickup is not the Ranger, but the Tacoma, followed by the Colorado or Ranger (depending on the month). Personally I think that if Chrysler built both a Wrangler pickup and a Dodge M80 on the same platform, they could sell millions of them worldwide (ok, not all in one year). Aside from the Defender 110 the only other pickups this size at present are fwd B-segment car-based pickups such as the Chevy Montana, Fiat Strada and Ford Courier. Edited August 23, 2006 by thegriffon

[RJB]

Yup, DC is slowly ruining Jeep day by day, year by year. Z Germans want to make it a brand that will sell 500,000 units a year and they don't care about heritage or a loyal following. It started with the Liberty and is continuing with the Compass and the Patriot. The bottom line anymore is profit, and that won't stop. I think you will see Jeep get more and more watered down in the near future. I better get a Wrangler soon, before it's gone forever.

[enzl]

Gladiator was a great concept, but, given $3 gas and the way the Dakota, Ranger, Colorado/Canyon sales have tanked, it's not surprising they didn't produce it.

Keep in mind that Jeep has added 3 nameplates and 4 models in 18 months....that's a commitment to the brand, regardless of your feelings about the Compatriot soft roaders.

(Just keep in mind that many other iconic brands have expanded their market segment reach...Porsche, MB, Lamborgini, BMW et al. While not all of these forays were successful, I don't see any of these brands really suffering as a result.)