Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hello Guest, we are proud to now have our Wiki online that is completely compiled and written by our members. Feel free to browse our Jeep-CJ Wiki or click on any orange keyword when looking at posts in the forum.
Let me know if this is becomming a national thing or if it's only local.
We have a local Jeep seller that is running an add with a silly WWII type cartoon, I suppose it's supposed to be General Patton. The cartoon guy is selling the toughness of a Jeep, really laying it on thick. Then he says something about buying a new CJ. With the CJ meaning Chrystler Jeep. I've gotta say, first off, "What a great way to draw the connection between a real Jeep (a CJ), and a Wrangler." Then I start to get all pissy about corrupting the name of my CJ. I've made my stand clear, a Wrangler is not a Jeep, more accurately it is NOT a CJ, this attempt to interconnect Civilian Jeep with Chrystler Jeep is upsetting my calm!
Is this a local thing or is this going to be a national trend?
1983 cj7 , six cylinders , 5 speed , 2.5 inch skyjacker suspension lift , 2 inch body , 35 x 12.50 x 15's ,one piece axles , just bought this cj after PO stored for the past 25 yrs ,
Let me know if this is becomming a national thing or if it's only local.
We have a local Jeep seller that is running an add with a silly WWII type cartoon, I suppose it's supposed to be General Patton. The cartoon guy is selling the toughness of a Jeep, really laying it on thick. Then he says something about buying a new CJ. With the CJ meaning Chrystler Jeep. I've gotta say, first off, "What a great way to draw the connection between a real Jeep (a CJ), and a Wrangler." Then I start to get all pissy about corrupting the name of my CJ. I've made my stand clear, a Wrangler is not a Jeep, more accurately it is NOT a CJ, this attempt to interconnect Civilian Jeep with Chrystler Jeep is upsetting my calm!
Is this a local thing or is this going to be a national trend?
Let me know if this is becomming a national thing or if it's only local.
We have a local Jeep seller that is running an add with a silly WWII type cartoon, I suppose it's supposed to be General Patton. The cartoon guy is selling the toughness of a Jeep, really laying it on thick. Then he says something about buying a new CJ. With the CJ meaning Chrystler Jeep. I've gotta say, first off, "What a great way to draw the connection between a real Jeep (a CJ), and a Wrangler." Then I start to get all pissy about corrupting the name of my CJ. I've made my stand clear, a Wrangler is not a Jeep, more accurately it is NOT a CJ, this attempt to interconnect Civilian Jeep with Chrystler Jeep is upsetting my calm!
Is this a local thing or is this going to be a national trend?
I probably will need to go hide under a chair or go into protective custody after saying this but I don't think that the CJ series should be considered the only real jeep. I understand why people say that because it retains the name-sake of the original Civillian jeep but lets be clear. Certain years and redesigns of the CJ model are just as drastically different from the original as some of the later wranglers.
I am sure someone will argue this but the YJ especially is almost practically the same vehicle as a late model CJ7 . Sure there are some quirks and differences but from the factory with no modifications a YJ has almost the same capabilities of a late model CJ straight from the factory with no modifications (Lets be clear i am talking no lifts and all stock specs). Sure the YJ and TJs lack the PTO and the designation of a rugged piece of farm equipment but neither do the later CJs. All have the same general body design/shape and can be used for the same purpose. Heck we all know that a YJ tub can be substituted for a Lat CJ7 tub, and the TJs are close enough to the same dimensions in design that, with some work, you can make some parts such as the engines, the tops, the roll bars work in the CJ.
My point is that that, although marketed better, the first two Wrangler generations are really no more drastically different vehicle than the CJ5 , CJ6 ,CJ7 , CJ8 etc redesigns were a drastically different vehicle from the CJ2a or the Bantam. CJs,Yjs,Tjs are all vehicle that you can mod for offroading, beach cruising, fun driving, in your garage as a tinker toy and are all great vehicle in their own right.
Ok so the JK maybe is a drastic redesign and a much different vehicle with alot of not so utilitarian features that we like to see... However, I would not call them a joke. I am especially going to have to run and hide after saying this, but I like them. I like the look and I like the 4 doors. They are definitely not as buildable in the garage as the older models and the price is simply outrageous but they are actually very capable offroad vehicle (even the 4 door) off the factory floor and with modification are just as good contenders for the hardcore stuff as any previous model. So I don't see the joke, they do everything that we ask our cjs to do.
I guess the joke is that the wranglers in their first 10 years of production sold more models than all the cj models combined and that Jeep cannot keep new wranglers on the show room floor. So that leads to alot of grocery getter, mallcrawling wranglers that arent getting used off road but that is a function of the users not the design or capability. And to be honest, I'm restoring my CJ7 right now to be used as a DD predominently on the street with MINOR offroading to campsites or the beach and that is a loose definition of offroading. So I will most likely be using my CJ7 for alot of the same functions we often harp on the abundance of JK owners for doing.
Im not trying to start a fight or get angry with anyone, but I think if Jeep had continued the CJ nameplate for the YJ and TJ that we wouldn't have such a negative attitude towards them (except c'mon square headlights?) as they are just inevitible redesigns and do not really fall that far away from the CJ body style.
And don't get me started on FSJ's. I think those are just as real jeeps as the CJs
THAT BEING SAID
It is very ridiculous that the commercial you speak of is using CJ to mean Chrysler Jeep. I'd bet that whomever made that cartoon has no idea that CJ is an actual model in Jeep's history. You would be surprised what jeep dealerships do not know about older jeeps. I had a guy that owned a Jeep dealership try to tell me that the engine in a wagoneer he was selling was a chrysler engine and when I asked him if he swapped in that engine he got angry with me and claimed that the AMC 360 wasnt an option in 89 because Chrysler owned jeep then.
I also like the YJ. Vary capable. But the JK being as capable as a CJ????? Comeon man....seriously???? OOOHHHH, I respect the 4.0. The new v6, please. The AMC 258 i6 / 4.2l , 4.0, and any AMC v8 were all torquy badass motors. Ill buy the YJ, but no other. And jeeps got better with age. Id rather a 80 model than a 58 model....Other than that spot on argument.
QUOTE=ThisGuyUKnow;183074]I probably will need to go hide under a chair or go into protective custody after saying this but I don't think that the CJ series should be considered the only real jeep. I understand why people say that because it retains the name-sake of the original Civillian jeep but lets be clear. Certain years and redesigns of the CJ model are just as drastically different from the original as some of the later wranglers.
I am sure someone will argue this but the YJ especially is almost practically the same vehicle as a late model CJ7 . Sure there are some quirks and differences but from the factory with no modifications a YJ has almost the same capabilities of a late model CJ straight from the factory with no modifications (Lets be clear i am talking no lifts and all stock specs). Sure the YJ and TJs lack the PTO and the designation of a rugged piece of farm equipment but neither do the later CJs. All have the same general body design/shape and can be used for the same purpose. Heck we all know that a YJ tub can be substituted for a Lat CJ7 tub, and the TJs are close enough to the same dimensions in design that, with some work, you can make some parts such as the engines, the tops, the roll bars work in the CJ.
My point is that that, although marketed better, the first two Wrangler generations are really no more drastically different vehicle than the CJ5 , CJ6 ,CJ7 , CJ8 etc redesigns were a drastically different vehicle from the CJ2a or the Bantam. CJs,Yjs,Tjs are all vehicle that you can mod for offroading, beach cruising, fun driving, in your garage as a tinker toy and are all great vehicle in their own right.
Ok so the JK maybe is a drastic redesign and a much different vehicle with alot of not so utilitarian features that we like to see... However, I would not call them a joke. I am especially going to have to run and hide after saying this, but I like them. I like the look and I like the 4 doors. They are definitely not as buildable in the garage as the older models and the price is simply outrageous but they are actually very capable offroad vehicle (even the 4 door) off the factory floor and with modification are just as good contenders for the hardcore stuff as any previous model. So I don't see the joke, they do everything that we ask our cjs to do.
I guess the joke is that the wranglers in their first 10 years of production sold more models than all the cj models combined and that Jeep cannot keep new wranglers on the show room floor. So that leads to alot of grocery getter, mallcrawling wranglers that arent getting used off road but that is a function of the users not the design or capability. And to be honest, I'm restoring my CJ7 right now to be used as a DD predominently on the street with MINOR offroading to campsites or the beach and that is a loose definition of offroading. So I will most likely be using my CJ7 for alot of the same functions we often harp on the abundance of JK owners for doing.
Im not trying to start a fight or get angry with anyone, but I think if Jeep had continued the CJ nameplate for the YJ and TJ that we wouldn't have such a negative attitude towards them (except c'mon square headlights?) as they are just inevitible redesigns and do not really fall that far away from the CJ body style.
And don't get me started on FSJ's. I think those are just as real jeeps as the CJs
THAT BEING SAID
It is very ridiculous that the commercial you speak of is using CJ to mean Chrysler Jeep. I'd bet that whomever made that cartoon has no idea that CJ is an actual model in Jeep's history. You would be surprised what jeep dealerships do not know about older jeeps. I had a guy that owned a Jeep dealership try to tell me that the engine in a wagoneer he was selling was a chrysler engine and when I asked him if he swapped in that engine he got angry with me and claimed that the AMC 360 wasnt an option in 89 because Chrysler owned jeep then.
Seriously... again Im not trying to incite anger, but if you took a stock CJ7 any year and a stock jk 4 door or 2 door. Neither vehicle has any modifications, what can your CJ do that that JK can't? The cj has a smaller size so it has that going for it but the JK has more weight on it which can be advantageous as well.
points well taken, I think that technology is a wonderful thing and I take advantage of it every time I can. Wranglers are more comfortable, more stable, more powerful and more dependable.BUT a CJ is a CJ and a Chrysler jeep is a Chrysler jeep. confusing this and taking advantage of the reputation of one to promote the other is not ethical. Was this commercial for a new Jeep?? That would make it an FJ, Fiat Jeep!!
My J-10 and Cherokee Chief were both definitely Jeeps! just not CJs.
OK, Ill bite, and no anger so dont worry bout that....but Im simple, small lift on 33's. Ill go head to head with a JK. My weight is also an advantage as heavier isnt always better. My horsepower and torque is an advantage. A fraction of the electronics is an advantage. The only advantage arguement that can be made for the JK is for the front end and rear end and fuel injection. But my carb is set up right and my axles will turn my tires just fine. And yes, I have a shorter wheel base and im narrower. So, where is the advantage of the JK? This is the same thing as saying a 94 Bronco was as capable as a 67 Bronco. Doesnt work like that.
Seriously... again Im not trying to incite anger, but if you took a stock CJ7 any year and a stock jk 4 door or 2 door. Neither vehicle has any modifications, what can your CJ do that that JK can't? The cj has a smaller size so it has that going for it but the JK has more weight on it which can be advantageous as well.[/QUOTE]
I probably will need to go hide under a chair or go into protective custody after saying this but I don't think that the CJ series should be considered the only real jeep. I understand why people say that because it retains the name-sake of the original Civillian jeep but lets be clear. Certain years and redesigns of the CJ model are just as drastically different from the original as some of the later wranglers.
I am sure someone will argue this but the YJ especially is almost practically the same vehicle as a late model CJ7 . Sure there are some quirks and differences but from the factory with no modifications a YJ has almost the same capabilities of a late model CJ straight from the factory with no modifications (Lets be clear i am talking no lifts and all stock specs). Sure the YJ and TJs lack the PTO and the designation of a rugged piece of farm equipment but neither do the later CJs. All have the same general body design/shape and can be used for the same purpose. Heck we all know that a YJ tub can be substituted for a Lat CJ7 tub, and the TJs are close enough to the same dimensions in design that, with some work, you can make some parts such as the engines, the tops, the roll bars work in the CJ.
My point is that that, although marketed better, the first two Wrangler generations are really no more drastically different vehicle than the CJ5 , CJ6 ,CJ7 , CJ8 etc redesigns were a drastically different vehicle from the CJ2a or the Bantam. CJs,Yjs,Tjs are all vehicle that you can mod for offroading, beach cruising, fun driving, in your garage as a tinker toy and are all great vehicle in their own right.
Ok so the JK maybe is a drastic redesign and a much different vehicle with alot of not so utilitarian features that we like to see... However, I would not call them a joke. I am especially going to have to run and hide after saying this, but I like them. I like the look and I like the 4 doors. They are definitely not as buildable in the garage as the older models and the price is simply outrageous but they are actually very capable offroad vehicle (even the 4 door) off the factory floor and with modification are just as good contenders for the hardcore stuff as any previous model. So I don't see the joke, they do everything that we ask our cjs to do.
I guess the joke is that the wranglers in their first 10 years of production sold more models than all the cj models combined and that Jeep cannot keep new wranglers on the show room floor. So that leads to alot of grocery getter, mallcrawling wranglers that arent getting used off road but that is a function of the users not the design or capability. And to be honest, I'm restoring my CJ7 right now to be used as a DD predominently on the street with MINOR offroading to campsites or the beach and that is a loose definition of offroading. So I will most likely be using my CJ7 for alot of the same functions we often harp on the abundance of JK owners for doing.
Im not trying to start a fight or get angry with anyone, but I think if Jeep had continued the CJ nameplate for the YJ and TJ that we wouldn't have such a negative attitude towards them (except c'mon square headlights?) as they are just inevitible redesigns and do not really fall that far away from the CJ body style.
And don't get me started on FSJ's. I think those are just as real jeeps as the CJs
THAT BEING SAID
It is very ridiculous that the commercial you speak of is using CJ to mean Chrysler Jeep. I'd bet that whomever made that cartoon has no idea that CJ is an actual model in Jeep's history. You would be surprised what jeep dealerships do not know about older jeeps. I had a guy that owned a Jeep dealership try to tell me that the engine in a wagoneer he was selling was a chrysler engine and when I asked him if he swapped in that engine he got angry with me and claimed that the AMC 360 wasnt an option in 89 because Chrysler owned jeep then.
you worded that so well that i dont think any arguements can ensue... i agree with you i am an owner of both a CJ5 and a 2011 JK. i love both of them i like to drive the CJ on nice days and when i want to enjoy a little more of a stable and nicer ride the JK is there..... a jeep is a jeep is a jeep its the owners that really make them what they are or arent.
there are plenty of people who have the original Humvee's and just have them to have them cause they look cool.. has nothing to do with actually driving them through combat...
so in my opinion once jeep starts making the wranglers with IFS then we can bitch.. until then its not the jeeps fault its a mall crawler
Well, that didn't go as expected. Big long rambling posts about the relative relationship between the CJ Jeep and the Chrysler products that have come along since the demise of the true CJ Jeep. What I have been noticing and hey I'm no genius about these things, is that the smaller Chrysler Jeeps are attempting to look more and more like the old CJ's. The narrowing of the hood, the change to round headlights, the reJeeping of Wrangler if you will. Like many other Automotive manufacturers paying homage to the past.
What took me by surprise was the CJ = Chrisler Jeep thing. I was also wondering if this was a national effort to link the old with the new. Like it or not, if it catches on, it's smart marketing and in a way honoring the CJ's we love today.
By-the-way I didn't like the CJ7 either. Steel doors with a soft inner panel and a pathedic plastic dash attached to a real steel dash. The beginning of the end, I believed it then and I believe it, somewhat less so, now.
Im not saying the JKs are bad. Just not as capable as a CJ. Its cheaper to maintain, and If I sink it in a mudhole, ehh...drag it out, clean it out, replace the radio and change the fluids. You cant say that about a JK. And IF I got to replace the motor, again, easy and cheap,,, ive even got a spare block 100 feet from me....
Im not saying the JKs are bad. Just not as capable as a CJ. Its cheaper to maintain, and If I sink it in a mudhole, ehh...drag it out, clean it out, replace the radio and change the fluids. You cant say that about a JK. And IF I got to replace the motor, again, easy and cheap,,, ive even got a spare block 100 feet from me....
this is what the argument is about, cj means its cheap easy and workable for the everyman, head job on the side of the highway, fine, busted axle, i can handle it. get a jk and now its head job on the side of the highway? um, ill have to re-mortage my house real quick, busted axle? hold on let me sell my firstborn child to a loan shark. give me a break ppl the idea of jeep died when the price skyrocketed out of sight.
Well, that didn't go as expected. Big long rambling posts about the relative relationship between the CJ Jeep and the Chrysler products that have come along since the demise of the true CJ Jeep. What I have been noticing and hey I'm no genius about these things, is that the smaller Chrysler Jeeps are attempting to look more and more like the old CJ's. The narrowing of the hood, the change to round headlights, the reJeeping of Wrangler if you will. Like many other Automotive manufacturers paying homage to the past.
What took me by surprise was the CJ = Chrisler Jeep thing. I was also wondering if this was a national effort to link the old with the new. Like it or not, if it catches on, it's smart marketing and in a way honoring the CJ's we love today.
By-the-way I didn't like the CJ7 either. Steel doors with a soft inner panel and a pathedic plastic dash attached to a real steel dash. The beginning of the end, I believed it then and I believe it, somewhat less so, now.
I apologize, that thesis I wrote was in response to the comment that cjs are the only real Jeeps
I agree with you that the company shouldnt use the CJ namesake for chrysler jeeps. I think that someone on that advertisement team had no idea what a cj was and but had heard the name and guesse that it meant chrysler jeep. You should call and have a talking to with the dealership.
I really don't mind long posts, they can be the meat on the bone. In the past year we've visited the "Whats a real Jeep" question on several occasions and I've been one of those that believe the Jeep lineage died in '86, but in reality that is more in line with ribbing a friend over a sports team than anything else. I've beat the dead horse and don't want to do it again..... wel not for a little while anyways.
83 CJ7 350 tbi, TH350, D300 twin sticked & clocked, narrowed Chief D44 Eaton Elocker & Moser shafts, Explorer 8.8 Detroit locker, 410's, RE 4.5" spring lift 1" body lift, 35" Claws, cage tied to frame, Corbeau baja seats, HD tie rod and draglink, u-bolts flipped, custom skid plate and sliders, Warn 9.5ti winch with Amsteel synthetic line
points well taken, I think that technology is a wonderful thing and I take advantage of it every time I can. Wranglers are more comfortable, more stable, more powerful and more dependable.BUT a CJ is a CJ and a Chrysler jeep is a Chrysler jeep. confusing this and taking advantage of the reputation of one to promote the other is not ethical. Was this commercial for a new Jeep?? That would make it an FJ, Fiat Jeep!!
My J-10 and Cherokee Chief were both definitely Jeeps! just not CJs.
The 4X4 club I'm in is starting to get a lot of jk's now and I have to say that they are just as capable as any cj out there. They are also easier to build better than a cj.
At least in the type of terrain we have around here.
Back to the ?, I haven't seen that commercial around here.
The newer jeeps are better than the older jeeps in many ways as mentioned, better ride, more reliable, way better mileage....and so on. I wouldn't own a new one for several reasons, however, initial cost, and unless I was very well off ( and I'm certainly not ), I wouldn't take a $30,000.00 Jeep off road the same as I would my old CJ7 ....Also, old jeeps just have a cool factor that the new ones don't have. I understand and really appreciate a good running, nice looking older CJ....it required allot of work and money to get it there. I just don't feel the same towards a new jeep when all that was required is credit and a payment. Either way, I'm glad that Jeeps are still alive, after all these years, and its a good thing.....is there another vehicle that has lived for so long? Can't think of one but maybe there is. The Chrysler Jeep thing....oh well, I just take that with a bit of humor...just a sales gimmick. My two cents anyway....
Something that I thought was funny was this week I was working on a new 2014 Cherokee and on the w/s in the middle bottem they have a flat fender climbing rocks.
I probably will need to go hide under a chair or go into protective custody after saying this but I don't think that the CJ series should be considered the only real jeep. I understand why people say that because it retains the name-sake of the original Civillian jeep but lets be clear. Certain years and redesigns of the CJ model are just as drastically different from the original as some of the later wranglers.
If you compare 1945 to 2014 then of course theres a huge difference, or even up until they quit producing the Jeep in 86. However, you will not find any year to year difference between vehicles that are as massive as you will between the last Jeep and the first Wrangler. The reason: they are TWO different vehicles and designed / made to be that way.
I am sure someone will argue this but the YJ especially is almost practically the same vehicle as a late model CJ7 . Sure there are some quirks and differences but from the factory with no modifications a YJ has almost the same capabilities of a late model CJ straight from the factory with no modifications (Lets be clear i am talking no lifts and all stock specs).
The list would be much shorter for their similarities than their differences. In fact the engine is really the only part the two share. And that was by design from AMC, whom publicly have stated on several instances that many of it's design cues were taken from the Cherokee, such as the interior, drivetrain and axles, etc. The similarity of the two is that it's a small sized open top vehicle. But that commonality is also shared with the Bronco, the Landcruiser, the Samari, etc.
As for it's ability, well you be the judge. It had lower ground clearance and inferior Transmission and axles. And a weaker sport bar. But it handled great on the road, which was what they were shooting for.
All have the same general body design/shape and can be used for the same purpose. Heck we all know that a YJ tub can be substituted for a Lat CJ7 tub, and the TJs are close enough to the same dimensions in design that, with some work, you can make some parts such as the engines, the tops, the roll bars work in the CJ.
The tub is not a direct substitute because they have different frames. You have to modify the wrangler tub to replace a Jeep's tub. You could make a Bronco tub fit it too with some work. Point is, it's a different body from a different vehicle. The Landcruiser was often mistaken for a Jeep.
I guess the joke is that the wranglers in their first 10 years of production sold more models than all the cj models combined and that Jeep cannot keep new wranglers on the show room floor. So that leads to alot of grocery getter, mallcrawling wranglers that arent getting used off road but that is a function of the users not the design or capability.
And rightly so. Compare the two time frames and it's economies. They were workhouses for their first decade and a half. The design of the Wrangler was to garner a greater marketshare thru creature comforts and a more daily driver scenario. And then when Chrysler bought them out they had the money to capitalize on that. Albeit on the coat tails of the legendary Jeep.
Im not trying to start a fight or get angry with anyone, but I think if Jeep had continued the CJ nameplate for the YJ and TJ that we wouldn't have such a negative attitude towards them (except c'mon square headlights?) as they are just inevitible redesigns and do not really fall that far away from the CJ body style.
And that's the point right there that so many miss and why they get offended when you say their vehicle is NOT a real Jeep. The name plate is different and the Jeep Company did that by design.... it's a DIFFERENT vehicle. Why must people keep erroneously considering them the same? Ignorance. Historical, factual ignorance. Not stupidity, they just don't know any better and that was Chrysler's goal all along. They didn't want AMC for their line of vehicle. They wanted the trademark Jeep name for future profit. And profit they have, but at the expense of the iconic Jeep and it's rich history. The water has been so muddied that the commercial about which this thread was started, is able to happen and many people don't know any better, which further cements their market plan.
Make no mistake. My issues aren't with the Wrangler, which I consider another capable vehicle just as I do the Hummer, Xterra, Blazer, etc., it's with The company that bought AMC/Jeep Corp.
And don't get me started on FSJ's. I think those are just as real jeeps as the CJs
A "Real Jeep" means a Jeep Jeep, formerly a Willys Jeep and a Kaiser Jeep (see the pattern), not a Jeep Wagoneer, a Jeep Cherokee, or a Jeep Gladiator, which are Full Sized Jeep brand vehicles. If you refer to every model as a Jeep, then what would you refer to the Jeep model as? Hence the term "real Jeep". It's not a derogatory name.
THAT BEING SAID... Ok, go ahead and throw rocks at me
