Jeep Garage  - Jeep Forum banner

Is bigger really better?

3K views 19 replies 11 participants last post by  Bmwister 
#1 · (Edited)
This is about WK2 vs ZJ dimensions (yeah, I know, not what you thought - sorry for that)

I tried to post it as a spreadsheet but it didn't work, so posting it as a screenshot.

As you can see WK2 is 7-10% larger in all dimensions. 29% heavier (for V6).

However, it just doesn't translate to more interior space. As you can see the only real improvement is in Rear Hip/Leg space, the rest is pretty much the same.

Luggage space is 11% less, Max cargo is 14% less. Huh???

Where did all this extra space and weight go? Thicker walls?
 

Attachments

See less See more
1
#4 ·
I agree! The sudden weight gain of vehicles is certainly counterproductive to the sales gimmick of economy! 29% heavier for the same tasks? I would hope at this point that they were equal even with the added wheelbase and rear seat room. At that point, the switch to the V6 would equal added performance, and much better economy.
 
#6 ·
Electronics adds a lot of weight too. TPMS, active headrests, side curtain airbags, motorized tilt/telescope wheel, all of it is weight. Doesn't seem like much, but there are a LOT of additional motors, sensors, and computers in this version.

And I understand there is considerably more weight in sound absorbing materials on the WK2 as well. Dynamat, for instance, is about .5lbs/sq. ft.

B
 
#7 · (Edited)
The reason for this post is that I was thinking that WK2 is just a bit bloated. I felt that ZJ (that I owned for 10 years) was perfect size for me (I am 5'7"). If they could just fit all this new interior and engine in a smaller size/lighter weight car - wouldn't it be great for everyone?

Another line of thought: this is a 5 seater. Other cars in this size often have 7 seats. So this kind of works as disadvantage for some buyers (I personally don't need 7 seats). Considering Chrysler also has 7-seat Durango I think they should've made WK2 a bit smaller (same size as ZJ) - that would translate in lower weight, better gas mileage, acceleration and possibly price.
 
#10 ·
The reason for this post is that I was thinking that WK2 is just a bit bloated. I felt that ZJ (that I owned for 10 years) was perfect size for me (I am 5'7"). If they could just fit all this new interior and engine in a smaller size/lighter weight car - wouldn't it be great for everyone?

Another line of thought: this is a 5 seater. Other cars in this size often have 7 seats. So this kind of works as disadvantage for some buyers (I personally don't need 7 seats). Considering Chrysler also has 7-seat Durango I think they should've made WK2 a bit smaller (same size as ZJ) - that would translate in lower weight, better gas mileage, acceleration and possibly price.

I couldn't DISagree more. While I'm not asking for more weight for no reason, I'm 6'2" and coming from a 2006 WK and I see your numbers but I don't feel them in the cabin. I can feel the extra cabin space and wouldn't change a thing. If they had to use aluminum instead of carbon fiber to get me a heavier vehical that still came in under 40M, I'm fine with that. I realize it's all a matter of tradeoff's and to get this same luxury feel in a lighter vehical would increase the cost, maybe drastically (think Porsche or Landrover)

All that said I would take a few more gears.
 
#8 ·
I said this once before in another thread: the government is mandating stricter crash standards and rollover protection. In order to meet those standards and still have a usable vehicle (for towing, cargo, etc.) weight must be increased due to additional and thickened steel throughout. ALL manufacturers are dealing with the same thing. I would be more worried if it got lighter, all else being equal.
 
#15 ·
also, another thought i had regarding this topic.

I see these small suv's from benz and other brands and i think to myself, man that would be an awesome suv if it were larger. I wouldn't want this jeep to shrink ANY. Even if it meant I got another mile per gallon. if i wanted light or fuel efficient i would've gone to the KIA dealer.

Maybe you should look into a patriot, they are lighter than the grand and get decent MPG's.

It's all personal preference. I just dislike smallish SUV's. I like my cars large, they seem to be safer and look better, to me anyway.
 
#16 ·
When you compare the exterior to a WK, you can see a big difference. I parked next to a Wk at the mall the other day and the WK2 is noticeably bigger/wider/longer/taller.
 
#17 ·
I am baffled on those luggage numbers. There is no way the old ZJ had that much luggage space with a spare tire taking up so much room. I owned a 5.9 limited for 3 years and the luggage space was crap compared to any other GC after that. I think the government has adjusted the numbers just like they did with MPG.
 
#19 ·
The reduced luggage capacity of the WK2 is most probably due to the increased whelelbase resulting in more rear seat legroom and reduced luggage space. Can't explain the reduced cargo capacity though.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top