Allpar Forums banner

61 - 80 of 105 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,975 Posts
All true SUVs are trucks, all minivans are trucks. BOF has nothing to do wiht the definition.
Minivans are usually considered cars which is why they compete in car of the year tests, not sport utility of the year.
 

·
Jeepaholic
Joined
·
5,874 Posts
Yes, that’s why I said they must undercut the Tahoe and make a value play or they will alienate many current Durango customers.
Undercutting Tahoe doesn’t make this vehicle something that current Durango buyers will want, because it doesn’t currently compete with Tahoe...not directly anyway. It’s a different class of vehicle, and will be much more expensive, not to mention larger. Just those two facts alone will alienate many current Durango customers. If you have data that suggests otherwise, that these customers are in large numbers looking for a larger, more expensive vehicle, then please share. I’m thinking not, but I’m willing to change my mind if someone has info to the contrary.

How many RT’s and Citadels are sold each year? How many SRT’s? Versus how many SXT’s and GT’s? All of those SXT and GT buyers are not likely to pay $20k more, or they probably would’ve opted for a RT or Citadel in the first place. And then ask those RT and Citadel buyers to fork over $20k or so more.

These aren’t going to sell in big numbers, either Wagoneer or a BOF Durango (no vehicle in the segment does, and most lag far behind the GM offerings. The market segment isn’t that big. Wishing it so doesn’t make it so. I hope they do well, but I’m highly skeptical in regards to sales numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,046 Posts
lol at 'small' - the T1 SUV offerings are a multi-billion profit program at GM. If Stellantis makes a 25% dent in this, the Stellantis offering will have been a success and have a meaningful contribution to profits vs. that of the 'economy' seven passenger Journey replacement, which is lower in priority on the totem poll.

Ford hasn't made a meaningful dent because their commercial vehicle sales group isn't aggressive/doesn't have a seat at the table with engineering.
 

·
Jeepaholic
Joined
·
5,874 Posts
Small as in not many are sold each year. I would’ve thought that was painfully obvious, but ok.

But feel free to continue with your pipe dreams....
 

·
Resident Photoshop Nerd
Joined
·
8,049 Posts
I agree with this. I don't really like most retro vehicles, but a more retro, bold Wagoneer design that is instantly recognizable could have been a hit. Instead, they gave it a front end styled closer to the post-refresh Cherokee.
Yeah the XXL Yuntu styling is what stands out here. As much as Gilles was trying to sell it, it just didn't say Wagoneer. Its far too conservative for the class, and if you replace the concepts lighting setup with more mundane lighting, you lose the presence it has.

You guys remember my minute changes that make a big difference..
79170


79171


79172
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,161 Posts
I honestly don't see how you can guarantee that. While there may be another Ram based bof SUV it could just as well be named Ram. Tavares may change some minds now that he's in charge. Besides, a bof Durango doesn't fit Dodge's brand image like the current Durango does.

Bug Dodge Ram R/T and SRT did??? and what about the 1996 Durango 360sp? a new BOF durago wouldnt be much different than what i mentioned. ride height wouldnt as high as a Wagoneer. it wouldnt give off anything "RUGGED".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,860 Posts
All due respect, that was a different time, for a brand that is now separate. The press, competitors, and others will make the case that a Durango like this isn't really a Durango. Now, personally, I don't care, I'd buy one in a second for a reasonable price. Dodge has painted themselves, just like some of us have said, into the proverbial corner. It makes no difference to me, but IMHO this truck based SUV would make a better Ram then a Dodge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,483 Posts
First generation Durango was BOF because it shared so much with the Dakota pickup. Everything from the A-pillar forward was identical including powertrains.

A modern BOF Durango does not make sense.

I would not have expected the BOF Durango to materialize anyway. I think it was just more inside rumor like so many other products.

With Stellantis sharpening the brands before they get any product, let's hope clear minds prevail.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Another possibility is that the BOF Durango could be similar in size and price with the current unibody Dakota and share the same platform with a new rumored Ram Dakota that might share frame with Jeep Gladiator but with a solid body on both, with the Dakota being available with both quad and crew cab with the quad cab having a full 6’+ cargo box. Unlike the Gladiator, both Dakota and Durango would come std. with rwd.
 

·
Resident Photoshop Nerd
Joined
·
8,049 Posts
Price point and branding would make a big difference... I can see it like this:

Durango - street variant, muscle, not off-road abilitie

Dakota - baby ram, more street, but has rebel variants to play with gm/ford where Gladiator can't/won't.

Wagoneer - Jeep variant, off-road capability expected, some luxury basics (Summit, etc).

Grand Wagoneer - Jeep soft-road variant; most lux, but probably less capable for it.
 

·
Jeepaholic
Joined
·
5,874 Posts
First generation Durango was BOF because it shared so much with the Dakota pickup. Everything from the A-pillar forward was identical including powertrains.

A modern BOF Durango does not make sense.

I would not have expected the BOF Durango to materialize anyway. I think it was just more inside rumor like so many other products.

With Stellantis sharpening the brands before they get any product, let's hope clear minds prevail.
Like the mythical Chrysler CUV and the Dodge midsize CUV/SUV, I wouldn’t hold my breath on the BOF Durango coming any time soon. Especially now with new management. Or as they say, “it’ll be here in 3 years”.

I‘ll believe it when I see it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,483 Posts
Another possibility is that the BOF Durango could be similar in size and price with the current unibody Dakota and share the same platform with a new rumored Ram Dakota that might share frame with Jeep Gladiator but with a solid body on both, with the Dakota being available with both quad and crew cab with the quad cab having a full 6’+ cargo box. Unlike the Gladiator, both Dakota and Durango would come std. with rwd.
There is no current unibody Dakota.

A BOF Dakota built alongside Gladiator would really hurt Gladiator sales. Yes, the Durango could share with that vehicle, but it does not exist yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David S

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,289 Posts
Minivans are usually considered cars which is why they compete in car of the year tests, not sport utility of the year.
Not surprising given the foreigners running MT these days. They are rated on the truck fuel economy curve and meet truck safety standards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,483 Posts
Fiat Toro is a compact size pickup, not midsize.

Ford will have the F-150, Ranger and Maverick, covering the full-size, mid-size and compact segments.

Yes, Maverick is unibody while Ranger and F-150 are BOF.

I doubt the company has the engineering skill to make another Comanche.....unibody cab and BOF bed Efficient and capable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
There is no current unibody Dakota.

A BOF Dakota built alongside Gladiator would really hurt Gladiator sales. Yes, the Durango could share with that vehicle, but it does not exist yet.
Oops, I meant unibody Durango. I disagree, a Dakota would have a different suspension, a solid body, no removable roof, 2 cab choices and 2 cargo bed lengt’s and 2wd would be standard, 4WD optional And would sell for a lower price, would compete more directly with Ford Ranger and others in that class. Gladiator I believe is the most expensive mid size pu on the market, so yes I believe their would be room for the Ram Dakota without taking sales away from the Gladiator.
 

·
Resident Photoshop Nerd
Joined
·
8,049 Posts
Oops, I meant unibody Durango. I disagree, a Dakota would have a different suspension, a solid body, no removable roof, 2 cab choices and 2 cargo bed lengt’s and 2wd would be standard, 4WD optional And would sell for a lower price, would compete more directly with Ford Ranger and others in that class. Gladiator I believe is the most expensive mid size pu on the market, so yes I believe their would be room for the Ram Dakota without taking sales away from the Gladiator.
I think it's that flexibility that your proposed dakota has that may undermine the Jeep.

Jeep has very few options to click. They are all 4wd, and most of the trims are a difference of materials not capability, rubicon and mojave excluded. Plus the Jeep price tag.

Dakota arguably offers more. By allowing rwd versions, it should tow more, have more body configurations, and different drivetrain options. And will probably be cheaper with no off-road duty suspension.. Even if it's street oriented, i think the dakota would win at least 50% of the time.

Here's another idea.. speaking of comanche.. what about if they actually produced that little renegade based baby truck?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,289 Posts
“These days”

The Dodge Caravan was car of the year in 1996.
"Foreigners running MT these days." The staff wasn't full of Aussies and Brits in 1996. Not that the old American staff was above criticism then. Like when they made the updated Thunderbird the '87 car of the year with a just a new nose and tail, but the '87 Daytona wasn't new enough to compete with the same amount of changes. I've been a reader since the '70s..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,289 Posts
Fiat Toro is a compact size pickup, not midsize.

Ford will have the F-150, Ranger and Maverick, covering the full-size, mid-size and compact segments.

Yes, Maverick is unibody while Ranger and F-150 are BOF.

I doubt the company has the engineering skill to make another Comanche.....unibody cab and BOF bed Efficient and capable.
Compact is about size not frame construction or load rating. Toro offers a 1 ton, there was even a 1 ton compact Mitsubishi pickup.

Compact: Ram 50 184.6" x 65.0" (BOF) Rampage 183.7" x 66.8" (Unibody)
Midsize: 1987 Dakota 187.5" x 68.4" (BOF) Toro 193.5" x 72.6" (Unibody)

I don't praise Fiat engineering, but look at the Ram Promaster, Unibody cab, ladder frame in the back. Any car maker should be able to do what Jeep did in 1986.
 
61 - 80 of 105 Posts
Top