Talk:Jeep Wagoneer (SJ)
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Great main pic
[edit]Great job on the pics, guys. I especially like "Jeep Grand Wagoneer 001.JPG", and vote to keep it as the main pic forever! That is one awesome Grand Wagoneer. :D Plasticboob (talk) 06:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
First SUV?
[edit]Maybe, but not necessarily. The US army jeep certainly predates the Wagoneer, having been introduced for the second World War. Land Rover was selling their vehicles in 1947 or 1948. The International Harvester Scout was introduced in 1961. Chevy's Suburban has been produced every year since 1935. Even Jeep's own CJ series debuted just after WWII. The Wagoneer post-dates all of these vehicles, and many more. --Badger151 20:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- I think this may be a case of model confusion, and an incorrect statement.
- First Jeep produced an all wheel drive station wagon (2-dr) from the mid-1940s until it was superceeded by the Wagoneer. I could see how one could confuse this vehicle as an extension of the Wagoneer, but they were two very distinct vehicles, with the earlier Jeep being more truck than passenger vehicle.
- Secondly, if we were to really look for the first American SUV - a vehicle that combined on/off road capabilities, four-wheeldrive and a passenger conpartment meant for humans instead of a truck with seats bolted to the floor in the back, I think that Ford and Mercury get the nod. Between 1940 and 1946 Ford began to equip some of its wood bodied station wagon with Marmon-Harrington 4-wheel drive units.
- I'm sure that there are earlier examples, just thought that this is food for thought. Stude62 20:42, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- If the Suburban is an "SUV", which some of the people who work on that article insist upon, then the Suburban gets the nod--who volunteers to note in the Suburban article that it is not an SUV? I tried, and it got reverted. Dogface 11:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Definitely not the first SUV, but again, definitely the first LUXURY SUV.
- The first Wagoneer offered limited off-road capabilities (actually: almost none).
- Until the Range Rover arrived on the scene in 1970, there were almost NO other vehicles that could match the off-road performance of the Wagoneer. It won first and second place in the 1973 Sno Drift ralley. The only other vehicles I can think of were the Ford Bronco and the International Scouts, neither of which were luxurious.
- I don't think it should be stated that the Jeep Wagoneer was the first luxury SUV. It sounds to me as if this vehicle was in fact just a basic estate car with limited off road credentials. If the Wagoneer was the first luxury SUV, does that mean the Land Rover series II 109 was the first SUV? Obviously not, and the Wagoneer cannot be called the first Luxury SUV. My vote would be the Range Rover.Mr. Bridger 15:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- I would have to disagree, and here is why. Note that I am referencing the Wagoneers from '63-'70, and especially the 1966 Super Wagoneer. The Range Rover did not hit the scene until much later, in '70. First of all, it was not a car. It had a body-on-frame design. The frame WAS adapted from the Gladiator pickup truck. It had solid FRONT and rear axles (after the first year or so, Dana 27 up front and Dana 44 in the rear, I believe), which were not found on cars. You could also get the 4WD version with independent suspension; modern SUVs have only relatively recently offered this. It had a lo-range, which was not found on cars. It had a push-button radio. It had a seven-position tilt steering wheel. It had ceiling courtesy lights. It had air conditioning. It had a power tailgate. It had power brakes. It had power steering and an (optional) TH400 automatic transmission, which were two important luxury features any way you look at them, and the Range Rover lacked both even as options (and didn't get a factory slushbox until 1982!) It also had a standard overhead cam engine, which, by todays standards, is "high tech." You could also get a V8. The Super Wagoneer cost about as much as a Cadillac. In addition, the expectations of what should constitute 'luxury' change as time moves forward. However, after all that, I don't understand how the Range Rover could be called the 'first.' Don't get me wrong, I love Range Rovers and think they're great SUVs, but second is a more appropriate word, and there's nothing wrong with that. Off-road, the Range Rover may outperform a Wagoneer in some situations, but, I always think that in general it's more about the driver than the vehicle. ;) As for the first SUV, that issue will never be resolved because the definition is too weak. I'd have to say the '46 Willys all-steel station wagon (even though it didn't get 4WD until '49.) Wow, that's a lot of info, perhaps it should be incorporated into the article? If you would like more info on the Super Wagoneer, see the PDF titled "Move Over Range Rover" on this page.--Plasticboob 13 Jun, 2007
- Well firstly Plasticboob, thank you for all the info regarding the Wagoneer, as a Briton, I've never even seen one 'in the flesh', so I'm struggling a bit on understanding quite what this vehicle was. I think a good car sector to compare with the situation we have here is the 'MPV'. Here in the U.K, and indeed most of Europe, the Renault Espace is considered to be the first MPV, the automobile that supposedly invented the multi purpose vehicle, however, almost 20 years earlier, Fiat produced the Fiat 600 in a small mini-bus form. It was a car that would today be considered to be a MPV, and yet most people forget the 600 altogether. So why is the Espace always thought to be the founding MPV? Well I don't really know, but I suspect it is about a few factors, I think it is partly about whether the car is accepted by consumers. The original Espace sold well, I don't think the 600 did. Now I can't comment on whether early American SUV-type vehicles did sell well, but the Range Rover certainly did and I think it was the first car to successfully blend car-like features with luxury with off road prowess (an original ad campaign commented on how the rich land owner could drive off his field and straight to a restaurant). Maybe the Wagoneer did this, maybe the other American SUVs did, I don't know, perhaps you could enlighten me. Mr. Bridger 19:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hello Mr. Bridger, you're welcome. The Wagoneer was accepted by consumers and was quite successful; it had a production run from late '62 until 1991. However, I do understand your point - and the Super Wagoneer was quite rare. There is no question that the Range Rover outsold the Super Wagoneer by many times; I was just stating for the record that the Super Wagoneer did come first. It was a limited-supply luxury 4wd Wagon from the factory available to the public. The 'regular' Wagoneer did sell quite well and the word 'luxury' was even used in some of the advertisements of the standard model. While they are not quite as smooth as the Range Rover on the road, they certainly don't feel 'truck like' to me - a Civic is much worse riding than a Wagoneer! The Grand Wagoneers were even better, I hear. There were numerous ads depicting Wagoneers, and especially Grand Wagoneers, in elegant, upscale settings, and there is no doubt that at the time one could also be driven off the field into a swanky city and still 'fit in' next to a luxury car, if that's what you meant. Here are some advertisements, if you care to have a look: 1969 Wagoneer Ad, Super Wagoneer Brochure describing it as a 'luxury wagon', 1973 luxury snowmobile. Few remember the Super Wagoneer, but practically every older American knows the Wagoneer - it was the quintessential SUV from inception and was featured in countless movies. I bet you could say the same for the Range Rover too! Plasticboob 22 Jun, 2007
- Well firstly Plasticboob, thank you for all the info regarding the Wagoneer, as a Briton, I've never even seen one 'in the flesh', so I'm struggling a bit on understanding quite what this vehicle was. I think a good car sector to compare with the situation we have here is the 'MPV'. Here in the U.K, and indeed most of Europe, the Renault Espace is considered to be the first MPV, the automobile that supposedly invented the multi purpose vehicle, however, almost 20 years earlier, Fiat produced the Fiat 600 in a small mini-bus form. It was a car that would today be considered to be a MPV, and yet most people forget the 600 altogether. So why is the Espace always thought to be the founding MPV? Well I don't really know, but I suspect it is about a few factors, I think it is partly about whether the car is accepted by consumers. The original Espace sold well, I don't think the 600 did. Now I can't comment on whether early American SUV-type vehicles did sell well, but the Range Rover certainly did and I think it was the first car to successfully blend car-like features with luxury with off road prowess (an original ad campaign commented on how the rich land owner could drive off his field and straight to a restaurant). Maybe the Wagoneer did this, maybe the other American SUVs did, I don't know, perhaps you could enlighten me. Mr. Bridger 19:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- I would have to disagree, and here is why. Note that I am referencing the Wagoneers from '63-'70, and especially the 1966 Super Wagoneer. The Range Rover did not hit the scene until much later, in '70. First of all, it was not a car. It had a body-on-frame design. The frame WAS adapted from the Gladiator pickup truck. It had solid FRONT and rear axles (after the first year or so, Dana 27 up front and Dana 44 in the rear, I believe), which were not found on cars. You could also get the 4WD version with independent suspension; modern SUVs have only relatively recently offered this. It had a lo-range, which was not found on cars. It had a push-button radio. It had a seven-position tilt steering wheel. It had ceiling courtesy lights. It had air conditioning. It had a power tailgate. It had power brakes. It had power steering and an (optional) TH400 automatic transmission, which were two important luxury features any way you look at them, and the Range Rover lacked both even as options (and didn't get a factory slushbox until 1982!) It also had a standard overhead cam engine, which, by todays standards, is "high tech." You could also get a V8. The Super Wagoneer cost about as much as a Cadillac. In addition, the expectations of what should constitute 'luxury' change as time moves forward. However, after all that, I don't understand how the Range Rover could be called the 'first.' Don't get me wrong, I love Range Rovers and think they're great SUVs, but second is a more appropriate word, and there's nothing wrong with that. Off-road, the Range Rover may outperform a Wagoneer in some situations, but, I always think that in general it's more about the driver than the vehicle. ;) As for the first SUV, that issue will never be resolved because the definition is too weak. I'd have to say the '46 Willys all-steel station wagon (even though it didn't get 4WD until '49.) Wow, that's a lot of info, perhaps it should be incorporated into the article? If you would like more info on the Super Wagoneer, see the PDF titled "Move Over Range Rover" on this page.--Plasticboob 13 Jun, 2007
- I don't think it should be stated that the Jeep Wagoneer was the first luxury SUV. It sounds to me as if this vehicle was in fact just a basic estate car with limited off road credentials. If the Wagoneer was the first luxury SUV, does that mean the Land Rover series II 109 was the first SUV? Obviously not, and the Wagoneer cannot be called the first Luxury SUV. My vote would be the Range Rover.Mr. Bridger 15:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Until the Range Rover arrived on the scene in 1970, there were almost NO other vehicles that could match the off-road performance of the Wagoneer. It won first and second place in the 1973 Sno Drift ralley. The only other vehicles I can think of were the Ford Bronco and the International Scouts, neither of which were luxurious.
- The first Wagoneer offered limited off-road capabilities (actually: almost none).
Hi. I think that some front grille pictures would in order as it was usually the only visible difference between year models. I'll provide one from a -79 model if there's any interest.
Please check stats
[edit]Will someone who knows a lot more about Wagoneers than I do please check the facts and figures in my fairly extensive edit? Many thanks. Writegeist (talk) 20:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Alphabet soup
[edit]Flory (American Cars 1960-1972, Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Coy, 2004), p.411, identifies the '66 Wagoneer as a J200. He doesn't, however, say if this was a new ID, or if it lasted past '66. Anybody who knows more care to add it? TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 21:04, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jeep Wagoneer (SJ). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924103033/http://www.sno-drift.org/History/history/1973-1978.htm to http://www.sno-drift.org/History/history/1973-1978.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:38, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:54, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Luxury
[edit]Was this as luxurious as a Range Rover, or less? --95.24.80.215 (talk) 11:26, 12 August 2024 (UTC)