• 2019 Jeep Scrambler Pickup: How Much Will It Tow? (Spied)


    2019 jeep scrambler wrangler pickup truck towing prototype
    2019 Jeep Scrambler prototype towing (photo credit: FourWheeler.com)

    How much will the new 2019 Jeep Scrambler (Wrangler-based) pickup truck be able to tow? We get a glimpse into this question with the following prototype image. This photo comes to us via Facebook, uploaded by FourWheeler.com.

    Take a close look. You will see a few telling signs at what Jeep is up to. We think the hitch is either a Class III or Class IV hitch, followed up by a weight distributing hitch. This is one of the first times we caught wind of (what could be) maximum weight testing for the upcoming Jeep Scrambler pickup truck.

    Right now, the king of mid-sized truck towing is the Chevrolet Colorado/ GMC Canyon with the 2.8L diesel engine. It is rated to tow a maximum of 7,700 lbs in 2WD trim. Other midsize trucks pull between 5,000 and 6,400 lbs. If Jeep wants to compete in towing (which is an ever-increasing important portion of midsize truck market), they will need to match or exceed 5,000-lbs minimum. With that being said, and with the boxy trailer we see this Jeep Scrambler towing, it’s a good bet that it will pull well over 5,000 lbs.

    According to the Scrambler Forum, the next generation Jeep Wrangler JL and Jeep Scrambler JT will have a 3.0L turbo-diesel V6available. We’re assuming it will be very similar to the EcoDiesel that is currently used in the Ram 1500 and Jeep Grand Cherokee. If that’s the case, it may equal the current model Jeep Grand Cherokee diesel which tows up to 6,500 lbs.

    Mind you: this is all conjecture. What do you think? Is it possible that Jeep will come out swinging and produce a vehicle with best-in-class towing? Will the Jeep Scrambler compete with the Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 (currently the best off-road vehicle in its class) both off-road and with towing (at 5,000 lbs)? We know FCA is serious about this truck as their development time has been lengthy.

    What do you think? Can you see anything we missed?

    Let us know!


    Nathan Adlen
    Nathan Adlen
    Easily amused by anything with four wheels, Nathan Adlen reviews vehicles from the cheapest to the most prestigious. Wrecking yards, dealer lots, garages, racetracks, professional automotive testing and automotive journalism - Nathan has experienced a wide range of the automotive spectrum. Brought up in the California car culture and educated in theater, childhood education, film, journalism and history, Nathan now lives with his family in Denver, CO. His words, good humor and video are enjoyed worldwide.

    Similar Articles

    144 thoughts on “2019 Jeep Scrambler Pickup: How Much Will It Tow? (Spied)

    1. Yawn… Unless it has a diesel electric train engine it’s just the “same old junk” that automakers have been shoving down us “stupid customers” throats…

      1. Gotta walk before you can run. A small diesel with that excellent ZF transmission is a very compelling vehicle. 30MPG all day long. Rock crawling dream. Great low end torque for towing. They can add electric to this and it will be the greatest outdoor campsite powerplant ever. I’ll plug my electric chain-saw into it and cut my firewood.

        1. Man, that would be so great to have a diesel Jeep diesel pickup with electrification. Imagine powering a whole backwoods campsite where the regular campers can’t go. Lights , AC, fans, cooking, miniwashers, tools, music, water heater, portable shower, TV, satellite. All in a quiet engine under the hood and taking up no room in the truck or trailer.No extra cost, no extra maintenance. Just plug and play. Come on, Jeep!

          1. You may not have noticed, the new Jeep will lose a lot of weight with new materials and a more modern design. That has been announced several times. So it may get better than 30 MPG.

            1. Actually, jeeps are not too bad for aerodynamics because of the pinched nose. And they are improving the windshield for the new one.

            2. Its counterintuitive sometimes, but that old Mustang of the 80’s was actually quite aerodynamic, even though it didn’t look that way. But for example, the cobra model was quite stable over 200 MPH.

            3. The 2.8L Dmax colorado doesnt get 30 either unless you get the stripped down 2×4 and thats a fairly aero’d truck with a low hanging air damn.

              a 4×4 Wrangler based pickup is not gunna get 30.

            4. Dale, I drive a 2.8-an it is very difficult to get 30 MPG. I’ve only been able to pull it off staying on the highway going 55 MPH. Best I’ve seen so far at normal freeway speeds is about 26. Fuelly numbers support that as well.

      2. Actually, when you really think about it, the Jeep of Jeeps has been famously slow to innovate and improve the product.
        So it is nice to see these big new steps. However, the Jeep of Jeep factory workers may be in in shock after 50 years of basically putting together the the same thing.

      3. ooooo, the wheelbase for that jeep pickup is too long. sounds like fca has decided not to make a midsized pickup, so they want to use the jeep as their segment product. problem with that, then jeep loses their competitive advantage of a short wheelbase, and it becomes just another midsized pickup. not good. not good.

        1. True, any longer of a wheelbase than their 4 door(which is already too long), could kill the Jeep brand.

          Dangerous, very dangerous to the brand.

          1. Why will this kill the brand? A lot of Jeepers tow their trail rig to the destination. If they had a jeep pickup to tow with and has decent offroad chops, they will switch from their current 1/2 ton tow vehicle and get one of these in a heartbeat. I’m guessing the wheelbase will be 128″ish so still shorter than a 1/2 ton crew cab.

            1. Rustydodge,

              Please do your due diligence before you assert a fact and spread untruths.

              If you had watched the above video, the info has come out that the new Jeep pickup will have a “205 inch wheelbase”

              Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long. for a Jeep, and 33 inches longer than a 4 door Jeep, which is already too long. Yikes!

            2. Hal. THe jeep will not have a 205″ wheelbase. Don’t care what the video says. Current wrangler is 95.4 or 116″ for 4 door. THe grand Cherokee is 105.9. the Durango is 119.9. Standard Ram 1500 is 140.9. No way a small truck is going to have over 200″ wheelbase. If the previous report is correct that it will be 33″ longer than a 4 door wrangler, then that’s 149. I think it will be 33″ longer than 2 door wrangler which is 128.4. 205″ mentioned in he video will be closer to the full length I’m guessing.

            3. Yep, TFL is getting really loose with their words.
              Just like yesterday when they mistakenly called the Cummins powertrian a concept, when the truck was a concept, NOT THE POWERTRAIN.

              TFL, journalism is not a good profession to be loose with your words.

            4. A 205″ wheelbase would be phonemically long. A crew cab Colorado with the long bed has a wheelbase of 140.5″. Perhaps they meant overall length? Colorado of the same configuration has an overall length of 225″.
              Due diligence would have one checking “facts” against what would be reasonable.

      4. Scrambler was the name of my Schwinn bicycle from the 60’s. No hand brakes, just go backwards with the pedals. Tough as nails. No, tougher. My brother still has it in his garage, and it still works!

      5. Looks lie RAM is doing things differently than before. Mark my words, This is the first time the new management group over RAM has come out with a all new product, and it could be very different and very impressive beyond what any of us ever thought. Its not the same old, same old with this new RAM management group. Again, I am not a RAM guy.

        1. The new RAM 1500 will undoubtedly be the towing king with those 6 lug hubs and all. It will be the interior leader. It will look the best, no doubt.

          Curious about rust protection(Ford)?

          Curious about towing confidence and chassis competence(GM?.

          Efficiency of the gas models (GM)?

          Overall manufacturing quality(Toyota)?

          Very interesting automotive case study and business case study with all the organizational changes.

          1. Bummer, looks like the RAM TRX is still a year or so away.
            The RAM hybrid will surely be on this new 1500 platform. I am surprised to see it so soon at the beginning of 2018.
            That is a new schedule for RAm.
            How about the Hellcat engine with a 300 HP electric assist? Call it the Demon RAM Horn!

        2. Had a ‘damn Ram’ years ago and NEVER again. It’s stilla Dodge built by Fiat which can’t build anything. Owned a Fiat 128 and was a pile of junk like the Dodge Ram.

      6. what would be even more dumb and even more useless junk is exactly that, the electric part. Same old electric junk that is worse for the environment, and does nothing but increase cost and complexity. The day energy density of batteries approaches at least 50% of gasoline or diesel is, then we can start being hopeful. The day energy density of electric batteries exceeds gasoline or diesel, then you can start talking but until then you are nothing but propaganda and fake news! No one wants electric vehicles because no one wants to pay $10 000 more for them and no one wants to flip the bill (another $7000) for battery pack change in 4 or 5 years time and did you notice? the price of electricity has risen like a hot air balloon? Not to mention that 75% of the worlds electric power is created by burning petro fuels. Talk about propaganda!

    2. Seriously though, I can’t imagine Jeep would go for max towing crown. It would involve too many compromises in ride quality and especially off-road performance. This is a Jeep after all and it has a reputation to uphold.
      I predict up to 1500 payload and 5500 tow

        1. Robert Ryan, R U nuts? a 205 inch wheelbase? This is not a primary off-road vehicle. Pickups are around 160 wheelbase. This thing is no Jeep.

          1. Mike
            But it still will be an off road vehicle. Why make a Jeep like all other Midsizers . Agree with Daniel regarding specifications

          2. There’s no way its got a 205″ wheelbase, that must be a typo. I may be wrong here but i think my CCLB F350 wheelbase is 176″. If that’s true than i think they’re coming out with a jeep limousine.

          3. Off-road doesn’t have to be about high breakover angles. This will be good in low traction areas. Long wheelbase is good for towing too. I imagine some enthusiasts will get the Wrangler Rubicon AND the Scrambler.

          1. You add just air ride and a 3.0 diesel and we are looking at another 6-7k. So what a cloth interior Rubicon truck is gunna be 45k to start?

            1. I don’t know, but if people buy Raptor for almost double ,I am not worry about more capable Jeep midsize truck.
              You will be able to buy even more capable, turbo gasoline , stripped down configuration of Jeep Scrambler. Light powerful and most offroad capable.
              You don’t have to buy e diesel.
              It’s a trend . People switch from SUV’s to pickups and this is going to be a huge success.

            2. I agree it will be successful no matter what, just like the Wrangler is successful even though its not a great daily driver. You still see a million people with them lifted on huge tires driving to work in the city. Most of them never see dirt.

            3. Zveiera-
              The Raptor is a realatively low production rig. Jeep sells many more wranglers. If costs go up much their sales numbers will drop accordingly. It would be great to have those things as and option-for those who want to spend the money.

            1. Thank you Real Jay S. A set of air bags isn’t going to give a Jeep a 6000lb “Bolinger” payload capability and I call boggus on the Bollinger payload claims too.

        1. Much worse, look how narrow it is. I fit drywall and plywood laying down in my Tacoma all day. Sits on the hump a bit but it is never a show stopper. Maybe you can lay the drywall flat on top of the bed rails and strap it down to the tires.

            1. Rambro, why not? Current wrangler is nearly 4′ between wheel wells. I don’t see how they could possibly drop the ball and not hit that number for inside bed width.

            2. Daniel from a scaling perspective I can see that the box on this truck in this photo will not allow for a 4 foot drywall. I will bet myself on it and if I am wrong you can have me.

            3. Rambro – no need to bet on it. I’ll be shocked if they didn’t make it 4′ inside… but hey, we’ll find out soon enough.

            4. Rambro, what’s your scaling perspective based on ?
              I will push your Bollinger on your farm one year for free,if it’s not a 4′ wide bed.

      1. So then it would be less than 7000 lbs if its remotely similar to the Wranglers which are 2000 and 3500lbs.

        Plus, I wouldnt tow more than 5000 lbs with the EcoDiesel anyways. Dont really wanna be stuck on the hills doing 50mph.

        1. Why? Out of embarrassment? Who cares if traffic right behind you have to either slow down or overtake? That’s what happens with semis. This idea that you should never have to slow down while towing is stupid. Anyway we pulled 7,000 lbs with one and we were limited to about 55 up a pretty decent hill. At least it wasn’t screaming at high rpm like a gas engine would be.

          1. Alex, in a non rude way you are ignorant towards gas motors just like most people. Take a look at the new turbo gas motors. Now that they are turboed they compete with turbo diesel motors now. Take a look at the Audi Q5 with the 2.0 turbo gas motor making 274Lb-ft of torque at 1600rpm and able to carry that torque into high rpms if needed where a diesel falls flat. The 2.9 twin Turbo they build also has low torque in a gas engine 442ft-lbs at 1900rpm. And the ultimate diesel slayer is the new Hyundai Sante Fe with a 2.0 gas turbo that has 260ft-lbs of torque at 1450rpm and carries that torque ruler flat to 3500rpm with superior HP to back it up if needed so you can maintain speed. You guys really need to go to TFL car where modern vehicles and engines exist that are not controlled so much by Texas oil, trying dearly to hang with CAFE standards to bring us an inferior product. Most are onboarding with electric motors now so the diesel is just a waste of time, yet again they are losing another advantage, Low end torque? is no longer a diesels claim to fame.

            1. Rambro, we all know your story of being a child and having a perceived bad emotional experience with diesel.
              But not even your mind can change the fact there is more chemical energy in diesel fuel per gallon than gas. And diesel is healthier to breathe than the modern gas engines (and that is without the filters even).
              So gas will never do as much work as diesel per gallon. So stop being untrue.

            2. Mike I stated facts. What is not true about the numbers I posted. Go find a diesel motor that blows away the low end torque of the Hyundai Sante Fe for us in a similar sized diesel engine. On top of that you pay 3000-10,000 dollars more for a diesel motor.

              Then the vehicle has to deal with the added weight for a disadvantage in agility and stopping distances and a loss in brake wear, then the extra energy in diesel is now also watered down from 113% to 103% the energy of gas with the corn oil additives and still has to be more efficient pushing a heavier vehicle and heavier engine parts and it has to overcome the restricted exhaust system because the diesel is so filthy. What is not true here.

            3. Those same advancements applied to these gas engines can be applied to diesel too, and yu will get even more power per gallon, because the chemicals in diesel have more energy period.
              Just goes to show ya, people only accept the truth of what their emotions will let them.

            4. I’m not ignorant to gas motors or the fact that an EcoBoost would be able to do it. I’m debating the necessity to pull a heavy trailer up a hill at 65mph.+ Everyone knows in any truck, the more you push the pedal in to race your trailer up a hill, the fuel economy sucks. You see people in 6.6-6.7L diesels hanging back on the freeway because any increase in speed kills fuel economy. With the small diesel, you can pull 7,000 lbs and average 14mpg. So you drop to 55 while towing up hills! Oh no! With the gasser, you will get 8-9mpg and you get to go 10 more mpg on those few hills you climb! But then you have to stop to fill it up more on your trip, so the diesel will still get there first. We don’t all live in an Ike Gauntlet world where the only thing that matters is how quickly you can pull a trailer from the bottom to the top.

            5. Mike if diesel could produce more power and still come in with the required QDR and within emissions regulations than it would be done if they currently had the technology to do so in order to meet CAFE standards and look saleable. Its just not happening.

            6. I agree Alex, but you stated a gas motor has to scream in order to do what a diesel does and that is not true. The gas turbo motors make low end torque just as good as any equivalent turbo diesel motor based on the new engines coming out. The other thing here is you can slow down the turbo gas motor to the diesels speed and still come in close to the mpg as the diesel. The gas has other advantages that trump mpg for the majority buyer with a lighter truck and a truck that IS able to accelerate IF needed, more so than the diesel and with biodiesel now your mpg is dropping as well and the availability of diesel is not always available which means you may have to go out of your way to get fuel for your truck which worsens mpg once again.

            7. Sorry, but my F150 EB will go just as far as a Ram ED on a tank, and I’ve got the old iron pig 2014 that gets 3-4 mpg worse than the new ones. I have a 36 gallon tank as do most others with crew cab F150’s and thats not an option on the ED. Even if the ram gets 40% better MPG’s its going the same distance.

            8. Zviera: We already had this discussion. The LeMans cars were hand built, hyper expensive R&D motors running ultra refined diesel fuel blended specifically for racing. Sure they are fast, but it doesnt translate to a road going vehicle.

            9. I am just saying, diesel beat all the hyper expensive gasoline engines running clean racing gasoline fuel many times in the row .

            10. @Robert Ryan. Australia has different rules and a different culture. The emissions may differ. Look at the UK right now because they failed to muzzle their diesels. They have proven the diesel exhaust is causing organ failures and birrh defects. Plus your Australian Diesel does not better our 2.0 gas turbo Santa Fe here in Canada and the US. The australian diesel brings on 325 torque at 1750rpm in a 2.2 liter motor. By ratio the turbo Santa Fe gas motor would bring 286 torque but at much lower rpm that carries from 1450rpm to 3500 with a lot more Hp on tap. At 1450rpm the Australian diesel, if it was a 2.0 liter would only make 244 torque and not 260 like the gas turbo at these low rpms.

            11. @Rambro
              We have the Petrol Sante Fe it does not sell. As Zviera said the Audi diesel was the preferred engine for LeMans, Peugeot had a winning Diesel race car at Lemans
              Petrol engines produce vast quantities of deadly pollutants ( C0 and Particulates) and Green house gases

            12. @Robert Ryan. Why do you resort to Lemans. Why dont you find a road worthy vehicle instead of a race car that uses a hybrid fuel that is not even the diesel available in the limited pumps we have in our current infrastructure. Next you will come after me for grammar and spelling errors so the diesel brain cells dont short circuit. You see your brain waves are crisscrossed right now with new information. It will take awhile to sort it out then you will have a clear head until the aliens invent another new technology that screws us all up again.

            13. Wish my wife’s Kia Sorento had the 2.2L diesel. The V6 is very efficient and pretty quick, but I don’t like the lack of torque at low rpm. Feels like it always has to kick down to accelerate at a decent rate.

          2. Sorry, but go watch the 2017 F150 IKE video. It pulls a 9000+ lb trailer up the IKE at 3k rpm. You need to get with the times and realize the the diesels arnt the solution to every problem like they were 10-15 years ago.

            Also, I have personally witnessed one fatalilty on the I80 pass here in Utah due to a guy slamming into the back of a slower truck and see news reports about it all the time. There are 18 wheelers going 20mph in the right lane and everyone else is going 65-75 in the other lanes. I would rather have the ability to stay with traffic at 65mph and not have to resort to riding the right lane at 50 and having to dart out every 30 seconds to get around a semi and hope no one smashes into me. I dont have a 53′, 60000 lb trailer to protect me.

            1. Yeah, but what if you go 65-75 and smash your head in to the semitruck ?
              Your post makes no sense . More like excuse for a wife to buy a very fast truck.
              If you go slowly in front of the semitruck, you are safe bro.

          3. @Rambro
            Diesel Pickups /SUV’ s and ” race vehicles” won outright and their classes in the last Dakar Rally. In the outright class they beat 7litre V8 Gas engined Buggys.
            As I said the Diesel Sante Fe is the one selling here.

            1. Robert Ryan and Zviera,

              To Rambro’s defense – you guys are arguably wrong about the Diesel examples you are using!

              The Diesels winning races have no emissions crap on them whatsoever!

              Put all of the EPA GOVERNMENT mandated emissions on them and they can’t compete. They become way more complex and unreliable and too expensive!

              Ask any modern day diesel mechanic what he fixes on diesel trucks these days and it all the emissions related crap.

              I agree about diesel having more BTU and energy than any gasoline engine that’s a given, but unless the government eases up and stops trying to kill diesel off with over regulations- they don’t make sense anymore!

            2. You are probably right, but DI gasoline engines doesn’t have any particulate filters and pollute 100 times more than diesels. Let’s put all the eco crap on gasoline engines and see , what’s going to happen then.

        1. Wow, if you believe the ecodiesel only gets 1 MPG combined better than the 2.7 equivalent F150, and if you believe the EPA when it comes to rating diesels and the ecodiesel particularly, you are a fool, and need to read and listen to TFL a lot closer. Wow.

          And embarrassment to the name Jay.

          1. Go look at fuelly.com. The Colorado Dmax and Ram ED numbers reported by actual users in real life are pretty much spot on with the EPA combined estimates. That could include people with tunes who get better than stock mpgs too. Show me a better source of information that isnt some random guy who went 50mph for 4 hours and reports 35 mpg.

            But yeah, keep name calling, thats what gets you credibility.

            1. I call a spade a spade.

              Why did you ask for a reference. I already provided you one. TFL for goodness sakes. You know, the one we are on right now!

              Duh.

              They have been testing this motor in several vehicles for a long time now.

            2. What about TFL? It got 3.5 mpg more than the 3.5 EB towing? So what? I think i can afford an F150 3.5EB in Lariat trim then I can afford the extra $10 the 10-15 times a year ill be towing.

              If we had slowed the 2.7 EB down to the snails pace that the Ram ED climbed the Ike instead of having it go the actual speed limit, I bet you would have seen the MPG’s were very close. Instead they had a 13 mph average speed differential which equates to 56% more air drag for the 2.7. That huge.

              Ill take a 2.7 with the 10 speed every day of the week. More capable, more fun and marginally worse MPG.

            3. real jay s had to back peddle on that one after admitting that he little diesel actually did get much better mileage than his Ford toy.

    3. I think the ecodiesel will top the Colorado’s towing mark. If the current Jeep WK2 is at 6500 with a short wheelbase, and the longer Durango with hemi is 7200, I think a slightly longer scrambler pickup w/ ecodiesel with improved cooling can get close to 8k. I expect on the Ram side that ecodiesel will get slight hp and tq jump and improvements to cooling to allow the tow ratings to closely match the hemi trucks. The 1500 will also finally get into the mid 7k GVWR which will greatly improve payload ratings, it’s current main weakness.

      1. Also considering the different gear ratios available for the truck… WK2 eco has 3.45 and Durango has 3.09 I think, excluding the new SRT.

        1. You cant tow 10k with a slight HP bump to the Ecodiesel and still meet J2807. You notice the first year the Ecodiesel was out they had 1000 lbs more towing then now? Thats because in 2015 Ram started to test to J2807. The thing struggled to pull 7500 up the IKE.

          1. Current ecodiesel is rated in the 9k per J2807 and is limited by the cooling capacity. 2019 ram will resolve cooling issues and bump up hp/tq. I predict it will be rated to tow over 10k for 2019

            1. In a regular cab no option truck. A crew cab is rated at 7500 or 8300 depending on options. My guess is that speed is also a factor in that limitation. J2807 requires that the truck maintain 40mph on Davis Dam in 100+F heat. The ED only averaged 52 mph on the IKE in the winter with snow on the ground, that means at some points it was probably going faster and some points going slower(aka close to 40).

            2. Jay my understanding is that due to heat soak, the eco will begin to derate when max towing, heat, and inclines are involved. If that is true and they address that, it will perform better on the davis dam/J2807 and therefore have higher ratings. It also suffers from lack of hp up the ike, but that is different than j2807 limitations. it will be interesting to see where the upcoming ford and ram diesel offerings land on tow ratings. They should have similar hp and tq and lots of gears to utilize.

      2. They need to trim the fat and increase GVWR. The F150 is a little lighter and has another 200 lbs of GVWR. The old F150 had a 7700 lb GVWR with the max tow package so the new trucks didnt gain or lose any payload vs their old one.

        1. That old F150 was a butt dragging mess at max payload and towing. The new one is thankfully much better, but still not as good of chassis dynamics as the GM. About the same as the RAM without the airbags, and behind the RAM with the airbags.

          1. Well its a half ton, 95% of which are used for picking up groceries. I spent $150 and put in a set of air bags and just hauled 2000 lbs of laminate flooring with mine and it felt like it had nothing in it. If you needed more capacity order the HD payload package and get the uprated springs.

            At least ford and Chevy give you the option to carry a decent payload, whether the springs are soft or not. Ram doesn’t even get there. 1300 lbs is the max for an Ecodiesel Crew Cab.

    4. I wonder – – – –

      If Nissan got us the “tweener” bridging the gap between 1/2 ton and 3/4 tons, is this Jeep truck striving to bridge the gap between mid-size and 1/2 ton?
      Will it, therefore, haul greater than 1500 lbs, and tow greater than 8,000 lbs.
      This “tweener” idea here would be quite a coup, if it’s accepted, — which has nor been the case for the Titan XD.
      I must say, than anything less than a slam-dunk surprise would just be another “me too midsize”, with no huge distinction…and that market is getting flooded.

      ===================

      1. CORRECTIONs – – –

        1) “tow greater than 8,000 lbs.” should be “tow greater than 8,000 lbs?”
        2) “I must say, than anything less than a slam-dunk..” should be “I must say, anything less than a slam-dunk…”

        ===============

          1. Rustydodge – – –

            Yeah. I agree. The JT “Scrambler” would have to hit a home run in the market place. Going “heavy” is one simple way to do that, since Jeep already has the meaty underpinnings in place from its Wrangler design.

            =================

            1. After owning a Dakota and then going to a larger 1/2 ton, a midsized truck would have to do a few things “right” to talk me back down in size. If this scrambler is a mini power wagon (front/rear lockers) with decent rear seat (crew cab) room and can fit a 4′ sheet of plywood/drywall in the back, it may just do it. The 4 door wranglers I’ve been in leave much to be desired for rear seat comfort.

      2. Dang. 205′ wheelbase on the Jeep truck!

        That absolutely ruins it.

        That is not a Jeep, and won’t be able to go where a Jeep goes.

        And we have waited so long for a Jeep truck. Not a FCA truck that looks like a Jeep in the front and has some suspension upgrades.Dang!

        1. No way, that’s terrible. 205 wheelbase is worse than almost any full sized pickup. Lost my money Jeepp. And Jeep has lost their soul.

          1. JL Bob
            X2! This is what we’ve waited years for. An off-road vehicle with a 205″ wheelbase, not good! This thing may “bottom out” on our local RR crossings. This is not worthy of the “jeep” nameplate!

            1. No way. The pictures look long, but not 205 inches long. How could that be. 205 would be a nonstarter. You would have to have the truck lifted to the sky for that to go anywhere close to off-road.

          1. Correct. the 205 is probably total length. If it is 33″ longer than current wrangler that puts it at either 128.4 or 149. Ram 1500 is 140.9 so we can say for certain the 205″ mentioned in the video is incorrect.

            1. That picture is not a 205 wheelbase vehicle.
              Major egg on TFL’s face for even suggesting it might be that long.
              And even more egg on the face of the Jeep forum if that is also what they reported. They should know better.

      3. The Colorado is already a tweener. Its got more payload that a lot of Ram 1500’s and is close with some of the higher optioned F150’s. The Diesel Colorado Z71 I looked at had like 1475 lbs of payload while my F150 Lariat Supercrew has 1539. They can tow upwards of 7000 lbs too.

    5. Having owned 3 Jeeps,my last being an 08 JK,I’m looking forward to the new Jeep pickup.I will,when it comes out,give the diesel scrambler a serious look see,and test drive.For now though,I’m just gonna take a wait and see attitude on it.I am interested.How many on here that are convinced it’s not going to sell good,or be really off road capable have actually owned some jeeps?

    6. I don’t think Jeep will put its name on any Scrambler that won’t be off-road worthy. I think what it will tow at this point is up in the air but I’m sure it will perform off-road. It will compete for sales with Nissan for the number 4 spot after Toyota, Ford, and Chevy. It looks like they are giving the truck the look that everyone had hoped for. It seems to me that FCA was listening to the calls of its customers. Good job.

      1. I disagree Moondog,I think the Jeep Pickup will out sell all offerings with the exception of the taco.But I’m willing to bet that some taco owners will come over to the dark side and buy the new Jeep pickup.Just sayin’…

        1. Lohchief I am certain there will be some Taco owners defect because a lot of us are very frustrated over our howling rear diffs and Toyota has no fix. Even the replacement rear diffs howl. This is testing even my Taco loyalty. I think the Jeep truck will sell well and it should. It seems FCA has listened and I hope they are rewarded with good sales numbers. I think at best they can compete for the 3 spot by jumping the already dated Colorado but Ford knows how to sell trucks. The Ranger will compete for the 1 spot right out of the gate. I think Ford will have a firm grasp on the 2 spot and we could look for Jeep and Chevy to fight it out for 3rd but we will have to wait and see. Either way I commend FCA for once again having the kahunas to build something different.

          1. Moondog the sales are coming soon and I bet Colorado is catching the Tacoma again this month with the introduction of the ZR2. The ZR2 is an advertising billboard for the rest of their lineup. Regardless whether or not people off road, almost every infomercial filled with propaganda is off road based for trucks and its in our heritage. Yes people will still buy a GMC elevation with a 17 degree approach angle but they buy it clueless of its debilitation and buy it for the vanity. The ZR2 has an old following that is onboarding and they will bring the popularity of the Colorado above and beyond the Tacoma now every month. Maybe I am wrong, will know in a few hours I guess. But I think the ZR2 might put the Colorado or at least the combined twins ahead of the Taco before Ford releases the Ranger.

            1. What makes me happy is the midsize field is widening out,more players.That means more effort towards the ‘one upmanship’ by the oems. Which in turn gives us more choices,and maybe lower prices.Anyways,it is heartening to know that there are choices now instead of the over-bloated and over priced full size trucks.Even the ridgeline will have a competitor with the Santa Fe,or santa cruz,whatever th’ hell they’ll call it.Good times are ahead for all that play the game of trucks…

            2. Lohchief, we definitely need more competition in the truck market period, in all classes in order to push them out of this 20 year draught.

            3. Ya Moondog its low but higher than last year and the overall year shows the Colorado gaining ground on the Tacoma but the Canyon went for a sht along with the Ridgeline. Without the ZR2 I think the Colorado would be way down like the Canyon right now. I believe a lot of what sells the Tacoma and the jeeps is their heritage and I think the ZR2 can bring that to Chevy. Give it some more time maybe. Either way I dont mind being wrong

    7. This maybe a way for ram to move it’s power wagon buyers to jeep with out losing them to other specialty buyers.
      The Colorado didn’t do very well for towing confidence in the tfl test.
      I doubt the jeep will either.

      I don’t have a formula. But seat of the pants tells me there is a relationship between tow vehicle weight and wheel base and towing ability.

      The closer the relationship shifts toward towing the further it moves away from off road ability.

      But I have no doubt there are die hard jeep fans that want to tow their jeep with a jeep.

      1. Buddy, most of the Wrangler owners that I see defecting to the Taco do so because of the harsh ride of the Wrangler. Tons of people switch because they wanted a bed and couldn’t tolerate the Jeep as a daily driver. I have never owned a Wrangler so can’t speak to that. I did own a Willys. 🙂

        1. My last wrangler was an 08 2 door.It didn’t ride as rough as others that I had.The jk uses coil springs,which really worked better that leafs in all four corners.Had better articulation when off road,and a lot less harsh ride,when tooling around town,or on the hwy.

      1. Which manufacturer does not lie about their towing ratings these days? Maybe GM is good at being more conservative, because they have been awarded most often by far as being confident in towing, but even they are not being honest.

        1. If you can find that magic trailer that has a 10% tongue weight then you could tow at the max on a lot of these trucks.

        2. The Colorado diesel was going off the road in the last video pulling a 5000Lb trailer and its rated for 7700. Depends on the size of the trailer AND its weight.

            1. Lohchief, not sure but the 2016 Gas V6 in the brochure states 7000lbs. 2wd or 4wd with ext cab or full cab with the Z82 package so no change. MT stated 7600 for 4×4 diesel so I doubt there is much of any change for this truck at the rated 7700 lbs but I cant find the information to confirm it. The Chevy brochures are a joke.

          1. I saw a Brute the other day and had to do a double take thinking someone got their hands on the Jeep truck early. It was a very impressive looking rig UNTIL I saw what they were selling for and then I just kind of chuckled and thought this guy will be sick when Jeep drops basically the same truck for less than half of what he paid for it.

      1. AEV started by building 4 door TJ’s, because that was what customers wanted. They have always worked very closely with Jeep, and later Ram on development. That has made their offerings some of the best integrated on the market.
        Yes, the JT Scrambler is the big reason AEV is not building that same truck anymore. Rest assured that they’ll offer packages corresponding to what they offer on JKs today.

    8. Based on widely distributed frame drawings and comparisons to the AEV Brute, the wheelbase has been pegged at 139″. Even if the track with doesn’t increase, that’s a bigger foot print than the Colorado. Power train in diesel and gas is plenty for a GCWR to exceed the Colorado as well. Brakes are beefy, to say the least. Spring rates and tire sizes will dictate if a particular truck has class leading off road OR towing capability. The rear spring rates necessary for good towing will be too stiff to flex well, at least without a load.

    9. Can they make a Jeep tow great loads then go off road the same day. I’d say no, looking at raptor ram and zr2. They all tow less than a standard p/u.

      Dsl adds cost to Jeep which is inexpensive to buy. Sorta goes against the grain.

    Leave a Reply

    Top