Jeep Wrangler concept pick-up / retro

[intakexhaust]

I'm bored with todays look of trucks but would dig this.
The rubber is nonsense, but like the idea of having a drop top. Looks fun.

[kach22i]

Nice, but I'd be more excited if International Harvester got back into the market with a new Scout pick-up truck.

[intakexhaust]

^Had one of those. Identical with removable hardtop and doors, hinged windscreen. Recall it was a 1964. Little 4 banger, might have also been 6 volt electrics. Pneumatic wiper motor, side windows were sliders. Tough little unit. Used for snow plowing.

[Arizona_928]

Those scout 80/800's are a hoot. Small and nimble for what they are. Had a 196CI in a 800a.
Jeep just needs to make the pick up version in general. No BS comanche with a unibody. Throw one of those 3.0l V6 diesels that they have.

[intakexhaust]

Yep to the oil burner. Make it a tough beam axle frt. / rear, low-low gearing in the box and a top end of 80-85 mph. Who cares if its a turd getting up to speed?! Heavy gauge chassis, steel galvanized panels (no aluminum please).

I don't know about the West coasters and Ford and Dodge trucks post MY 2000, but in the midwest, lots are becoming rust heaps. Absolute junk. BIL is on another and both had self cracking windshields in the winter. Truck sits out overnight and in the AM, defroster is turned on as usual and its a crack-a-mania.

[pwd72s]

Evidently, the smaller pickup is making a comeback...I'm hoping they don't go too big with them. Not just Jeep...other car makers coming along with them as well.

[tcar]

Originally Posted by intakexhaust

. BIL is on another and both had self cracking windshields in the winter. Truck sits out overnight and in the AM, defroster is turned on as usual and its a crack-a-mania.

Everyone is using much thinner glass to save weight... fuel economy ratings.

[Scott R]

Originally Posted by tcar

Everyone is using much thinner glass to save weight... fuel economy ratings.

Nobody buys this type of car thinking about MPG, gas is cheap.

[herr_oberst]

But does it have an airplane engine and use shotgun shells for starting?

This Airplane-Engine 1939 Plymouth Pickup Is Radically Radial

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by AZ_porschekid

Those scout 80/800's are a hoot. Small and nimble for what they are. Had a 196CI in a 800a

4,000 pounds of nibble with manual steering?

random pics that YOU have taken.......



Not so small (at least next to a P-car), larger than a Ford Bronco anyway.

I did not know about the 6-volt thing, but it makes sense.

Just a Wrangle with a bed like the Brute would do me.

Here is a double cab version:
http://www.motortrend.com/news/aev-jeep-brute-double-cab-hemi-first-drive/

[onewhippedpuppy]

Supposedly a Wrangler pickup is a done deal for the next generation. Which sounds awesome.

[intakexhaust]

^Well thats good news. Lets hope these young guys in R&D and bean counters stay to the core and think raw truck. I also get the entire gov. safety, EPA pile it on but I'm tired of all the frilly girlie trucks these days. Big tough guys lol.... I challenge them to throw tools, construction debris, farm crapo stuff in them. Take it off road with tree limbs slapping the sides, real mud and ditch, creek crossing.

Also having an itch for one of these. Mid- 60's, 4wd, 352c.i. Screeew the emission man. Honking carb with manual choke control. hehe

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by intakexhaust

Also having an itch for one of these. Mid- 60's, 4wd, 352c.i. Screeew the emission man. Honking carb with manual choke control. hehe

Back in High School we had a 1968 F150 with a 390 in it, no 4WD and it sucked in the snow.

Great memories though.

A friend once had a 1962 F100 I think, those old full sized trucks were so much smaller back then.

I'm pretty sure even the mid-size 2016 Chevy Colorado is larger than the old full sized 1960's trucks.

What's up with that?

[VincentVega]

No kidding. The current Colorado is about the size of my 99 1500 or at least very close.

The Jeep truck looks cool but I wonder what you use it for considering the small bed. Does look cool.

[Arizona_928]

Originally Posted by kach22i

4,000 pounds of nibble with manual steering?

Well considering they are not full length axles. They really are. I did a WJ box on it for PS, & ungraded to a Holley 2 barrel carb.
I would own another in heartbeat over any of the wranglers. Especially since I have a 4 cyl t18/d20 twin stick laying around.

[kach22i]

Well Arizona is the right place to find one.

I'm up in Michigan and those old Scouts all rusted out many decades ago.

[intakexhaust]

No doubt about the Wrangler proto short bed. Not going to grab a load of sheet rock or ply, but there's ways around it.... hitch mount t-bar, drag a small trailer 4x8, etc. Anyways, a smaller chassis earns merit in tight trails. If sufficient ground clearance and beam axle, can crawl over obstacles and gain pumpkin clearance.

All for thought. Would be neat though if manufacturers brought back smaller trucks, stripped or limited equipped, heavier gauge galvanized steel. No way around the EPA, safety hair baggies and all that but make a raw fun simple truck.

You go to the dealer and there it is with no options but say for trans.. Pick a color, no carpet, liner floor to hose out, thick vinyl seat.

[intakexhaust]

Originally Posted by AZ_porschekid

Those scout 80/800's are a hoot. Small and nimble for what they are. Had a 196CI in a 800a.
Jeep just needs to make the pick up version in general. No BS comanche with a unibody. Throw one of those 3.0l V6 diesels that they have.

This is much like the one had including color combo. Dashboard was all steel, no radio. Three passenger bench. Western plow only had hydraulic lift, no power swivel, pump was mounted underhood.