Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > When advertising surpasses product.

When advertising surpasses product.
Thread Tools
angelmb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 04:55 AM
 


     
Cipher13
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 05:06 AM
 
Lemme know what you think after you actually use one.

Great ad, too.
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 06:56 AM
 
Have you ever driven a jeep?

I owned one and it was the best vehicle I ever had. Next time perhaps you should do a little more research before saying the advertising is surpasses the product
     
Mastrap
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 07:20 AM
 
Great ads, but I think the OP is right. Jeeps are far from the best off road vehicles available. That honour goes to the Land Rover and the Toyota Land Cruiser, both of which you'll find in daily use in remote areas all over the globe. Jeeps, not so much.

This is not to say that 'Jeepz suck lol', some models are pretty capable in their own right. But when I look at the current lineup of cars I don't see anything even remotely tempting.
     
angelmb  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 07:21 AM
 
You got it wrong, I wasn't yelling a JEEP is cr*p,

I could have included the VW DSG gearbox ads and still say the same thing no matter how good the tech is, the ads are just stellar… whatever.
     
angelmb  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 07:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by Mastrap View Post
That honour goes to the Land Rover and the Toyota Land Cruiser
and the Mercedes Benz G Class… don't forget either the UNIMOG.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 07:25 AM
 
The Unimog doesn't *really* count.
     
Mastrap
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 07:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by angelmb View Post
and the Mercedes Benz G Class… don't forget either the UNIMOG.
True enough, but you don't find the Mercedes used as a workhorse in the middle of the African bush. Fine car, no argument, but it never managed to take that market away from, or even share it with, the Toyotas and Landys.

The old Unimogs of course just rock, but then they're a different animal altogether.
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 07:53 AM
 
[QUOTE=angelmb;3699684]You got it wrong, I wasn't yelling a JEEP is cr*p, /QUOTE]
You original post implied that the advertising was better then the actual product.

btw, in the example you provided I really don't see it. Marketing I suppose is a personal preference and those ads don't do anything for me, but owning my jeep was AWESOME.

I was sad to see it go but I had to grow up and be a responsible adult (for once).
     
angelmb  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 08:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by MacosNerd View Post
You original post implied that the advertising was better then the actual product.
Well, bad wording on my behalf then. What I wanted to said is that no matter how good the given JEEP -or the whole brand- is, I wouldn't care that much about it as it was the ad execution itself what captured my attention. So I blame my 'borked' english cause I even find JEEPs to be reasonably good-looking vehicles, with one exception, the Compass, now that's weird and ugly.
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 08:40 AM
 
I agree with the compass, its just plain ugly. The problem that's facing jeep now that they have no line (except for the ugly compass) that has decent mileage.
     
Mastrap
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 08:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by MacosNerd View Post
I was sad to see it go but I had to grow up and be a responsible adult (for once).
I had to make the same decision with my old Land Rover. It went to a very good home, so that part was ok. But rarely a week goes by where I don't miss that old truck.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 10:13 AM
 
Those images are really creative. Very very cool. But you're right that they DO look a lot cooler than the product.

I've never owned a Jeep product, but I've worked in and on them as well as having driven and been a passenger in many of them. Solid is the sense I get from them. Not "stylish", even the newer models. Not that they're "ugly," but more that they're utilitarian and well styled for that.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 11:04 AM
 
The only thing Jeep has going for it is the indestructible Ford 4.0L Inline-6...which I'm not even sure they use anymore.

Other than that the frames are wimpy, the gas mileage sucks ass for such a small vehicle, and the stock Wrangler has crappy tires.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 01:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
... the gas mileage sucks ass for such a small vehicle...
It's all about the gearing. There's a reason Jeeps are used for crawling rocks so much.
     
Luca Rescigno
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 02:10 PM
 
Wow wtf is up with this thread.

I understood from the beginning that angelmb was referring to how, in some cases, the advertisement itself is given much more attention than the product. The ad and the brand name may feature prominently, but they don't tell you anything about the product other than that the company that makes it has some creative marketing people. That's not a bad thing either.

Also why are people complaining about gas mileage in Jeeps? They're Jeeps. If you want good gas mileage, why would you even consider one? I bet the only reason they have the Compass is to appeal to people who want the styling of a Jeep without the disadvantages, and for raising Chrysler's average fuel economy for CAFE purposes.

I personally think it would be fun to have a Wrangler for summer. Just for cruising and actually doing some off-roading (unlike most SUV owners). I have a Honda Fit for commuting.

"That's Mama Luigi to you, Mario!" *wheeze*
     
phantomdragonz
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Near Boulder, CO
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 02:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
The only thing Jeep has going for it is the indestructible Ford 4.0L Inline-6...which I'm not even sure they use anymore.
FORD??? fords 4.0L six is a V-six not an inline like the jeep engine! and sadly they dont use it anymore...

the 4.0L engines were torquey as hell, I have driven both the 4.2 and a 4.0 the 4.2 was torquier then the 4.0 but they both blow any similar displacement V6 engine out of the water, they are AWESOME for 4-Wheeling, but are not so hot on the highway (could be the gearing on my jeep though)

I currently own a 1989 Jeep Wrangler (came with a 4.2L carbourated engine) and I have since swapped in a 4.0L from a 2000 Wrangler. 33" tires and 4.56:1 axle gears, with a 5 speed out of the 2000 Wrangler (NV3550)

The 4.0 in the jeep was originally from AMC and was a 4.2L, A LOT of the parts can be swapped from block to block, a common swap is to take the crank and connecting rods out of the 4.2L and put them in a 4.0L to make it a 4.6L stroker motor...

I only drive my jeep when I am going 4-wheeling, I drive a Civic as a daily driver

—Zach
     
design219
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 02:58 PM
 
There's an old saying that the best way to kill a poor product is with really good marketing.

As for Jeep, I have no opinion.
__________________________________________________

My stupid iPhone game: Nesen Probe, it's rather old, annoying and pointless, but it's free.
Was free. Now it's gone. Never to be seen again.
Off to join its brother and sister apps that could not
keep up with the ever updating iOS. RIP Nesen Probe.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 05:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by phantomdragonz View Post
FORD??? fords 4.0L six is a V-six not an inline like the jeep engine! and sadly they dont use it anymore...
Dude, my dad owned a F-150 WITH an 4.0L I-6. They made them for a LOOONG time and they were rock solid. Used the same engines for Jeeps and most people I knew took them over 230K miles.
     
Luca Rescigno
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 06:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
Dude, my dad owned a F-150 WITH an 4.0L I-6. They made them for a LOOONG time and they were rock solid. Used the same engines for Jeeps and most people I knew took them over 230K miles.
So a Chrysler vehicle uses a Ford engine?

Okay.

Or wait, when you say "the same engines" do you mean I6 just like the Ford, or did you actually mean made by Ford? If the former, then I agree, I6 engines are cool. If the latter, then I am confused.

"That's Mama Luigi to you, Mario!" *wheeze*
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 06:34 PM
 
I assumed they were shared between the companies since both engines are incredibly similar. Like how most early 90s Chrysler I-4s were made by Mitsubishi.

Appears I was wrong thinking this after consulting a few webpages, but the specs for both engines are almost dead-on and have the same reputation for bulletproof reliability.

Carry on.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 06:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
It's all about the gearing. There's a reason Jeeps are used for crawling rocks so much.
Eh, if anyone crawls rocks in a Jeep they'll swap out everything that's anywhere near stock on a Wrangler. I can't see a professional crawling machine with the stock gearbox and diff. still in it.

I don't hate Jeeps or anything, but I've never been particularly impressed with them. Ever look at the frame of those things? I think my mom's minivan has a beefier chassis.
     
zerostar
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 07:06 PM
 
I have my first (and last) jeep this year. Worst vehicle I have ever owned. I have never had this many problems with a brand new vehicle.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2008, 07:11 PM
 
Which is a damn shame since Jeep has always been synonymous with reliability.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:04 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,