Home » What Do You Think About The Upcoming All-Electric Jeep Wagoneer S?

What Do You Think About The Upcoming All-Electric Jeep Wagoneer S?

Screen Shot 2022 09 08 At 10.58.49 Pm

Jeep had a big press conference yesterday, which I attended virtually from Australia because I’m Jeep-obsessed. During the briefing, Jeep Brand’s CEO Christian Meunier announced that “By the end of 2025, [Jeep’s] full lineup will be electrified, including four all-electric vehicles competing in the heart of the marketplace.” Stellantis also said that by 2030, half of all Jeep sales in the U.S. are expected to be electric. More importantly, the press conference came with three major EV debuts: the Jeep Recon, the Jeep Avenger, and the Jeep Wagoneer S. Let’s look at the last one.

Sharing the same “STLA Large” platform as the Recon, the Wagoneer S will be built on a unibody platform with a big battery pack under the belly, a frunk up front, and a motor driving each axle — a fairly standard setup to find in a modern EV. Jeep says it’s aiming for a range of 400 miles and an output of 600 horsepower, which should get the machine to 60 mph in 3.5 seconds. The car will make a public debut in 2023, with production starting the following year. Apparently Jeep is taking reservations as early as early 2023.

All New, All Electric Wagoneer S, The Art Of American Premium

I don’t have a ton of commentary to add to these photos other than that Jeep’s decision to start its fully electric lineup with the Wagoneer S and the Recon makes a lot of sense. The latter is billed as a family-sized off-roader, and the Wagoneer as a premium SUV. These are two segments that tend to command high price tags, and right now electric cars are just expensive. So if you’d like some profit margin, you may as well wrap those pricey batteries in luxury, because people will willingly drop heavy coin for it. A pricey mid-size or small SUV may not have worked in the U.S. right now.

Screen Shot 2022 09 08 At 10.59.05 Pm

I’ll note that I find the rear wing fun and different, and the wide rear horizontal light bar looks nice, too. Plus, in the dark photo above, the grille slots look like snow buildup:

All New, All Electric Wagoneer S, The Art Of American Premium

All New, All Electric Wagoneer S, The Art Of American Premium

 

All New, All Electric Wagoneer S, The Art Of American Premium

Of today’s three all-electric Jeep debuts, this one has me least interested. The Avenger is a small EV that should appeal to the masses in Europe if it’s priced right, and the Recon is Jeep’s first truly off-road capable EV. This Wagoneer S, though, looks a lot like other EV crossovers on the market. It looks nice! But, compared to the other two Jeep EVs that showed their faces today, this one feels less interesting, but maybe my colleague Jason can find some excitement in the Wagoneer S.

[Editor’s Note: I’m not sure I can actually find some excitement in this, because I’m not sure I’d even be able to sit in something so sleek and modern without combusting, but I do think what they’re showing here – even if they’re just renders – is a handsome and clean design.

I think even David’s cloudy engineer eyes honed in on the two key details of this design: that interesting roof-mounted wing and the novel treatment of the traditional Jeep seven-slot grille.

The rest of the design is impressively minimal, with the only real bit of jewelry being that polished steel arch that runs up the A-pillar, across the roofline, and then fills and defines the D-pillar. It’s clean and precise-looking, which seems to be the defining design language here, and that roof wing follows suit as well, extending back from that roofline cleanly, not so much rising as much as allowing the center part of the roof to dip down, leaving the wing to carry the roofline on its own. It’s a nice touch, though I think the vantage point to really appreciate it is from above, where it won’t be seen as often for us non-avians.

Screen Shot 2022 09 08 At 10.58.49 Pm

The treatment of the fiercely-defended Jeep seven-slot grille is interesting, because, as we’ve seen on a few other recent Jeeps, it’s not actually a grille, because those aren’t open air intake slots. In many ways, this is the most radical departure, because they’re not really slots at all, instead are seven gaps between eight teeth-like dividers there, over a sloping, textured, and it appears illuminated surface.

On this EV, there’s no need for cooling air in that area (it all seems to come in below the bumper line) so what’s left is purely for identity purposes.

Wagoneerev Grille

In this illumination, the negative space shapes do suggest piles of snow, as David noted, though I wonder if that’s partially an effect of the photograph, since in person the concavity of the the silver textured area may be more evident.

It’s interesting, though I’m not so sure how strong its connection to the traditional Jeep slots are, if that even matters at this point? 

Anyway, I think it’s handsome but maybe a bit forgettable, like other handsome things I’ve known. – JT]

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit

37 Responses

  1. So now Jeep is doing what those clickbaity car “journalism” websites do and showing us a bunch of crappy drawings (“this hot hatch has a LAMBORGHINI V10”-proceeds to show us some dumb rendering)

  2. This looks more Cherokee and less new Wagoneer to me. The funky D pillar was the main throwback to the old Wagoneers, and this one isn’t pulling it off. Would’ve been interesting if they’d tried the shaver grille versus the 7-slot), but fiddle with the lighting on this one and it might look like teeth (Angry Jeep Wagoneer mods incoming!). Also, why do EVs have so many extra lights? Wouldn’t that drain the battery needlessly?

  3. I understand that this fills a fairly large niche in the market, and I can clearly see the path they’re trying to cut with Wagoneer as a brand (forget Cadillac and Lincoln, they’re aimed at Range Rover clients). This is very clearly the luxury option against the Recon’s “Ruggedness” which will continue to earn grunts from the peanut gallery.

    I think the swept back and wing are a modern and interesting choice that helps with CD, but on a vehicle this large, it may look like a caricature of “sport” (think more Rolls Cullinan and less RR Sport).
    But at the same time, it makes all the sense in the world to start with larger EVs where you can store a greater amount of battery. I imagine with the assistance of time and investment, we can eventually get back to reasonably sized cars when cheap batteries with range don’t take up quite so much space.

    And for the record, as an American, I’m once again inclined to feel robbed as Europe gets the coolest option.

  4. Too big, probably too heavy, not very practical (for me, anyway) and certain to be way too expensive.

    Other than that, not really interested.

    If Jeep would revive the Old Skool Cherokee — with the 4.0 inline-six — we might have something to talk about.

  5. If I wanted Range Rover styling, why wouldn’t I just buy one of those?

    There’s nothing wrong with the existing Wagoneer IMO, so I’m not particularly interested in this one.

      1. The main reason to have this (in my opinion) is to drive long distances in comfort, usually towing a trailer. Can it go over 300 miles fully loaded? If not this is just another expensive toy for city dwellers.

  6. Too much swank. Not enough Jeep.

    Reminiscent of a Range Rover Velar. But the Velar does it better.

    This is not to my tastes. Of all the Jeep products just announced, I actually prefer the looks of the Avenger over the rest of them, even over the Recon.

    I think it’s a mistake that the Avenger will not be coming stateside. Jeep will need something to contend with offerings from other automakers like the upcoming Equinox. But maybe that’s still coming down the pipeline. The Renegade has some name recognition, so maybe they’ll stick with that nameplate in the U.S. whenever they do offer a small electric CUV.

  7. I think if they’re going to prioritize on road manners and still want the jeep name, stop making a pretend SUV thing, scale the entire body vertically by 10-15% down the Z axis, and just make jeep station wagons. Plus it would be a cool looking wagon.

  8. They’ve somehow sent me a bunch of actual paper marketing content in the mail, but I very much don’t like any of the wagoneers. I know they sell, but they’re too damn big even for my local Whole Foods lot. The styling doesn’t do it for me on the ICE ones, and this seems to blandify it further. Fake grille but no car face? Two odd choices that seem to somehow conflict. I know why they’re doing this, but I wish they wouldn’t.

  9. It looks expensive and will have the other parents in the after school pickup line wondering to themselves what you do for a living – that’s the main goal with anything in this segment, right?

  10. How did they manage to take one of the ugliest vehicles available today and make it even uglier? I love the idea of it, but why does it need to be different from the existing ugly-mobile?

  11. I vote this one most likely to succeed. it is the least likely vehicle in ICE form to be driven off road, it still has AWD for winter use, and the styling and model are already considered upscale hauler, that likely never get used for long trips.

  12. Terrible name for a major product launch. I know they are trying to make Wagoneer a brand but:
    1. The only wagoneer is a hyper-thirsty suburban and its fancy cousin.
    2. This isn’t remotely related in platform
    3. Wagoneer S sounds like a base-level trim of the Wagoneer.

    There have to be better names than Wagoneer S.

    Wagoneer Charge
    Wagoneer Peak
    Wagoneer Sport
    Wagoneer Dream

    Etc.

    Terrible name

    1. Yeah, if they are going to make Wagoneer a “brand” (or sub-brand) they need to make the model names far more clear. Especially when the only two existing models in your Wagoneer “brand” are Wagoneer and Grand Wagoneer.

      The idea of turning models into brands is utterly baffling to me and only seems to have gotten more common. Do all these marketing people have data showing it actually works? It just seems like a confusing practice for consumers.

  13. I don’t get the wing. Why didn’t you just fill in the gap with car and make a proper wagon rear? Is there a great clamoring in the market for wings on SUVs?

    It’s not as stupid as when they put wings on truck tailgates, but that doesn’t make it smart.

      1. Given that the wing is there to trap air between it and the back glass so flow over the rear is smoothed, and having a solid sheet of material would be even more effective at that task (which is why it’s the choice of pretty much every current hatchback), your answer is wrong.

  14. The name sucks. No two ways about it. Why not Wagoneer E?
    However, this model makes sense.

    Remember firstly that this is a Wagoneer. Not a Grand Wagoneer. Jeep has been extremely aggressive in pointing out that Wagoneer != Grand Wagoneer; they’re two very different vehicles separated by over $30,000. (Even if the bones are identical.)
    I expect this one to be positioned between Wagoneers and Grand Wagoneers, which sit at the tippy top of the luxury SUV market. G-Wagens are a segment unto themselves; the Wagoneer fights it out with the Escalade, Yukon Denali (not regular Yukon,) Range Rover, etc.
    The Wagoneer “starts” at $61k and goes up to $82k for the Series III Carbide, while the Grand Wagoneer “starts” at $90k and I was able to kit one out to $125k. Told you – over $30k spread. This allows them to slot the Wagoneer S (ew, that just feels wrong too) very comfortably at $80-89k. And without even being at the event, I can already guess what they’ll be doing with it. In addition to the BEV portion, they’ll probably give it the passenger display standard ($1400 option on Wagoneer) and additional interior color choices from the GW line (Wagoneer only gets black and gray) or a unique interior trim package.
    Also bear in mind, margins on the Wagoneers are fucking nuts. I’ve heard they’re even higher than the Grand Cherokee WK2’s, and those things literally printed money.

    Expounding on that, I’d expect a BEV version of the Grand Wagoneer 3-row in the MY25-26 lineup based on Wagoneer S sales. If they sell extremely strongly, no question there will be a GW version at a higher price point. They’re the same chassis. However, if the BEV version sells below expectations, they can lean on it to further differentiate Wagoneer / Grand Wagoneer, and protect the GW sales. (GW customers are paying all that money so they can show off that they had all that money, largely. Again, $125k. For a Jeep. And they absolutely will consider bespoke builds which can push it even higher still.)

    Range though, I’m very skeptical of. Firstly, the Hurricane engine is very clearly not performing. Grand Wagoneer heavy duty tow package forces the 6.4 Hemi; you cannot equip the Hurricane with HD tow, period. Which means no 9,750lbs (already cut from 9,850lbs); I’ve been told the Hurricane’s limited to either 7,500lbs or 8,250lbs (nobody was certain.)
    And a big part of that? The Wagoneer is absolutely fucking massive and fat. The WS platform has a minimum weight of over 6,000lbs. With the Hurricane. Six fucking thousand pounds, escalating to over 6,600lbs with options and you’re going to replace a 410lbs engine and transmission in a chassis that already has very significant concerns with not blowing out tires from weight with 1,200lbs of batteries? Ha ha holy shit. I do not envy their suspension engineers.

  15. As a person who is unlikely to to purchase either a Jeep or a BEV, these vehicles don’t do much for me. I do think that they may be another step on the road to vehicles that would be attractive to me, in the unlikely event that the the necessary improvements in price, real-world range, charging speed, charging infrastructure, power generation and transmission capacity, etc., occur in my lifetime (I am 76).

    1. As a practical matter, going big and SUV-shaped to meet the perceived market only worsens the range/charge time issue. It requires a bigger battery to push a bigger, boxier car a given distance and at a given rate of charge (whether limited by the car’s own battery pack or the charging equipment available) it takes longer to charge that bigger battery.

      From a long-term-focused, adoption-based perspective it would make more sense to work the range/charging question around small cars and pure work trucks used for fixed-route work like parcel delivery and school buses, and work their way up and over to luxury.
      As a business matter, especially in supply-constrained times, profit per unit is king and the focus is always on the share price.

      1. But customers are accustomed to paying more (really, outrageously more) for large vehicles, and EVs are very expensive to build due to battery raw materials and the current lack of scale, so doing this lets them have the nice, fat margins that a subcompact runabout just wouldn’t

Leave a Reply