Yea, the door was a little short, but overall I think the proportions and shapes work really nicely.I think it needs like another 12 inches behind the door to balance with the longer bed but not too bad
Yea, the door was a little short, but overall I think the proportions and shapes work really nicely.I think it needs like another 12 inches behind the door to balance with the longer bed but not too bad
That’s kind of nice.
It really is. I kinda like it.That’s kind of nice.
These are all just variations of PBY that you are trying to sneak in
Hey, a girls gotta try.These are all just variations of PBY that you are trying to sneak in.
Crazy.Just ran another using sketches only but added a Scout. Gemini is crazy. Three sketches and told it to make a street scape adding people and pedestrians Can’t believe what it pulled together in 45 seconds
That very nice. Well done
Your sir are an AI artist! Seeing the Traveler without tire carrier inspired me to consider whether removing accessories would make the vehicle feel smaller. Many of the people in this group who have seen the traveler in person, myself included, have come away with the impression that it is a quite a large vehicle. I can't help but wonder if that impresion is overly influenced by the 35's, tall roof rack, and the tire carrier. Would a Traveler on 33's without the carrier and rack give a different impression? I'd love to know. The rack adds 4-5 inches in height (or more?). The carrier adds about 20" in length and the 35's play their part in height as well. The width is what is it of course. I'm curious if I'm the only one potentially interested in decontenting the vehicle for a smaller feel? My primary use case is off-road and 33's with 11" of ground clearance are more that enough for the trails in the Mountain West (OnX Offroad up to a 7 trail rating) that I frequent. I'm not interested in damaging my Traveler with anything more aggressive. The locker should be standard and I'm hoping for a sway bar disconnect option that is not tied to an expensive offroad package. Same with rock rails and armor options of course. Are others here thinking along these lines or is everyone here "Go big or go home!"
I love the tire carrier, I’m getting it regardless. However, I really want to see the Traveler on an 18” with 33s.Your sir are an AI artist! Seeing the Traveler without tire carrier inspired me to consider whether removing accessories would make the vehicle feel smaller. Many of the people in this group who have seen the traveler in person, myself included, have come away with the impression that it is a quite a large vehicle. I can't help but wonder if that impresion is overly influenced by the 35's, tall roof rack, and the tire carrier. Would a Traveler on 33's without the carrier and rack give a different impression? I'd love to know. The rack adds 4-5 inches in height (or more?). The carrier adds about 20" in length and the 35's play their part in height as well. The width is what is it of course. I'm curious if I'm the only one potentially interested in decontenting the vehicle for a smaller feel? My primary use case is off-road and 33's with 11" of ground clearance are more that enough for the trails in the Mountain West (OnX Offroad up to a 7 trail rating) that I frequent. I'm not interested in damaging my Traveler with anything more aggressive. The locker should be standard and I'm hoping for a sway bar disconnect option that is not tied to an expensive offroad package. Same with rock rails and armor options of course. Are others here thinking along these lines or is everyone here "Go big or go home!"![]()
I thought it was much wider than my Wrangler, but it really isn’t. I measured at the widest point of my Wrangker, the tire. Because I have an offset wheel the Traveler is only about 1-1/2 inches wider. I still say the Traveler looks wider because it doesn’t have a thinner body/hood with a fender flare.To be fair, from my POV I don’t think it’s that big. Visually I think it looks big but I think that is due to the design proportions. That said, we’ve had 3-row SUVs up until a few months ago for probably pushing 16 years so to me it doesn’t seem big but that’s what I’m comparing it against. If anything the height is what gets me the most but it makes the proportions of rest of traveler feel really good
Completely agree. And ironically I don’t think Wranglers look or feel wide. I really think a lot of it is the proportions that visually make it look bigger. Granted, it’s no Geo Tracker or Suzuki Jimney but I think it at or just below a Yukon-IMO. And I think size-wise that’s correct as well based on dimensions. I think the rear carrier makes it bigger for sure but certainly don’t need that to start. Like @cyure i want the carrier because it’s how I’ve seen it every time but to each their own as far as how they use itI thought it was much wider than my Wrangler, but it really isn’t. I measured at the widest point of my Wrangker, the tire. Because I have an offset wheel the Traveler is only about 1-1/2 inches wider. I still say the Traveler looks wider because it doesn’t have a thinner body/hood with a fender flare.