I dunno, the Panda is a dinky 4x4 for sure. But so is an MB, and they both have about the same horsepower. Maybe Jeep is trying to get back to its roots and move away from the bloated behemoths that the Wranglers have become. Of course, I'm being a little tongue-in-cheek here. The point is: change is inevitable. When AMC released the Eagles under the stewardship of Renault, they were pretty stout 4x4 cars, much beefier than the Subarus (their only competition) of September 1979 (1980 model year). Jeep traditionalists predicted wholesale wussification of the CJ. Instead, the lessons learned from building unibody-platform 4x4s helped make the XJ series wildly popular (and profitable). "Wait! A unibody Jeep? And the drivetrains are so weak and unreliable!" Once again, Jeep purists predicted automotive apocalypse. The XJ platform was soon sorted out and they sold several thousand boatloads of 'em from 1984 to 2001. Yet the CJ soldiered on...until 1987 when the YJ Wrangler was introduced. "Square headlights? As God is my witness, I will never buy another Jeep!!" Yeah, for the first couple of years, YJ drivetrains kinda sucked, but before their curtain call in 1995, they had a 4.0 HO and AX15 running gear available--not too shabby. Why is Jeep considering a move like this when it will surely dilute the Jeep bloodline? Well, in Colorado at least, I can count about 5 Outbacks/Forresters for every Jeep JK/JKU I see. For most people, the Subarus are exactly what they need. My girlfriend owns a 2011 Outback, and I like it (it reminds me of an Eagle wagon, only it's faster and gets about twice the mileage). I've owned Jeeps continuously since 1981, but at 10mpg, I don't drive my J10 much anymore. Am I that much of a Jeep stalwart that I'm willing to spend my entire retirement savings on gas? Nope. I will drive what suits my needs the best, just like everyone else. Rest assured; the Jeep "heritage"" will survive. It's called branding.