Originally Posted by bofer84
just curious, what do you think is more capable, a deffender 90, or the jeep jk rubicon??
A difficult question.
Here in the UK Land Rovers rule and nealry every serious off roader uses a Land Rover, or some other vehicle converted to run Land Rover parts.
Jeeps by comparison are pretty rare, in fact I probably see more Aston Martins on the road than I do Wranglers so they are not really favoured or even considered a serious prospect.
Me, well I'm more open minded. I know what Land Rovers can do (have been around them all my life). But I also understand Jeeps are bad *** also (hence why I'm on this website).
Personally I think a Land Rover is more rugged and thougher as a whole vehicle. It can tow 7700lb from the factory and is heavily used in agriculture and military.
Also the older ones are very nimble being as short as 80" so off road competitions are very good with them.
Also the full time 4wd is a great bonus.
But Jeeps have a lot of really godd attributes, like the Dana 44 on the JK and the electronic dissconnects and less body work covering the wheels (front arches/fenders specifically).
So really I think it's much of a muchness just with different plus/minus' on both sides.
I still want to by a JK though