[BDOG1]

I went through the same deal last month. The 7k off the sticker of a new (08) rubicon did the trick! Got it just the way I wanted. Lifetime PT helps too!

[airtime34]

What was the out the door price? navigation included? thanks

[thedirt]

Originally Posted by CDNBEAR2009JEEP

Anyway, the 2006 Jeep TJ Rubicon has a 4.0L V6 with 190 HP @ 235 lb/ft of torque. Why is that not compared to a minivan engine? Or, do you have a biased opinion toward the JKs? I will tell you that the JKs don't look, drive, or feel weird. If that was the case, then all of the Jeeps would be that way.

Even though the horsepower (+11) and torque (+2) is more in the JK, the Rubicon is more suited for hardcore trails because of the upgraded suspension, etc. Mind you, you will have lots of plastic and a few more buttons.

Comparing peak numbers is almost useless. It's all about the area under the curve.

[Famous337]

this topic is gettin beat up everywhere. geeze.

im in the market for a new Jeep. A TJ unlimited (LJ), or a JK unlimited. Im gonna drive em both and see what i like better!

The reason im somewhat leaning towards the TJ Unlimted, is cause I have hundreds of dollars worth of parts from my current jeep that will fit right on the LJ!!

[Avian]

Originally Posted by Famous337

this topic is gettin beat up everywhere. geeze.

im in the market for a new Jeep. A TJ unlimited (LJ), or a JK unlimited. Im gonna drive em both and see what i like better!

The reason im somewhat leaning towards the TJ Unlimted, is cause I have hundreds of dollars worth of parts from my current jeep that will fit right on the LJ!!

Thats always a bonus.



I just recently looked at an LJ while at the dealer. Ive always liked them. And I was shocked as to how small and low to the ground it was compared to my JK (2 door). The bumpers didnt even come up to my knees, the overhangs were rather large, and I could even see right over top of the vehicle without a problem, lol.


Made me really appreciate all the improvements they did with the JK.

[Thunderstrike]

I have a 2004 TJ Sahara and recently bought a 2009 JK Rubicon. TJ is more fun to drive, but JK is better in many other aspects, ride, MPG, power windows/locks, etc. It also cruise faster and quieter on highway, BUT the fund driving feelings of TJ is gone.

[pyrotyro]

Originally Posted by Avian

Thats always a bonus.



I just recently looked at an LJ while at the dealer. Ive always liked them. And I was shocked as to how small and low to the ground it was compared to my JK (2 door). The bumpers didnt even come up to my knees, the overhangs were rather large, and I could even see right over top of the vehicle without a problem, lol.


Made me really appreciate all the improvements they did with the JK.

thats called low COG, something they really messed up on the JK. The thing is way too dang high while not having much ground clearance!

when you compare an LJ to a 4 door, the LJ is gunna be better off no matter lifted or stock because of the break over angle! the LJ is the best factory built jeep in terms of break over angle compromise. steady on the climbs/descents and not going to get high centered as easily as a 4 door

[jpg0511]

Originally Posted by pyrotyro

thats called low COG, something they really messed up on the JK. The thing is way too dang high while not having much ground clearance!

when you compare an LJ to a 4 door, the LJ is gunna be better off no matter lifted or stock because of the break over angle! the LJ is the best factory built jeep in terms of break over angle compromise. steady on the climbs/descents and not going to get high centered as easily as a 4 door

Low COG that is one way of putting it. Funny way if you ask me concidering almost every TJ owner lifts there Jeep. Along with everyone else who gets the offroading bug.

[pyrotyro]

Originally Posted by jpg0511

Low COG that is one way of putting it. Funny way if you ask me concidering almost every TJ owner lifts there Jeep. Along with everyone else who gets the offroading bug.

but a lifted lj would still have a lower COG then a JK is my point

[Avian]

Originally Posted by pyrotyro

but a lifted lj would still have a lower COG then a JK is my point

I agree. The T-case skid is just too low IMO. Sure the rock sliders are a foot and a half off the ground, but at its lowest point, the JK only has 10" or so of centerline clearance.

[jpg0511]

What I am say that if you wanted to say run 35s. With a lift to clear them on a TJ and on a JK the JK would be more stabile because it is a little wider. And the COG would be close to the same. If comparing stock of coarse the TJ would have a lower COG but will not clear the same size tires. It is strange to me to read something like that when almost everyone with a TJ or any Jeep really usualy wants more cleance for lager tires. Same thing with the flares on the JK. They allow more clearance and can be change very easily. I want to change mine to the flat fender style because I like the look better plus it makes more room for those 35s. But I dont think they ruined the Wrangler because of the flairs. And that is a good point about the tranfercase hanging down on the TJs also. That is another thing that I think Jeep done good with looking at what people wanted and fix that problem in the JK.

[badazzelanore]

Originally Posted by JeeperSC

Ok, then what about it makes a JK out peform the TJ off road? Is a stock 2009 Ruby going to hands down run circles around a 2006 Ruby?

btw, automakers have redesigned vehicles to perform worse then the previous models and it not hurt sales. in 1992 ford stopped making the 5.0L foxbody mustangs. By 2006, the mustang had a heavier body and a 4.6L modular motor which made the poor muscle car a complete turd. That didnt hurt mustang sales, infact mustang still out sold the camaro and firebird which were the two other cars in the mustangs class.

seriously 7 (SEVEN) identical posts?

[gmfcma]

he was adamant about that