New JPMagazine Article on JK Pros and Cons - Page 5 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Wrangler Forums > JK Wrangler Technical Forum > New JPMagazine Article on JK Pros and Cons

G2 Disc Brake Conversion Kit for Jeep Wrangler YJ TJ LJ ChRough Country Jeep Suspension Deals at Rockridge 4WD!Rockridge 4WD IS Taking Zone Offroad Suspension Lift Kits

Reply
Unread 09-23-2006, 10:01 PM   #61
cab76
Registered User
2007 JK Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Yuba City, California
Posts: 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Backroads

BTW, one question. I know that the Sahara and Rubicon come with 32" tires but aren't they lower profile 17-18" tires? How suitable would these be for offroad or is it just a given that you'd need to change the stock wheels and tires?
Both the 06 and 07 Rubicons come with 75 sidewall tires, the 07 just comes on one inch bigger rims, so I would think the 07s would be just as suitable for offroad conditions.

cab76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-23-2006, 11:20 PM   #62
neZZr
Lifted/Locked/Rolled/Sunk
 
neZZr's Avatar
2005 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: AZ eventually...
Posts: 4,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by cab76
Both the 06 and 07 Rubicons come with 75 sidewall tires, the 07 just comes on one inch bigger rims, so I would think the 07s would be just as suitable for offroad conditions.
With 17 inch rims, you're exactly right because the tire is 1" taller now too. So the sidewall height would remain unchanged from the TJ Rubicon.
__________________
My Hummer Hole video
SIRA 4x4 club

I'll be Savvy someday!
neZZr is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 12:35 PM   #63
Dirty Backroads
Registered User
2005 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Jersey Shore
Posts: 1,396
Well, that's good. Wheels and tires are among the easiest things to "fix" in any case. I got rid of my stockers with less than 6k miles on them.

Am I reading one of these posts correctly? Does the JK offer an option for 2WD only? No 4WD? On a Jeep Wrangler? That's not just insane, that's criminal!
__________________
2005 Solar Yellow TJ Sport

Yellow Jeep Club Member #123

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniper111
Nothing like going topless with some Kid Rock blasting looking down on the rice boys with their dropped Civics wondering what Japanese steel would look like under the Mickey Thompsons.
Dirty Backroads is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 12:38 PM   #64
neZZr
Lifted/Locked/Rolled/Sunk
 
neZZr's Avatar
2005 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: AZ eventually...
Posts: 4,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Backroads
Well, that's good. Wheels and tires are among the easiest things to "fix" in any case. I got rid of my stockers with less than 6k miles on them.

Am I reading one of these posts correctly? Does the JK offer an option for 2WD only? No 4WD? On a Jeep Wrangler? That's not just insane, that's criminal!
I believe that's always been an option... though rare. I've never seen a 2wd Wrangler, but we've had several 2wd WK's & KJ's run through our shop
__________________
My Hummer Hole video
SIRA 4x4 club

I'll be Savvy someday!
neZZr is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 12:54 PM   #65
Dirty Backroads
Registered User
2005 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Jersey Shore
Posts: 1,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by neZZr
I believe that's always been an option... though rare. I've never seen a 2wd Wrangler, but we've had several 2wd WK's & KJ's run through our shop
I thought all Jeeps were 4WD. Sorta like Subarus are always AWD (correct me if I'm wrong on this one). I can see a 2wd KJ but a Wrangler should be 4WD only. It smells too much like "Soccer Mom" for a Wrangler to be 2WD.
__________________
2005 Solar Yellow TJ Sport

Yellow Jeep Club Member #123

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniper111
Nothing like going topless with some Kid Rock blasting looking down on the rice boys with their dropped Civics wondering what Japanese steel would look like under the Mickey Thompsons.
Dirty Backroads is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 01:01 PM   #66
jpaddict
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 127
Postal Jeeps were often 2wd.
__________________
MB E55 AMG
Dodge/Cummins 400 rwhp
[B]Now driving the new Rubi!![/B]
Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue, extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.
jpaddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 01:04 PM   #67
Dirty Backroads
Registered User
2005 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Jersey Shore
Posts: 1,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpaddict
Postal Jeeps were often 2wd.
That actually makes sense, although 4WD would've made it easier for them to get through rain, snow, sleet and hail.
__________________
2005 Solar Yellow TJ Sport

Yellow Jeep Club Member #123

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniper111
Nothing like going topless with some Kid Rock blasting looking down on the rice boys with their dropped Civics wondering what Japanese steel would look like under the Mickey Thompsons.
Dirty Backroads is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 01:05 PM   #68
neZZr
Lifted/Locked/Rolled/Sunk
 
neZZr's Avatar
2005 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: AZ eventually...
Posts: 4,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Backroads
That actually makes sense, although 4WD would've made it easier for them to get through rain, snow, sleet and hail.


Have you ever watched Seinfeld?
__________________
My Hummer Hole video
SIRA 4x4 club

I'll be Savvy someday!
neZZr is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 01:50 PM   #69
cab76
Registered User
2007 JK Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Yuba City, California
Posts: 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Backroads
I thought all Jeeps were 4WD. Sorta like Subarus are always AWD (correct me if I'm wrong on this one). I can see a 2wd KJ but a Wrangler should be 4WD only. It smells too much like "Soccer Mom" for a Wrangler to be 2WD.
It's just an option - get over it...
cab76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 07:45 PM   #70
XJ2Timer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Temple, TX
Posts: 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by neZZr
I believe that's always been an option... though rare. I've never seen a 2wd Wrangler, but we've had several 2wd WK's & KJ's run through our shop
I believe no Jeeps that were designated CJ's or named Wrangler were offered in 2 wheel drive. The DJ's or Dispatcher Jeeps, Galas, Surrey, etc were 2 wheel drive. Depending on where one lives there are many XJ's, ZJ's, KJ's, WJ's and WK/XK's in 2 wheel drive. Think of them as the modern version of the old 2 wheel drive Willys wagons.
With the 4 door JK they are trying to entice all those old Cherokee buyers. The ones that bought them in 4 wheel drive and those that just wanted a rugged 4 dr 2 wheel drive vehicle.
One advantage of all those 2 wheel drive versions of those Jeep vehicles out there is a greater supply of used parts to fix up the 4 wheel drive ones.
__________________
1st one- 1989 Cherokee Laredo. 12 great years
2nd one- 2001 Cherokee Limited. Got it before they were gone.
XJ2Timer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 07:58 PM   #71
ieatchickens
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Bismarck, ND
Posts: 845
Quote:
Originally Posted by neZZr
I believe that's always been an option... though rare. I've never seen a 2wd Wrangler, but we've had several 2wd WK's & KJ's run through our shop
There has never been a 2wd Wrangler....til now.

PS Postal Jeeps, the DJ were not part of the CJ family.
__________________
98' SE, Chili Pepper Red, grizzly wheels, 126AA/103AA to 129AA/105AA coil swap, 3/4" spacer, 31 Yoko Geolander AT, soft top, rear view mirror turned upside down, door straps twisted, rubicon wipers, optional factory rear sway bar, doors & top on.
Low Output 4 Cylinder Jeep Club Member #1
06' Grand Cherokee Limited, 4.7 liter V8
99' Grand Cherokee Limited, 4.7 liter V8
ieatchickens is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 08:41 PM   #72
neZZr
Lifted/Locked/Rolled/Sunk
 
neZZr's Avatar
2005 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: AZ eventually...
Posts: 4,682
Well you learn something every day. Reguardless... 2WD & Jeep just doesn't make much sense. Wrangler or otherwise.
__________________
My Hummer Hole video
SIRA 4x4 club

I'll be Savvy someday!
neZZr is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 09:15 PM   #73
Jakemd98
Choosy moms choose jeep.
 
Jakemd98's Avatar
1997 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 1,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEDFoot
The grille is plastic, the 3.8 sucks (even though it's better than the 4.0 it just "feels" like it sucks), some chick thought it was ugly, not a "real jeep", etc. etc.).
Ok not to offend, but these kind of comments make me angry, just like how the comments of "JK's suck" make you mad.

The 3.8 is only better on paper. it has not been on the market or on the road long enough to say that. Like for example the 4.9 cadillac motor made in the early 90's is a awesome motor (if you ever had one you would know) it was rated at 200 hp and 275 foot pounds. then in 94 i believe the 4.6 north star came out... "HECK it's a better motor. i mean it's rated at 275 hp and 275 foot pounds..." then they came out with a 300 hp/295 foot pounds 4.6. On paper the 4.6 is a better motor, but later down the road you find out that the 4.9 is actually a better motor, due to the fact that it will go over 200k strong and it might even hit 300k, and the 4.6 starts to die around 140k. I have seen both motors and have helped my dad work on the cars. My sisters 96 eldorado with the 300 hp 4.6 and 130K has needed more work in the last year then the 93 4.9 deville, with 201k, has in the past 3 years. Plus we talked to a mechanic who said that the North stars are junk after 120k... that comment is not a good one cause there are north stars out there that have over 140k that I know of... But the reputation of the motor is not the best. The same could applie to the 3.8 vs the 4.0 .

so after all that rant all i'm trying to say is that just beacuse the 3.8 is better on paper, doesn't necesarily mean it is better.
__________________
Jake Davis

97 Jeep Wrangler
4.0, 5 speed AX-15, D44 & Ford 8.8 w/Detroit - 4.88, NP-231, OME 2.5" coils w/1.25" spacers on front, 1.25" JKS BL, 35X12.50R15 KM2 on 15x8 Eagle alloys, Banks Header, Banks Monster Exhaust, Brown Dog MML, Rhino Liner, Tuffy Glove Box, AtoZ Rockers, Optima Red Top Battery.

1998 GMC Yukon

Wilmington weekly 4x4 meet
Jakemd98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 09:33 PM   #74
neZZr
Lifted/Locked/Rolled/Sunk
 
neZZr's Avatar
2005 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: AZ eventually...
Posts: 4,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakemd98
Ok not to offend, but these kind of comments make me angry, just like how the comments of "JK's suck" make you mad.

The 3.8 is only better on paper. it has not been on the market or on the road long enough to say that. Like for example the 4.9 cadillac motor made in the early 90's is a awesome motor (if you ever had one you would know) it was rated at 200 hp and 275 foot pounds. then in 94 i believe the 4.6 north star came out... "HECK it's a better motor. i mean it's rated at 275 hp and 275 foot pounds..." then they came out with a 300 hp/295 foot pounds 4.6. On paper the 4.6 is a better motor, but later down the road you find out that the 4.9 is actually a better motor, due to the fact that it will go over 200k strong and it might even hit 300k, and the 4.6 starts to die around 140k. I have seen both motors and have helped my dad work on the cars. My sisters 96 eldorado with the 300 hp 4.6 and 130K has needed more work in the last year then the 93 4.9 deville, with 201k, has in the past 3 years. Plus we talked to a mechanic who said that the North stars are junk after 120k... that comment is not a good one cause there are north stars out there that have over 140k that I know of... But the reputation of the motor is not the best. The same could applie to the 3.8 vs the 4.0 .

so after all that rant all i'm trying to say is that just beacuse the 3.8 is better on paper, doesn't necesarily mean it is better.
It's true that the horsepower & torque numbers look better on paper than the 4.0, except the 4.0 develops its power lower in the rev band... so in that respect the 4.0 is truely better.

But for the claim of reliability, I work in a Chrysler/Jeep dealer and I can tell you there are PLEANTY of >200k 3.8s (as well as the similar 3.3L) on the road in the minivans as well as other Chrysler cars. I don't think reliability will be a big concern. They've even been turbo charged with few mechanical failures. The 4.0 is legendary, but the 3.8 is no slouch, it just doesn't get the rep because there aren't many die-hard minivan owners as there are Jeepers
__________________
My Hummer Hole video
SIRA 4x4 club

I'll be Savvy someday!
neZZr is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2006, 09:45 PM   #75
K&VRubicon
Registered User
2010 JK Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Salem, Oregon
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakemd98
The 3.8 is only better on paper. it has not been on the market or on the road long enough to say that.
So I guess that 15 yeas on the market is not long enough to know anything about an engine.
__________________
2003 Rubicon, oba - Gone but not forgotten
2010 Mango Tango Unlimited

"Time is an illusion, Lunchtime doubly so." - Ford Prefect
K&VRubicon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.