|
07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the
Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm
'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm > Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the > Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm
'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm > Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the > Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm
'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm > Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the > Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
The torque curve chart for the 3.8L engine is here:
http://www.geocities.com/namastefolks/powercurves.jpg The chart for the 4.0L is here: http://www.----------.com/temp/4LEngineHP-Torque.jpg Tom <jcarter10@comcast.net> wrote in message news:1dWdnYJjHoOr5qjZRVn-qQ@comcast.com... > Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the > Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! > > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
The torque curve chart for the 3.8L engine is here:
http://www.geocities.com/namastefolks/powercurves.jpg The chart for the 4.0L is here: http://www.----------.com/temp/4LEngineHP-Torque.jpg Tom <jcarter10@comcast.net> wrote in message news:1dWdnYJjHoOr5qjZRVn-qQ@comcast.com... > Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the > Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! > > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
The torque curve chart for the 3.8L engine is here:
http://www.geocities.com/namastefolks/powercurves.jpg The chart for the 4.0L is here: http://www.----------.com/temp/4LEngineHP-Torque.jpg Tom <jcarter10@comcast.net> wrote in message news:1dWdnYJjHoOr5qjZRVn-qQ@comcast.com... > Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the > Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! > > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I notice that the values are not shown at idle RPM's. I happen to
think having "80% of usable torque available at idle speed" is rather handy when my feet are busy feathering the brake and the clutch. Maybe a hand throttle comes standard with that new engine? Maybe it doesn't come with a stick? Maybe only three-footed drivers can run difficult trails with the '07? "mabar" <xyzz4569@fastmail.fm> writes: > The torque curve chart for the 3.8L engine is here: > > http://www.geocities.com/namastefolks/powercurves.jpg > > The chart for the 4.0L is here: > > http://www.----------.com/temp/4LEngineHP-Torque.jpg > > Tom > > <jcarter10@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:1dWdnYJjHoOr5qjZRVn-qQ@comcast.com... >> Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the >> Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! >> >> > > -- |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I notice that the values are not shown at idle RPM's. I happen to
think having "80% of usable torque available at idle speed" is rather handy when my feet are busy feathering the brake and the clutch. Maybe a hand throttle comes standard with that new engine? Maybe it doesn't come with a stick? Maybe only three-footed drivers can run difficult trails with the '07? "mabar" <xyzz4569@fastmail.fm> writes: > The torque curve chart for the 3.8L engine is here: > > http://www.geocities.com/namastefolks/powercurves.jpg > > The chart for the 4.0L is here: > > http://www.----------.com/temp/4LEngineHP-Torque.jpg > > Tom > > <jcarter10@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:1dWdnYJjHoOr5qjZRVn-qQ@comcast.com... >> Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the >> Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! >> >> > > -- |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I notice that the values are not shown at idle RPM's. I happen to
think having "80% of usable torque available at idle speed" is rather handy when my feet are busy feathering the brake and the clutch. Maybe a hand throttle comes standard with that new engine? Maybe it doesn't come with a stick? Maybe only three-footed drivers can run difficult trails with the '07? "mabar" <xyzz4569@fastmail.fm> writes: > The torque curve chart for the 3.8L engine is here: > > http://www.geocities.com/namastefolks/powercurves.jpg > > The chart for the 4.0L is here: > > http://www.----------.com/temp/4LEngineHP-Torque.jpg > > Tom > > <jcarter10@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:1dWdnYJjHoOr5qjZRVn-qQ@comcast.com... >> Anyone seen a comparison? Needless to say I couldn't find anything on the >> Chrysler site. Should be VERY interesting!! >> >> > > -- |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at
jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: > '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm > '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm > So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or something at idle. With great engine braking. The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? -jeff |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at
jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: > '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm > '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm > So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or something at idle. With great engine braking. The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? -jeff |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at
jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: > '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm > '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm > So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or something at idle. With great engine braking. The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? -jeff |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Jeff Olsen wrote:
> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at > jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: > > >>'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >> > > > So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is > about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! > > Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ > (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or > something at idle. With great engine braking. > > The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 > engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? > > -jeff > Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the difference between HP and Torque. You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. One question on the Tundra, they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. tw __________________________________________________ ___________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Jeff Olsen wrote:
> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at > jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: > > >>'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >> > > > So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is > about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! > > Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ > (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or > something at idle. With great engine braking. > > The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 > engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? > > -jeff > Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the difference between HP and Torque. You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. One question on the Tundra, they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. tw __________________________________________________ ___________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Jeff Olsen wrote:
> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at > jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: > > >>'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >> > > > So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is > about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! > > Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ > (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or > something at idle. With great engine braking. > > The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 > engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? > > -jeff > Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the difference between HP and Torque. You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. One question on the Tundra, they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. tw __________________________________________________ ___________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
waldron is just trailor trash ....heLikes to poke his nose in everyone elses
business because he is 4'8" 200lbs lives in a trailor and has bad acne..(little man syndroum I suppose) the stats came from JP magazine. They have an article showing all the differences between the 06 and 07...very informative article! -- "twaldron" <thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com> wrote in message news:2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com... >> >>>'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>> >> >> >> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world >> is >> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >> >> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >> something at idle. With great engine braking. >> >> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 >> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >> >> -jeff >> > > Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the > difference between HP and Torque. > > You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the > 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my > Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. One question on the Tundra, they > are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan next > year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I passed > on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 improvements on > the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. > > tw > __________________________________________________ ___________________ > 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco > > "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." > > Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 > > Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') > A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton > capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. > __________________________________________________ ___________________ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
waldron is just trailor trash ....heLikes to poke his nose in everyone elses
business because he is 4'8" 200lbs lives in a trailor and has bad acne..(little man syndroum I suppose) the stats came from JP magazine. They have an article showing all the differences between the 06 and 07...very informative article! -- "twaldron" <thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com> wrote in message news:2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com... >> >>>'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>> >> >> >> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world >> is >> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >> >> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >> something at idle. With great engine braking. >> >> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 >> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >> >> -jeff >> > > Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the > difference between HP and Torque. > > You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the > 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my > Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. One question on the Tundra, they > are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan next > year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I passed > on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 improvements on > the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. > > tw > __________________________________________________ ___________________ > 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco > > "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." > > Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 > > Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') > A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton > capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. > __________________________________________________ ___________________ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
waldron is just trailor trash ....heLikes to poke his nose in everyone elses
business because he is 4'8" 200lbs lives in a trailor and has bad acne..(little man syndroum I suppose) the stats came from JP magazine. They have an article showing all the differences between the 06 and 07...very informative article! -- "twaldron" <thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com> wrote in message news:2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com... >> >>>'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>> >> >> >> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world >> is >> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >> >> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >> something at idle. With great engine braking. >> >> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 >> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >> >> -jeff >> > > Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the > difference between HP and Torque. > > You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the > 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my > Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. One question on the Tundra, they > are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan next > year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I passed > on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 improvements on > the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. > > tw > __________________________________________________ ___________________ > 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco > > "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." > > Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 > > Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') > A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton > capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. > __________________________________________________ ___________________ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I think this is where the new 3.8 V-6s are going to fall flat on their
face. (More info is at http://www.allpar.com/mopar/37.html). They openly admit that torque is not nearly as strong at the straight-6's, and that more emphasis is being placed on high-revving engines that offer better fuel economy, (ahem) ...typical of the Minivan Heritage from which this design was taken. If you extrapolate the torque curves on both charts, it's clear that the present I-6 offers twice the torque at ldle than the new 3.7. DC doesn't have much of a choice I guess: tooling for I-6's is worn and it will cost a bundle to continue producing, and the Feds want more fuel economy and lowered emissions. Something had to give eventually - nothing good lasts forever. You won't ever see a rework of the 4.0. It's a terribly inefficient design from an economy and emissions standpoint. But the longevity, brute-strength and reliability is something that you will never see purposely designed into a 'modern' engine. |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I think this is where the new 3.8 V-6s are going to fall flat on their
face. (More info is at http://www.allpar.com/mopar/37.html). They openly admit that torque is not nearly as strong at the straight-6's, and that more emphasis is being placed on high-revving engines that offer better fuel economy, (ahem) ...typical of the Minivan Heritage from which this design was taken. If you extrapolate the torque curves on both charts, it's clear that the present I-6 offers twice the torque at ldle than the new 3.7. DC doesn't have much of a choice I guess: tooling for I-6's is worn and it will cost a bundle to continue producing, and the Feds want more fuel economy and lowered emissions. Something had to give eventually - nothing good lasts forever. You won't ever see a rework of the 4.0. It's a terribly inefficient design from an economy and emissions standpoint. But the longevity, brute-strength and reliability is something that you will never see purposely designed into a 'modern' engine. |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I think this is where the new 3.8 V-6s are going to fall flat on their
face. (More info is at http://www.allpar.com/mopar/37.html). They openly admit that torque is not nearly as strong at the straight-6's, and that more emphasis is being placed on high-revving engines that offer better fuel economy, (ahem) ...typical of the Minivan Heritage from which this design was taken. If you extrapolate the torque curves on both charts, it's clear that the present I-6 offers twice the torque at ldle than the new 3.7. DC doesn't have much of a choice I guess: tooling for I-6's is worn and it will cost a bundle to continue producing, and the Feds want more fuel economy and lowered emissions. Something had to give eventually - nothing good lasts forever. You won't ever see a rework of the 4.0. It's a terribly inefficient design from an economy and emissions standpoint. But the longevity, brute-strength and reliability is something that you will never see purposely designed into a 'modern' engine. |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I don't have the figures at idle but at 1200 RPM the 4 liter I-6 makes about
210 lb ft torque and the 3.7 liter Jeep V-6 makes a tad less than 200. At generally usable engine speed (2000-2800 rpm) the 4 liter makes about 215 lb ft and the 3.7 makes 220 lb ft I do not have figures for the 3.8 liter Dodge Minivan motor "JD Adams" <JDAdams@Softcom.Net> wrote in message news:1144430238.567112.220810@z34g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com... >I think this is where the new 3.8 V-6s are going to fall flat on their > face. (More info is at http://www.allpar.com/mopar/37.html). They > openly admit that torque is not nearly as strong at the straight-6's, > and that more emphasis is being placed on high-revving engines that > offer better fuel economy, (ahem) ...typical of the Minivan Heritage > from which this design was taken. > > If you extrapolate the torque curves on both charts, it's clear that > the present I-6 offers twice the torque at ldle than the new 3.7. DC > doesn't have much of a choice I guess: tooling for I-6's is worn and it > will cost a bundle to continue producing, and the Feds want more fuel > economy and lowered emissions. Something had to give eventually - > nothing good lasts forever. > > You won't ever see a rework of the 4.0. It's a terribly inefficient > design from an economy and emissions standpoint. But the longevity, > brute-strength and reliability is something that you will never see > purposely designed into a 'modern' engine. > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I don't have the figures at idle but at 1200 RPM the 4 liter I-6 makes about
210 lb ft torque and the 3.7 liter Jeep V-6 makes a tad less than 200. At generally usable engine speed (2000-2800 rpm) the 4 liter makes about 215 lb ft and the 3.7 makes 220 lb ft I do not have figures for the 3.8 liter Dodge Minivan motor "JD Adams" <JDAdams@Softcom.Net> wrote in message news:1144430238.567112.220810@z34g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com... >I think this is where the new 3.8 V-6s are going to fall flat on their > face. (More info is at http://www.allpar.com/mopar/37.html). They > openly admit that torque is not nearly as strong at the straight-6's, > and that more emphasis is being placed on high-revving engines that > offer better fuel economy, (ahem) ...typical of the Minivan Heritage > from which this design was taken. > > If you extrapolate the torque curves on both charts, it's clear that > the present I-6 offers twice the torque at ldle than the new 3.7. DC > doesn't have much of a choice I guess: tooling for I-6's is worn and it > will cost a bundle to continue producing, and the Feds want more fuel > economy and lowered emissions. Something had to give eventually - > nothing good lasts forever. > > You won't ever see a rework of the 4.0. It's a terribly inefficient > design from an economy and emissions standpoint. But the longevity, > brute-strength and reliability is something that you will never see > purposely designed into a 'modern' engine. > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I don't have the figures at idle but at 1200 RPM the 4 liter I-6 makes about
210 lb ft torque and the 3.7 liter Jeep V-6 makes a tad less than 200. At generally usable engine speed (2000-2800 rpm) the 4 liter makes about 215 lb ft and the 3.7 makes 220 lb ft I do not have figures for the 3.8 liter Dodge Minivan motor "JD Adams" <JDAdams@Softcom.Net> wrote in message news:1144430238.567112.220810@z34g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com... >I think this is where the new 3.8 V-6s are going to fall flat on their > face. (More info is at http://www.allpar.com/mopar/37.html). They > openly admit that torque is not nearly as strong at the straight-6's, > and that more emphasis is being placed on high-revving engines that > offer better fuel economy, (ahem) ...typical of the Minivan Heritage > from which this design was taken. > > If you extrapolate the torque curves on both charts, it's clear that > the present I-6 offers twice the torque at ldle than the new 3.7. DC > doesn't have much of a choice I guess: tooling for I-6's is worn and it > will cost a bundle to continue producing, and the Feds want more fuel > economy and lowered emissions. Something had to give eventually - > nothing good lasts forever. > > You won't ever see a rework of the 4.0. It's a terribly inefficient > design from an economy and emissions standpoint. But the longevity, > brute-strength and reliability is something that you will never see > purposely designed into a 'modern' engine. > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Spelled "trailer" and "syndrome"...just like an edjumicaded sales droid
to muck up a grade school name calling session. BTW, I didn't realize JP magazine _had_ my stats. I'd try to explain to you the difference between HP and Torque and how they relate to each other, but it would bore everyone on the NG with common knowledge and you'd still be bleary eyed. Besides, the visual of you trying to regurgitate it to your prospective clients in the car lot brings back scenes from Dumb & Dumber and I can't stop laughing long enough to be serious. tw __________________________________________________ ___________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Jarod Sprauer wrote: > waldron is just trailor trash ....heLikes to poke his nose in everyone elses > business because he is 4'8" 200lbs lives in a trailor and has bad > acne..(little man syndroum I suppose) the stats came from JP magazine. |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Spelled "trailer" and "syndrome"...just like an edjumicaded sales droid
to muck up a grade school name calling session. BTW, I didn't realize JP magazine _had_ my stats. I'd try to explain to you the difference between HP and Torque and how they relate to each other, but it would bore everyone on the NG with common knowledge and you'd still be bleary eyed. Besides, the visual of you trying to regurgitate it to your prospective clients in the car lot brings back scenes from Dumb & Dumber and I can't stop laughing long enough to be serious. tw __________________________________________________ ___________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Jarod Sprauer wrote: > waldron is just trailor trash ....heLikes to poke his nose in everyone elses > business because he is 4'8" 200lbs lives in a trailor and has bad > acne..(little man syndroum I suppose) the stats came from JP magazine. |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Spelled "trailer" and "syndrome"...just like an edjumicaded sales droid
to muck up a grade school name calling session. BTW, I didn't realize JP magazine _had_ my stats. I'd try to explain to you the difference between HP and Torque and how they relate to each other, but it would bore everyone on the NG with common knowledge and you'd still be bleary eyed. Besides, the visual of you trying to regurgitate it to your prospective clients in the car lot brings back scenes from Dumb & Dumber and I can't stop laughing long enough to be serious. tw __________________________________________________ ___________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Jarod Sprauer wrote: > waldron is just trailor trash ....heLikes to poke his nose in everyone elses > business because he is 4'8" 200lbs lives in a trailor and has bad > acne..(little man syndroum I suppose) the stats came from JP magazine. |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at
thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: > Jeff Olsen wrote: >> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at >> jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >> >> >>> '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>> '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>> >> >> >> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is >> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >> >> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >> something at idle. With great engine braking. >> >> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 >> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >> >> -jeff >> > > Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the > difference between HP and Torque. Hah! Gotcha. > You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the > 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my > Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass off on my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big tires; they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig that sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't want to tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids around in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I want, a used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six years to buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! One question on the Tundra, > they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan > next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I > passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 > improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra was on the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents in the bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest this truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the last few years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I wanted a pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The Tundra and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great power when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled it out for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why the Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS and that 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck I've ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. Looks? See above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on the decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing vehicle. Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. Everyone i know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has more in it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I have no beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy puffed-up I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. -jeff > > tw > __________________________________________________ ___________________ > 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco > > "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." > > Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 > > Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') > A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton > capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. > __________________________________________________ ___________________ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at
thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: > Jeff Olsen wrote: >> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at >> jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >> >> >>> '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>> '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>> >> >> >> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is >> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >> >> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >> something at idle. With great engine braking. >> >> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 >> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >> >> -jeff >> > > Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the > difference between HP and Torque. Hah! Gotcha. > You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the > 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my > Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass off on my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big tires; they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig that sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't want to tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids around in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I want, a used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six years to buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! One question on the Tundra, > they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan > next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I > passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 > improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra was on the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents in the bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest this truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the last few years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I wanted a pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The Tundra and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great power when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled it out for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why the Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS and that 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck I've ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. Looks? See above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on the decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing vehicle. Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. Everyone i know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has more in it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I have no beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy puffed-up I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. -jeff > > tw > __________________________________________________ ___________________ > 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco > > "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." > > Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 > > Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') > A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton > capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. > __________________________________________________ ___________________ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at
thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: > Jeff Olsen wrote: >> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at >> jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >> >> >>> '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>> '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>> >> >> >> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is >> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >> >> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >> something at idle. With great engine braking. >> >> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 >> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >> >> -jeff >> > > Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the > difference between HP and Torque. Hah! Gotcha. > You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the > 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my > Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass off on my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big tires; they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig that sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't want to tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids around in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I want, a used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six years to buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! One question on the Tundra, > they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan > next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I > passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 > improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra was on the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents in the bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest this truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the last few years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I wanted a pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The Tundra and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great power when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled it out for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why the Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS and that 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck I've ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. Looks? See above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on the decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing vehicle. Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. Everyone i know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has more in it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I have no beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy puffed-up I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. -jeff > > tw > __________________________________________________ ___________________ > 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco > > "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." > > Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 > > Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') > A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton > capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. > __________________________________________________ ___________________ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I think you're on the right track for your next TJ. The I6 in the 97-06
seems to suit your needs better. You just can't fault it for offroad fun. As far as the Titan/Tundra thing...yes, I was refering to bigger/stronger as to being "better", that depends on how you use the truck, of course. My needs/thoughts were different than yours, so I leaned toward the Titan (towing 6000#+, carrying gear & passengers). Current model performance aside, Toyota is my first choice (miss my 4Runner) and they are truly competing with the Nissan Titan next year. I definitely see why you chose the 7/8ths Tundra for your needs. The new Tacoma would probably work for you too, weaving around trees (a bit larger than the tiny previous Taco...I was too tall to sit in the old one). Styling goes to Toyota, I agree, but I think Nissan had to make a splash with the first viable real workhorse Japanese pickup to gain respect. To compete with the Dodge, Ford and Chevy in selling to the "puffed up" US workman, they had to lose that under powered, too small, 'tin can' image. I believe they did that and Toyota seems to be following suit. This is a good thing. I was just curious, thanks. tw ______________________________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Jeff Olsen wrote: > in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at > thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: > > >>Jeff Olsen wrote: >> >>>in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at >>>jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >>> >>> >>> >>>>'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>>'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>>> >>> >>> >>>So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is >>>about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >>> >>>Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >>>(sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >>>something at idle. With great engine braking. >>> >>>The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 >>>engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >>> >>>-jeff >>> >> >>Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the >>difference between HP and Torque. > > > Hah! Gotcha. > > >>You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the >>'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my >>Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. > > > Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the > meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass off on > my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big tires; > they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) > > One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my > next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig that > sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't want to > tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids around > in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I want, a > used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly > serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six years to > buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! > > > One question on the Tundra, > >>they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan >>next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I >>passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 >>improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. > > > Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm > concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra was on > the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate > heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or > anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents in the > bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a > bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second > times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest this > truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and > gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak > firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the last few > years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I wanted a > pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The Tundra > and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great power > when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... > > But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled it out > for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why the > Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS and that > 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck I've > ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. Looks? See > above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. > > I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on the > decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing vehicle. > Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. Everyone i > know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I > bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has more in > it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I have no > beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy puffed-up > I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. > > -jeff > > > > >>tw >>________________________________________________ _____________________ >>2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >> >>"There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >> >>Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >> >>Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >>A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >>capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >>________________________________________________ _____________________ > > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I think you're on the right track for your next TJ. The I6 in the 97-06
seems to suit your needs better. You just can't fault it for offroad fun. As far as the Titan/Tundra thing...yes, I was refering to bigger/stronger as to being "better", that depends on how you use the truck, of course. My needs/thoughts were different than yours, so I leaned toward the Titan (towing 6000#+, carrying gear & passengers). Current model performance aside, Toyota is my first choice (miss my 4Runner) and they are truly competing with the Nissan Titan next year. I definitely see why you chose the 7/8ths Tundra for your needs. The new Tacoma would probably work for you too, weaving around trees (a bit larger than the tiny previous Taco...I was too tall to sit in the old one). Styling goes to Toyota, I agree, but I think Nissan had to make a splash with the first viable real workhorse Japanese pickup to gain respect. To compete with the Dodge, Ford and Chevy in selling to the "puffed up" US workman, they had to lose that under powered, too small, 'tin can' image. I believe they did that and Toyota seems to be following suit. This is a good thing. I was just curious, thanks. tw ______________________________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Jeff Olsen wrote: > in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at > thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: > > >>Jeff Olsen wrote: >> >>>in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at >>>jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >>> >>> >>> >>>>'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>>'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>>> >>> >>> >>>So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is >>>about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >>> >>>Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >>>(sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >>>something at idle. With great engine braking. >>> >>>The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 >>>engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >>> >>>-jeff >>> >> >>Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the >>difference between HP and Torque. > > > Hah! Gotcha. > > >>You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the >>'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my >>Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. > > > Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the > meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass off on > my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big tires; > they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) > > One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my > next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig that > sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't want to > tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids around > in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I want, a > used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly > serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six years to > buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! > > > One question on the Tundra, > >>they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan >>next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I >>passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 >>improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. > > > Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm > concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra was on > the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate > heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or > anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents in the > bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a > bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second > times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest this > truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and > gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak > firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the last few > years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I wanted a > pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The Tundra > and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great power > when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... > > But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled it out > for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why the > Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS and that > 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck I've > ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. Looks? See > above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. > > I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on the > decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing vehicle. > Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. Everyone i > know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I > bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has more in > it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I have no > beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy puffed-up > I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. > > -jeff > > > > >>tw >>________________________________________________ _____________________ >>2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >> >>"There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >> >>Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >> >>Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >>A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >>capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >>________________________________________________ _____________________ > > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
I think you're on the right track for your next TJ. The I6 in the 97-06
seems to suit your needs better. You just can't fault it for offroad fun. As far as the Titan/Tundra thing...yes, I was refering to bigger/stronger as to being "better", that depends on how you use the truck, of course. My needs/thoughts were different than yours, so I leaned toward the Titan (towing 6000#+, carrying gear & passengers). Current model performance aside, Toyota is my first choice (miss my 4Runner) and they are truly competing with the Nissan Titan next year. I definitely see why you chose the 7/8ths Tundra for your needs. The new Tacoma would probably work for you too, weaving around trees (a bit larger than the tiny previous Taco...I was too tall to sit in the old one). Styling goes to Toyota, I agree, but I think Nissan had to make a splash with the first viable real workhorse Japanese pickup to gain respect. To compete with the Dodge, Ford and Chevy in selling to the "puffed up" US workman, they had to lose that under powered, too small, 'tin can' image. I believe they did that and Toyota seems to be following suit. This is a good thing. I was just curious, thanks. tw ______________________________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Jeff Olsen wrote: > in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at > thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: > > >>Jeff Olsen wrote: >> >>>in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod Sprauer at >>>jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >>> >>> >>> >>>>'06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>>'07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>>> >>> >>> >>>So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the world is >>>about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >>> >>>Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >>>(sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >>>something at idle. With great engine braking. >>> >>>The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this fancypants '07 >>>engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >>> >>>-jeff >>> >> >>Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the >>difference between HP and Torque. > > > Hah! Gotcha. > > >>You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the >>'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my >>Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. > > > Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the > meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass off on > my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big tires; > they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) > > One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my > next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig that > sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't want to > tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids around > in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I want, a > used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly > serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six years to > buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! > > > One question on the Tundra, > >>they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan >>next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I >>passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 >>improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. > > > Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm > concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra was on > the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate > heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or > anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents in the > bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a > bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second > times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest this > truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and > gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak > firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the last few > years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I wanted a > pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The Tundra > and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great power > when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... > > But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled it out > for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why the > Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS and that > 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck I've > ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. Looks? See > above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. > > I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on the > decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing vehicle. > Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. Everyone i > know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I > bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has more in > it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I have no > beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy puffed-up > I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. > > -jeff > > > > >>tw >>________________________________________________ _____________________ >>2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >> >>"There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >> >>Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >> >>Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >>A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >>capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >>________________________________________________ _____________________ > > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Just FYI, the Titan's tow rating is up to 9,500 lbs. It has a really
strong boxed frame (the Toyota's frame is c-channel) and its 5.6L engine has more torque than any other truck in its class. When I buy a truck, it's going to be a Titan. :) Jerry twaldron wrote: > I think you're on the right track for your next TJ. The I6 in the 97-06 > seems to suit your needs better. You just can't fault it for offroad fun. > > As far as the Titan/Tundra thing...yes, I was refering to > bigger/stronger as to being "better", that depends on how you use the > truck, of course. My needs/thoughts were different than yours, so I > leaned toward the Titan (towing 6000#+, carrying gear & passengers). > Current model performance aside, Toyota is my first choice (miss my > 4Runner) and they are truly competing with the Nissan Titan next year. > > I definitely see why you chose the 7/8ths Tundra for your needs. The new > Tacoma would probably work for you too, weaving around trees (a bit > larger than the tiny previous Taco...I was too tall to sit in the old > one). Styling goes to Toyota, I agree, but I think Nissan had to make a > splash with the first viable real workhorse Japanese pickup to gain > respect. To compete with the Dodge, Ford and Chevy in selling to the > "puffed up" US workman, they had to lose that under powered, too small, > 'tin can' image. I believe they did that and Toyota seems to be > following suit. This is a good thing. > > I was just curious, thanks. > > tw > ______________________________________ > 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco > > "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." > > Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 > > Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') > A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton > capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. > __________________________________________________ ___________________ > > Jeff Olsen wrote: > >> in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at >> thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: >> >> >>> Jeff Olsen wrote: >>> >>>> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod >>>> Sprauer at >>>> jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>>> '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the >>>> world is >>>> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >>>> >>>> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >>>> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >>>> something at idle. With great engine braking. >>>> >>>> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this >>>> fancypants '07 >>>> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >>>> >>>> -jeff >>>> >>> >>> Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the >>> difference between HP and Torque. >> >> >> >> Hah! Gotcha. >> >> >>> You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the >>> 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my >>> Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. >> >> >> >> Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the >> meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass >> off on >> my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big tires; >> they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) >> >> One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my >> next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig >> that >> sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't >> want to >> tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids >> around >> in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I >> want, a >> used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly >> serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six >> years to >> buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! >> >> >> One question on the Tundra, >> >>> they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan >>> next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I >>> passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 >>> improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. >> >> >> >> Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm >> concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra >> was on >> the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate >> heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or >> anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents >> in the >> bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a >> bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second >> times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest >> this >> truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and >> gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak >> firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the >> last few >> years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I wanted a >> pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The >> Tundra >> and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great >> power >> when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... >> >> But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled >> it out >> for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why the >> Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS >> and that >> 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck I've >> ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. >> Looks? See >> above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. >> >> I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on the >> decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing >> vehicle. >> Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. >> Everyone i >> know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I >> bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has >> more in >> it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I have no >> beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy >> puffed-up >> I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. >> >> -jeff >> >> >> >>> tw >>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >>> 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >>> >>> "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >>> >>> Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >>> >>> Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >>> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >>> capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >> >> >> -- Jerry Bransford PP-ASEL N6TAY See the Geezer Jeep at http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Just FYI, the Titan's tow rating is up to 9,500 lbs. It has a really
strong boxed frame (the Toyota's frame is c-channel) and its 5.6L engine has more torque than any other truck in its class. When I buy a truck, it's going to be a Titan. :) Jerry twaldron wrote: > I think you're on the right track for your next TJ. The I6 in the 97-06 > seems to suit your needs better. You just can't fault it for offroad fun. > > As far as the Titan/Tundra thing...yes, I was refering to > bigger/stronger as to being "better", that depends on how you use the > truck, of course. My needs/thoughts were different than yours, so I > leaned toward the Titan (towing 6000#+, carrying gear & passengers). > Current model performance aside, Toyota is my first choice (miss my > 4Runner) and they are truly competing with the Nissan Titan next year. > > I definitely see why you chose the 7/8ths Tundra for your needs. The new > Tacoma would probably work for you too, weaving around trees (a bit > larger than the tiny previous Taco...I was too tall to sit in the old > one). Styling goes to Toyota, I agree, but I think Nissan had to make a > splash with the first viable real workhorse Japanese pickup to gain > respect. To compete with the Dodge, Ford and Chevy in selling to the > "puffed up" US workman, they had to lose that under powered, too small, > 'tin can' image. I believe they did that and Toyota seems to be > following suit. This is a good thing. > > I was just curious, thanks. > > tw > ______________________________________ > 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco > > "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." > > Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 > > Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') > A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton > capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. > __________________________________________________ ___________________ > > Jeff Olsen wrote: > >> in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at >> thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: >> >> >>> Jeff Olsen wrote: >>> >>>> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod >>>> Sprauer at >>>> jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>>> '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the >>>> world is >>>> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >>>> >>>> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >>>> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >>>> something at idle. With great engine braking. >>>> >>>> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this >>>> fancypants '07 >>>> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >>>> >>>> -jeff >>>> >>> >>> Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the >>> difference between HP and Torque. >> >> >> >> Hah! Gotcha. >> >> >>> You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the >>> 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my >>> Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. >> >> >> >> Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the >> meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass >> off on >> my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big tires; >> they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) >> >> One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my >> next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig >> that >> sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't >> want to >> tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids >> around >> in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I >> want, a >> used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly >> serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six >> years to >> buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! >> >> >> One question on the Tundra, >> >>> they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan >>> next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I >>> passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 >>> improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. >> >> >> >> Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm >> concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra >> was on >> the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate >> heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or >> anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents >> in the >> bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a >> bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second >> times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest >> this >> truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and >> gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak >> firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the >> last few >> years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I wanted a >> pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The >> Tundra >> and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great >> power >> when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... >> >> But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled >> it out >> for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why the >> Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS >> and that >> 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck I've >> ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. >> Looks? See >> above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. >> >> I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on the >> decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing >> vehicle. >> Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. >> Everyone i >> know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I >> bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has >> more in >> it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I have no >> beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy >> puffed-up >> I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. >> >> -jeff >> >> >> >>> tw >>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >>> 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >>> >>> "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >>> >>> Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >>> >>> Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >>> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >>> capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >> >> >> -- Jerry Bransford PP-ASEL N6TAY See the Geezer Jeep at http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Just FYI, the Titan's tow rating is up to 9,500 lbs. It has a really
strong boxed frame (the Toyota's frame is c-channel) and its 5.6L engine has more torque than any other truck in its class. When I buy a truck, it's going to be a Titan. :) Jerry twaldron wrote: > I think you're on the right track for your next TJ. The I6 in the 97-06 > seems to suit your needs better. You just can't fault it for offroad fun. > > As far as the Titan/Tundra thing...yes, I was refering to > bigger/stronger as to being "better", that depends on how you use the > truck, of course. My needs/thoughts were different than yours, so I > leaned toward the Titan (towing 6000#+, carrying gear & passengers). > Current model performance aside, Toyota is my first choice (miss my > 4Runner) and they are truly competing with the Nissan Titan next year. > > I definitely see why you chose the 7/8ths Tundra for your needs. The new > Tacoma would probably work for you too, weaving around trees (a bit > larger than the tiny previous Taco...I was too tall to sit in the old > one). Styling goes to Toyota, I agree, but I think Nissan had to make a > splash with the first viable real workhorse Japanese pickup to gain > respect. To compete with the Dodge, Ford and Chevy in selling to the > "puffed up" US workman, they had to lose that under powered, too small, > 'tin can' image. I believe they did that and Toyota seems to be > following suit. This is a good thing. > > I was just curious, thanks. > > tw > ______________________________________ > 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco > > "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." > > Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 > > Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') > A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton > capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. > __________________________________________________ ___________________ > > Jeff Olsen wrote: > >> in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at >> thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: >> >> >>> Jeff Olsen wrote: >>> >>>> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod >>>> Sprauer at >>>> jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>>> '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the >>>> world is >>>> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >>>> >>>> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had my TJ >>>> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >>>> something at idle. With great engine braking. >>>> >>>> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this >>>> fancypants '07 >>>> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >>>> >>>> -jeff >>>> >>> >>> Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the >>> difference between HP and Torque. >> >> >> >> Hah! Gotcha. >> >> >>> You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the >>> 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my >>> Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. >> >> >> >> Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the >> meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass >> off on >> my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big tires; >> they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) >> >> One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my >> next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig >> that >> sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't >> want to >> tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids >> around >> in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I >> want, a >> used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly >> serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six >> years to >> buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! >> >> >> One question on the Tundra, >> >>> they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan >>> next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I >>> passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 >>> improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. >> >> >> >> Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm >> concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra >> was on >> the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate >> heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or >> anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents >> in the >> bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a >> bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second >> times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest >> this >> truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and >> gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak >> firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the >> last few >> years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I wanted a >> pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The >> Tundra >> and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great >> power >> when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... >> >> But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled >> it out >> for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why the >> Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS >> and that >> 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck I've >> ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. >> Looks? See >> above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. >> >> I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on the >> decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing >> vehicle. >> Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. >> Everyone i >> know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I >> bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has >> more in >> it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I have no >> beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy >> puffed-up >> I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. >> >> -jeff >> >> >> >>> tw >>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >>> 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >>> >>> "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >>> >>> Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >>> >>> Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >>> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >>> capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >> >> >> -- Jerry Bransford PP-ASEL N6TAY See the Geezer Jeep at http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/ |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Yes, 9500#...my personal needs are closer to 6000#+. Funny, it's got
more HP than any car I've ever had, including Mustangs, Firebirds/TAs, Vets, Camaro, etc. __________________________________________________ ___________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Jerry Bransford wrote: > Just FYI, the Titan's tow rating is up to 9,500 lbs. It has a really > strong boxed frame (the Toyota's frame is c-channel) and its 5.6L engine > has more torque than any other truck in its class. When I buy a truck, > it's going to be a Titan. :) > > Jerry > > twaldron wrote: > >> I think you're on the right track for your next TJ. The I6 in the >> 97-06 seems to suit your needs better. You just can't fault it for >> offroad fun. >> >> As far as the Titan/Tundra thing...yes, I was refering to >> bigger/stronger as to being "better", that depends on how you use the >> truck, of course. My needs/thoughts were different than yours, so I >> leaned toward the Titan (towing 6000#+, carrying gear & passengers). >> Current model performance aside, Toyota is my first choice (miss my >> 4Runner) and they are truly competing with the Nissan Titan next year. >> >> I definitely see why you chose the 7/8ths Tundra for your needs. The >> new Tacoma would probably work for you too, weaving around trees (a >> bit larger than the tiny previous Taco...I was too tall to sit in the >> old one). Styling goes to Toyota, I agree, but I think Nissan had to >> make a splash with the first viable real workhorse Japanese pickup to >> gain respect. To compete with the Dodge, Ford and Chevy in selling to >> the "puffed up" US workman, they had to lose that under powered, too >> small, 'tin can' image. I believe they did that and Toyota seems to be >> following suit. This is a good thing. >> >> I was just curious, thanks. >> >> tw >> ______________________________________ >> 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >> >> "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >> >> Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >> >> Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >> capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >> >> Jeff Olsen wrote: >> >>> in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at >>> thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: >>> >>> >>>> Jeff Olsen wrote: >>>> >>>>> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod >>>>> Sprauer at >>>>> jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>>>> '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the >>>>> world is >>>>> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >>>>> >>>>> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had >>>>> my TJ >>>>> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >>>>> something at idle. With great engine braking. >>>>> >>>>> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this >>>>> fancypants '07 >>>>> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >>>>> >>>>> -jeff >>>>> >>>> >>>> Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the >>>> difference between HP and Torque. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hah! Gotcha. >>> >>> >>>> You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the >>>> 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my >>>> Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the >>> meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass >>> off on >>> my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big >>> tires; >>> they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) >>> >>> One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my >>> next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig >>> that >>> sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't >>> want to >>> tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids >>> around >>> in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I >>> want, a >>> used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly >>> serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six >>> years to >>> buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! >>> >>> >>> One question on the Tundra, >>> >>>> they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan >>>> next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I >>>> passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 >>>> improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm >>> concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra >>> was on >>> the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate >>> heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or >>> anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents >>> in the >>> bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a >>> bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second >>> times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest >>> this >>> truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and >>> gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak >>> firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the >>> last few >>> years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I >>> wanted a >>> pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The >>> Tundra >>> and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great >>> power >>> when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... >>> >>> But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled >>> it out >>> for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why >>> the >>> Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS >>> and that >>> 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck >>> I've >>> ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. >>> Looks? See >>> above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. >>> >>> I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on >>> the >>> decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing >>> vehicle. >>> Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. >>> Everyone i >>> know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I >>> bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has >>> more in >>> it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I >>> have no >>> beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy >>> puffed-up >>> I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. >>> >>> -jeff >>> >>> >>>> tw >>>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >>>> 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >>>> >>>> "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >>>> >>>> Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >>>> >>>> Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >>>> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >>>> capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >>>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >>> >>> >>> >>> > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Yes, 9500#...my personal needs are closer to 6000#+. Funny, it's got
more HP than any car I've ever had, including Mustangs, Firebirds/TAs, Vets, Camaro, etc. __________________________________________________ ___________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Jerry Bransford wrote: > Just FYI, the Titan's tow rating is up to 9,500 lbs. It has a really > strong boxed frame (the Toyota's frame is c-channel) and its 5.6L engine > has more torque than any other truck in its class. When I buy a truck, > it's going to be a Titan. :) > > Jerry > > twaldron wrote: > >> I think you're on the right track for your next TJ. The I6 in the >> 97-06 seems to suit your needs better. You just can't fault it for >> offroad fun. >> >> As far as the Titan/Tundra thing...yes, I was refering to >> bigger/stronger as to being "better", that depends on how you use the >> truck, of course. My needs/thoughts were different than yours, so I >> leaned toward the Titan (towing 6000#+, carrying gear & passengers). >> Current model performance aside, Toyota is my first choice (miss my >> 4Runner) and they are truly competing with the Nissan Titan next year. >> >> I definitely see why you chose the 7/8ths Tundra for your needs. The >> new Tacoma would probably work for you too, weaving around trees (a >> bit larger than the tiny previous Taco...I was too tall to sit in the >> old one). Styling goes to Toyota, I agree, but I think Nissan had to >> make a splash with the first viable real workhorse Japanese pickup to >> gain respect. To compete with the Dodge, Ford and Chevy in selling to >> the "puffed up" US workman, they had to lose that under powered, too >> small, 'tin can' image. I believe they did that and Toyota seems to be >> following suit. This is a good thing. >> >> I was just curious, thanks. >> >> tw >> ______________________________________ >> 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >> >> "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >> >> Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >> >> Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >> capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >> >> Jeff Olsen wrote: >> >>> in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at >>> thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: >>> >>> >>>> Jeff Olsen wrote: >>>> >>>>> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod >>>>> Sprauer at >>>>> jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>>>> '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the >>>>> world is >>>>> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >>>>> >>>>> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had >>>>> my TJ >>>>> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >>>>> something at idle. With great engine braking. >>>>> >>>>> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this >>>>> fancypants '07 >>>>> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >>>>> >>>>> -jeff >>>>> >>>> >>>> Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the >>>> difference between HP and Torque. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hah! Gotcha. >>> >>> >>>> You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the >>>> 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my >>>> Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the >>> meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass >>> off on >>> my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big >>> tires; >>> they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) >>> >>> One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my >>> next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig >>> that >>> sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't >>> want to >>> tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids >>> around >>> in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I >>> want, a >>> used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly >>> serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six >>> years to >>> buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! >>> >>> >>> One question on the Tundra, >>> >>>> they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan >>>> next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I >>>> passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 >>>> improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm >>> concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra >>> was on >>> the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate >>> heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or >>> anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents >>> in the >>> bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a >>> bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second >>> times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest >>> this >>> truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and >>> gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak >>> firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the >>> last few >>> years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I >>> wanted a >>> pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The >>> Tundra >>> and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great >>> power >>> when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... >>> >>> But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled >>> it out >>> for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why >>> the >>> Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS >>> and that >>> 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck >>> I've >>> ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. >>> Looks? See >>> above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. >>> >>> I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on >>> the >>> decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing >>> vehicle. >>> Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. >>> Everyone i >>> know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I >>> bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has >>> more in >>> it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I >>> have no >>> beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy >>> puffed-up >>> I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. >>> >>> -jeff >>> >>> >>>> tw >>>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >>>> 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >>>> >>>> "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >>>> >>>> Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >>>> >>>> Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >>>> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >>>> capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >>>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >>> >>> >>> >>> > |
Re: 07 vs. 06 Wrangler torque curves?
Yes, 9500#...my personal needs are closer to 6000#+. Funny, it's got
more HP than any car I've ever had, including Mustangs, Firebirds/TAs, Vets, Camaro, etc. __________________________________________________ ___________________ 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Jerry Bransford wrote: > Just FYI, the Titan's tow rating is up to 9,500 lbs. It has a really > strong boxed frame (the Toyota's frame is c-channel) and its 5.6L engine > has more torque than any other truck in its class. When I buy a truck, > it's going to be a Titan. :) > > Jerry > > twaldron wrote: > >> I think you're on the right track for your next TJ. The I6 in the >> 97-06 seems to suit your needs better. You just can't fault it for >> offroad fun. >> >> As far as the Titan/Tundra thing...yes, I was refering to >> bigger/stronger as to being "better", that depends on how you use the >> truck, of course. My needs/thoughts were different than yours, so I >> leaned toward the Titan (towing 6000#+, carrying gear & passengers). >> Current model performance aside, Toyota is my first choice (miss my >> 4Runner) and they are truly competing with the Nissan Titan next year. >> >> I definitely see why you chose the 7/8ths Tundra for your needs. The >> new Tacoma would probably work for you too, weaving around trees (a >> bit larger than the tiny previous Taco...I was too tall to sit in the >> old one). Styling goes to Toyota, I agree, but I think Nissan had to >> make a splash with the first viable real workhorse Japanese pickup to >> gain respect. To compete with the Dodge, Ford and Chevy in selling to >> the "puffed up" US workman, they had to lose that under powered, too >> small, 'tin can' image. I believe they did that and Toyota seems to be >> following suit. This is a good thing. >> >> I was just curious, thanks. >> >> tw >> ______________________________________ >> 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >> >> "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >> >> Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >> >> Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >> capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >> >> Jeff Olsen wrote: >> >>> in article 2KednevIf5yN_avZRVn-ug@comcast.com, twaldron at >>> thomasOBVIOUS@rubicons.com wrote on 4/7/06 5:50 AM: >>> >>> >>>> Jeff Olsen wrote: >>>> >>>>> in article CrfZf.12672$tN3.5182@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, Jarod >>>>> Sprauer at >>>>> jsprauer2000@yahoo.com wrote on 4/6/06 2:08 PM: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> '06 190 hp @ 4600 rpm >>>>>> '07 205 hp @ 5200 rpm >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So who ever runs their 4.0L I6 at 4600 rpm? Things sound like the >>>>> world is >>>>> about to blow up revving that high. ROAR! >>>>> >>>>> Where torque matters to me, in a jeep, is at or near idle. I had >>>>> my TJ >>>>> (sniff) geared 4.10 with 31's and it felt like an electric motor or >>>>> something at idle. With great engine braking. >>>>> >>>>> The 4.7L V8 in my new Tundra, OTOH, likes to REV! It this >>>>> fancypants '07 >>>>> engine a V6 or V8? Or did they rework the 4.0L? >>>>> >>>>> -jeff >>>>> >>>> >>>> Ah, don't listen to him. He's a used car salesman. They don't know the >>>> difference between HP and Torque. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hah! Gotcha. >>> >>> >>>> You must've been hiding under a rock to miss all the discussion on the >>>> 'new' to the Wrangler line, V6! :) One thing it did is cure my >>>> Upgrade-itis as far as any SWB Jeeps go. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Nah... I traded my TJ a few months ago and have been very busy in the >>> meantime. Not paying attention to Jeeps. I've been skiing my ass >>> off on >>> my days off! (thought of the day: big thigh muscles are like big >>> tires; >>> they make the tough stuff soooo much easier!) >>> >>> One thing this V6 thing DOES do for me, is set a time limit on buying my >>> next TJ. I learned from the first one that I don't want one as a rig >>> that >>> sees much street time, or at least commuting or long trips, I don't >>> want to >>> tow a trailer with it unnecessarily, and I don't want to haul my kids >>> around >>> in it. In other words, I want it to be my toy. So... for what I >>> want, a >>> used one is fine and one with about 70k miles would be perfectly >>> serviceable, and half price. So... that means I've got about six >>> years to >>> buy a nice clean '06 with records and low miles AND THE I6 ENGINE! >>> >>> >>> One question on the Tundra, >>> >>>> they are coming out with a new one to actually compete with the Titan >>>> next year, why didn't you wait for THAT one? The reason I ask is that I >>>> passed on the Toyota in favor of the Titan in '04. With the '07 >>>> improvements on the Toyota, I'd have gone with it instead. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Aren't they just making it bigger? That's not better as far as I'm >>> concerned. For me, it was between the Taco and Tundra. The Tundra >>> was on >>> the large side of what I needed. And I was not after the ultimate >>> heavy-duty truck to pull a large boat over mountain passes at 80 mph or >>> anything. I do use it as a truck; at 3000 miles it has several dents >>> in the >>> bed and I was down to bare metal in a couple bad scrapes (but I got a >>> bedliner sprayed on yesterday)... got it stuck for the first and second >>> times last week hauling firewood out of my woods... etc. The hardest >>> this >>> truck will work is big loads of firewood (4 cords so far this year) and >>> gravel, and hauling a bunch of stuff and a small trailer full of oak >>> firewood to elk camp every year. My Wrangler did OK with that the >>> last few >>> years and I hope the Tundra will do better. Other than that I >>> wanted a >>> pleasant commute 3-4 days a week into town a half hour each way. The >>> Tundra >>> and XM radio fit the bill!! Smooth, crazy quiet, fun to drive, great >>> power >>> when I get an excuse to pass somebody on the country roads... >>> >>> But to directly answer your question, the styling on the Nissan ruled >>> it out >>> for me. I'm not a chest-pounding kind of guy. I don't even know why >>> the >>> Nissan is supposed to be better? More power? The Tundra hauls ASS >>> and that >>> 4.7L engine is a marvel. More payload? Tundra is the biggest truck >>> I've >>> ever had (my third) and hauls more than I care to load/unload. >>> Looks? See >>> above. Towing? Anything my Tundra won't tow I don't want any part of. >>> >>> I think also the whole... I dunno.. the whole "Toyota" thing bears on >>> the >>> decision too. We have a '95 Land Cruiser that is just an amazing >>> vehicle. >>> Talk about a capable, dependable, confindence-inspiring vehicle. >>> Everyone i >>> know with Toyota's loves them. My last truck was an '86 Nissan that I >>> bought with 45k miles on it and it died at 177k miles (and still has >>> more in >>> it if anyone wants to put an engine in it) and I used it HARD. I >>> have no >>> beef with Nissan; if the Titan wasn't trying to look so tough-guy >>> puffed-up >>> I would've considered one. But it's hard to argue against a Toyota. >>> >>> -jeff >>> >>> >>>> tw >>>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >>>> 2003 TJ Rubicon * 2001 XJ Sport * 1971 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco >>>> >>>> "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'." >>>> >>>> Pronunciation: 'jEp Function: noun Date: 1940 >>>> >>>> Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase') >>>> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80" wheelbase, 1/4-ton >>>> capacity and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in World War II. >>>> __________________________________________________ ___________________ >>> >>> >>> >>> > |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:05 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands