"ElAlumbrado" <elNOSPAMalumbrado@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d8d31$425e01a9$943f9512$13604@STARBAND.NET...
> "Bryan" <frametype@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Nwi7e.1165$eR.1074@news02.roc.ny...
>> Got to disagree. My '05 TJ runs 65-70mph (70 is the limit here) highway
>> all the time here in WV, except for some of the steeper hills.
>> But again, the 2.4. has more power than the 2.5.
>> Mileage has been consistently between a low of 20 and a high of 24.
>> Usually 22-23mpg.
>>
>> Bryan
>
> Bryan, my 2000 TJ has *never* delivered better than 17, and I usually
> expect 14. That little engine is so anemic and the Jeep is geared so low
> that 70, for me, is wishful thinking. Here in West Texas the speed limit
> is 75, but most traffic travels between 85 and 90, and 100+ on lonely
> desert highways is to be expected. The only time my Jeep sees the highway
> (and just about the only time it sees pavement) is when it's being towed
> behind my RV.
>
> Maybe it's the new 6-speed that makes the difference.
>
> Bill

I'm just adding my two cents to this thread because maybe it will help the
original poster.

I spent twenty-six years in the army with many thousands of hours in M38,
M151, and other assorted vehicles, including the combat development command
where we tested some strange things.

The design was for off-road, meaning that the tires (look at them) are for
mud and not for high-speed, or even wet weather on asphalt. An original Jeep
tire will hydroplane easily, in rain, and, if dry, will get very hot at
highway speeds, since it is riding on only the center high point.

The power train, and the short wheelbase chassis, is more for pulling stumps
than driving in a straight line, at any speed.

We have had more soldier accidents on highways than off-road, and a lot of
the safety briefings were devoted to driving on the highway, where the
driver is constantly fighting the large wheels going in every direction.
Remember, the military Jeeps did not have tire balancing, front end
alignments, etc. Nothing that the modern car has to have to drive in a
straight line at highway speeds.

And shall I tell you about convoying Jeeps in the rain? The vacuum wipers
that slow to nothing when you accelerate. The canvas top that blows up then
down with a whack that makes you hold your ears. The heater - oh wait -
there's no heater. The small tail lights that you only see when you are ten
feet away -oops! The wonderful olive drab paint that means nobody can see
you in the dark -oops!

Not me.

 

LOL.

That old heap (it was the one we painted with reflectorized
International Orange) had a homemade metal half cab. Pax side had
extra headroom due to the humongous dimple caused by somebody hitting
their head right smarlty as it took a ditch just a tad fast (no seat
belts in the 50's). Today, I would need about 4 inches of Dr. Schoals
gel pads for my hemroids to survive one of those jumps.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 06:11:29 UTC L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:

> So you don't see yourself doing the Rat Patrol:
> http://www.omencity.com/thetedster/jeepthing/flying.jpg
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Will Honea wrote:
> >
> > Years back I drove a '48 MB for a couple of years. It would get up to
> > 55-60 on the downhil sections of the Garden State Parkway if you had a
> > tail wind, but it sounded like it was wound so tight that you didn't
> > stay yher too long. What I remember most about it was the stability.
> > With the short wheel base and narrow track keeping it on the road was
> > a full time job at or above 50mph and staying in one lane was
> > questionable, especially if there was any crosswind. Great fun when I
> > was young and stupid but not my idea of a touring car.
> >
> > --
> > Will Honea


--
Will Honea

 

LOL.

That old heap (it was the one we painted with reflectorized
International Orange) had a homemade metal half cab. Pax side had
extra headroom due to the humongous dimple caused by somebody hitting
their head right smarlty as it took a ditch just a tad fast (no seat
belts in the 50's). Today, I would need about 4 inches of Dr. Schoals
gel pads for my hemroids to survive one of those jumps.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 06:11:29 UTC L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:

> So you don't see yourself doing the Rat Patrol:
> http://www.omencity.com/thetedster/jeepthing/flying.jpg
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Will Honea wrote:
> >
> > Years back I drove a '48 MB for a couple of years. It would get up to
> > 55-60 on the downhil sections of the Garden State Parkway if you had a
> > tail wind, but it sounded like it was wound so tight that you didn't
> > stay yher too long. What I remember most about it was the stability.
> > With the short wheel base and narrow track keeping it on the road was
> > a full time job at or above 50mph and staying in one lane was
> > questionable, especially if there was any crosswind. Great fun when I
> > was young and stupid but not my idea of a touring car.
> >
> > --
> > Will Honea


--
Will Honea

 

LOL.

That old heap (it was the one we painted with reflectorized
International Orange) had a homemade metal half cab. Pax side had
extra headroom due to the humongous dimple caused by somebody hitting
their head right smarlty as it took a ditch just a tad fast (no seat
belts in the 50's). Today, I would need about 4 inches of Dr. Schoals
gel pads for my hemroids to survive one of those jumps.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 06:11:29 UTC L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:

> So you don't see yourself doing the Rat Patrol:
> http://www.omencity.com/thetedster/jeepthing/flying.jpg
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Will Honea wrote:
> >
> > Years back I drove a '48 MB for a couple of years. It would get up to
> > 55-60 on the downhil sections of the Garden State Parkway if you had a
> > tail wind, but it sounded like it was wound so tight that you didn't
> > stay yher too long. What I remember most about it was the stability.
> > With the short wheel base and narrow track keeping it on the road was
> > a full time job at or above 50mph and staying in one lane was
> > questionable, especially if there was any crosswind. Great fun when I
> > was young and stupid but not my idea of a touring car.
> >
> > --
> > Will Honea


--
Will Honea

 

LOL.

That old heap (it was the one we painted with reflectorized
International Orange) had a homemade metal half cab. Pax side had
extra headroom due to the humongous dimple caused by somebody hitting
their head right smarlty as it took a ditch just a tad fast (no seat
belts in the 50's). Today, I would need about 4 inches of Dr. Schoals
gel pads for my hemroids to survive one of those jumps.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 06:11:29 UTC L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:

> So you don't see yourself doing the Rat Patrol:
> http://www.omencity.com/thetedster/jeepthing/flying.jpg
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Will Honea wrote:
> >
> > Years back I drove a '48 MB for a couple of years. It would get up to
> > 55-60 on the downhil sections of the Garden State Parkway if you had a
> > tail wind, but it sounded like it was wound so tight that you didn't
> > stay yher too long. What I remember most about it was the stability.
> > With the short wheel base and narrow track keeping it on the road was
> > a full time job at or above 50mph and staying in one lane was
> > questionable, especially if there was any crosswind. Great fun when I
> > was young and stupid but not my idea of a touring car.
> >
> > --
> > Will Honea


--
Will Honea

 

"ElAlumbrado" <elNOSPAMalumbrado@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d8d31$425e01a9$943f9512$13604@STARBAND.NET...

>
> Bryan, my 2000 TJ has *never* delivered better than 17, and I usually
> expect 14. That little engine is so anemic and the Jeep is geared so low
> that 70, for me, is wishful thinking. Here in West Texas the speed limit
> is 75, but most traffic travels between 85 and 90, and 100+ on lonely
> desert highways is to be expected. The only time my Jeep sees the highway
> (and just about the only time it sees pavement) is when it's being towed
> behind my RV.
>
> Maybe it's the new 6-speed that makes the difference.
>
> Bill
>

Bill,

The 6 speed helps, and the 2.4 is, IMHO, an improvement also, with more
power than the 2.5
I would not want to try to keep up with traffic at the speeds you describe,
and I don't think my TJ would be up to that either.
But I can do 70mph fine on the interstate, with some drops to 5th gear and
60-65mph on the longer or steeper hills, or against strong headwinds.
My good mileage I attribute to spending most of my time on rural roads at
45-55mph.
For what it is worth, I have test driven several 2.5 Wranglers, and was put
off by the poor performance, and I did not want to buy a 6 cylinder, as
whatever I own must also do double duty as my daily driver. I drive a lot as
part of my job, and so every mpg means a great deal.
The 2.4 caught my attention, and with the addition of the 6-speed, it was
time to go to the dealership and try again.
I was pleased with the improvement over the 2.5/5-speeds.

Of course, I wouldn't mind a 6 cylinder Rubicon, but banks are funny about
wanting their payments on time !
:-)

Bryan

 

"ElAlumbrado" <elNOSPAMalumbrado@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d8d31$425e01a9$943f9512$13604@STARBAND.NET...

>
> Bryan, my 2000 TJ has *never* delivered better than 17, and I usually
> expect 14. That little engine is so anemic and the Jeep is geared so low
> that 70, for me, is wishful thinking. Here in West Texas the speed limit
> is 75, but most traffic travels between 85 and 90, and 100+ on lonely
> desert highways is to be expected. The only time my Jeep sees the highway
> (and just about the only time it sees pavement) is when it's being towed
> behind my RV.
>
> Maybe it's the new 6-speed that makes the difference.
>
> Bill
>

Bill,

The 6 speed helps, and the 2.4 is, IMHO, an improvement also, with more
power than the 2.5
I would not want to try to keep up with traffic at the speeds you describe,
and I don't think my TJ would be up to that either.
But I can do 70mph fine on the interstate, with some drops to 5th gear and
60-65mph on the longer or steeper hills, or against strong headwinds.
My good mileage I attribute to spending most of my time on rural roads at
45-55mph.
For what it is worth, I have test driven several 2.5 Wranglers, and was put
off by the poor performance, and I did not want to buy a 6 cylinder, as
whatever I own must also do double duty as my daily driver. I drive a lot as
part of my job, and so every mpg means a great deal.
The 2.4 caught my attention, and with the addition of the 6-speed, it was
time to go to the dealership and try again.
I was pleased with the improvement over the 2.5/5-speeds.

Of course, I wouldn't mind a 6 cylinder Rubicon, but banks are funny about
wanting their payments on time !
:-)

Bryan

 

"ElAlumbrado" <elNOSPAMalumbrado@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d8d31$425e01a9$943f9512$13604@STARBAND.NET...

>
> Bryan, my 2000 TJ has *never* delivered better than 17, and I usually
> expect 14. That little engine is so anemic and the Jeep is geared so low
> that 70, for me, is wishful thinking. Here in West Texas the speed limit
> is 75, but most traffic travels between 85 and 90, and 100+ on lonely
> desert highways is to be expected. The only time my Jeep sees the highway
> (and just about the only time it sees pavement) is when it's being towed
> behind my RV.
>
> Maybe it's the new 6-speed that makes the difference.
>
> Bill
>

Bill,

The 6 speed helps, and the 2.4 is, IMHO, an improvement also, with more
power than the 2.5
I would not want to try to keep up with traffic at the speeds you describe,
and I don't think my TJ would be up to that either.
But I can do 70mph fine on the interstate, with some drops to 5th gear and
60-65mph on the longer or steeper hills, or against strong headwinds.
My good mileage I attribute to spending most of my time on rural roads at
45-55mph.
For what it is worth, I have test driven several 2.5 Wranglers, and was put
off by the poor performance, and I did not want to buy a 6 cylinder, as
whatever I own must also do double duty as my daily driver. I drive a lot as
part of my job, and so every mpg means a great deal.
The 2.4 caught my attention, and with the addition of the 6-speed, it was
time to go to the dealership and try again.
I was pleased with the improvement over the 2.5/5-speeds.

Of course, I wouldn't mind a 6 cylinder Rubicon, but banks are funny about
wanting their payments on time !
:-)

Bryan

 

"ElAlumbrado" <elNOSPAMalumbrado@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d8d31$425e01a9$943f9512$13604@STARBAND.NET...

>
> Bryan, my 2000 TJ has *never* delivered better than 17, and I usually
> expect 14. That little engine is so anemic and the Jeep is geared so low
> that 70, for me, is wishful thinking. Here in West Texas the speed limit
> is 75, but most traffic travels between 85 and 90, and 100+ on lonely
> desert highways is to be expected. The only time my Jeep sees the highway
> (and just about the only time it sees pavement) is when it's being towed
> behind my RV.
>
> Maybe it's the new 6-speed that makes the difference.
>
> Bill
>

Bill,

The 6 speed helps, and the 2.4 is, IMHO, an improvement also, with more
power than the 2.5
I would not want to try to keep up with traffic at the speeds you describe,
and I don't think my TJ would be up to that either.
But I can do 70mph fine on the interstate, with some drops to 5th gear and
60-65mph on the longer or steeper hills, or against strong headwinds.
My good mileage I attribute to spending most of my time on rural roads at
45-55mph.
For what it is worth, I have test driven several 2.5 Wranglers, and was put
off by the poor performance, and I did not want to buy a 6 cylinder, as
whatever I own must also do double duty as my daily driver. I drive a lot as
part of my job, and so every mpg means a great deal.
The 2.4 caught my attention, and with the addition of the 6-speed, it was
time to go to the dealership and try again.
I was pleased with the improvement over the 2.5/5-speeds.

Of course, I wouldn't mind a 6 cylinder Rubicon, but banks are funny about
wanting their payments on time !
:-)

Bryan

 

I used my '48 ****** for about 6 months to commute a 40 mile round trip
to college. Was a fun ride, no highways. Got a lot of strange looks
around campus, and should could fit in about any open parking spot. I
would not recommend it but it sure was a fun ride.



In article <lHy7e.1284$8x1.580@news02.roc.ny>,
"Bryan" <frametype@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "ElAlumbrado" <elNOSPAMalumbrado@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:d8d31$425e01a9$943f9512$13604@STARBAND.NET...
>
> >
> > Bryan, my 2000 TJ has *never* delivered better than 17, and I usually
> > expect 14. That little engine is so anemic and the Jeep is geared so low
> > that 70, for me, is wishful thinking. Here in West Texas the speed limit
> > is 75, but most traffic travels between 85 and 90, and 100+ on lonely
> > desert highways is to be expected. The only time my Jeep sees the highway
> > (and just about the only time it sees pavement) is when it's being towed
> > behind my RV.
> >
> > Maybe it's the new 6-speed that makes the difference.
> >
> > Bill
> >
>
> Bill,
>
> The 6 speed helps, and the 2.4 is, IMHO, an improvement also, with more
> power than the 2.5
> I would not want to try to keep up with traffic at the speeds you describe,
> and I don't think my TJ would be up to that either.
> But I can do 70mph fine on the interstate, with some drops to 5th gear and
> 60-65mph on the longer or steeper hills, or against strong headwinds.
> My good mileage I attribute to spending most of my time on rural roads at
> 45-55mph.
> For what it is worth, I have test driven several 2.5 Wranglers, and was put
> off by the poor performance, and I did not want to buy a 6 cylinder, as
> whatever I own must also do double duty as my daily driver. I drive a lot as
> part of my job, and so every mpg means a great deal.
> The 2.4 caught my attention, and with the addition of the 6-speed, it was
> time to go to the dealership and try again.
> I was pleased with the improvement over the 2.5/5-speeds.
>
> Of course, I wouldn't mind a 6 cylinder Rubicon, but banks are funny about
> wanting their payments on time !
> :-)
>
> Bryan

--
o_o_o_o
/| ,[_____],
|¯¯¯L --O|||||||O-
()_)¯()_) ¯¯¯¯¯ )_)