LS

<txjeep7@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184791538.410883.168290@j4g2000prf.googlegro ups.com...
>I have been reading some of the specs on the JK Rubicon
> Unlimited.... front and rear lockers you can activate with the
> flick of a switch? dana 44s front and rear? 32" tires standard, no
> lift kit needed?? 4.10 gear ratio, 4:1 compression, and a six speed
> manual? And all with a factory warranty!!! Sounds like the most
> capable stock jeep EVER. You might even be able to stick 33s or 34s
> on it straight out of the showroom! Not to mention, it can tow 3500
> pounds.... I might finally be able to get rid of the separate tow
> vehicle I had to keep for my jet skis and ATVs because my TJ couldn't
> tow over 2000 lbs!
>
> As soon as I saw the photos and read the first specs, my heart has
> been racing with desire. Pamela Anderson move over, all my lust is
> for the latest and greatest off the Chrysler assembly line!
>
> But wait. There seems to be a derisive undercurrent of scorn and
> disappointment here on the jeep group. People are saying things like
> "the TJ is the last wrangler I'll ever buy."
>
> Why?????? What am I missing? What's wrong with the JK... it sounds
> like an offroader's dream!
>
> I remember when the TJ came out, people scoffed and said it would
> never be as good as the YJ. And when the YJ came out, people swore
> they'd never give up the CJ. I'm too young to remember when the CJ
> first hit the market, but I'm willing to bet people were dissing it
> when compared to the ******.
>
> So... is all this anti-JK sentiment just "sour grapes" but people
> who are slow to change (and perhaps a bit unhappy/jealous that they
> bought a TJ and now something has eclipsed it)? Or is there some
> real, material failing in the JK that I need to be aware of before
> trekking to a dealership to lay down my cash for one?
>
I guess I'll be the first one here to admit to buying a JK. We had an '01
TJ with the 4 banger engine and it was a perfectly capable off road Jeep.
Not fast on the highway but it always got you where you needed to go. It
was getting, as they say, a bit long in the tooth and was beginning to need
lots of time and money to keep things under repair so we went and looked at
the JK Jeeps. We have had it about a month, has a couple thousand miles on
it now. What do we think of it? Well to start with, it is tremendously
quieter on the road. You can actually listen to the radio at interstate
speeds. The top is easier to put up and down, it's much, much easier to put
the side windows in. The back seat folds up out of the way with the flick of
a lever all by itself. It also comes out much easier than the TJ. We have
the standard tranny and are getting an average of 18 MPG around town with
country road driving mixed in, no highway to speak of. It's a LOT higher
than the TJ was, both from the larger wheels and tires and the body seems to
sit higher on the frame. When you take the doors off there is a plug that
you simply pull and the dome lights are disabled, no more going in behind
the glove box and pulling number four fuse. Folks rap the ESP stability
thing but I haven't noticed that it's even there. There is a button on the
dash to turn it off if you think it's bothering you. The disk brakes at all
four wheels are awesome and have great stopping power compared to the old TJ
we had. The old Jeep trick of pressing your brake pedal when you get a
wheel spinning to send more torque to the other wheel has been used for
years. The JK does this for you, it has traction control for all four
wheels that will pinch the brake on a wheel that gets spinning so the power
will go to the other wheel. Sort of a poor man's limited slip. I had to go
try this out so I headed out to some muddy areas and got on the gas to spin
things. I was surprised, it really does work and help. The other big knock
I keep seeing is the demise of the 4 liter in line six. I came out of a 4
banger TJ so this moter has huge power to me. Folks will always like stuff
and other folks won't, thats just life and makes it interesting. Now, what
don't I like? The TJ front seats would fold and tip up to let people in the
back. The JK just lets the seat back fold forward and the seat slides
forward on it's track making it real difficult to get anyone into the back
seat. We rarely use the back seat for passengers so it's not too big a deal
to us but it would be if you use the back seat much. The radio still sucks.
The front seat belts flap between the floor and the upper slide mount when
you have the top off. Other than that, we are very happy with the new Jeep.
After drooling over the Rubicon, we bought the X model with the only option
being the package with a/c, cloth seats, adjustable height drivers seat and
center console. I guess everyone will have to decide for themselves if this
one is for them or not. We're quite happy and it is our daily driver as
well as being our play toy and I'm convinced, now I'm comparing pretty much
stock Jeeps here, it's a more capable Jeep both on the road and off than my
TJ was. Time may change my mind or maybe not. Hope this answers some of
your questions and is just my two cents worth on the JK. Happy Jeeping
everyone!
Les

Brian

attnews was the first person on RAMJ+W I ever killfiled. ;) Very poor
signal-to-noise ratio.

I also remember folks saying that leaf spring conversions would be the
biggest after-market "upgrade" for TJs. Hah!


B

In article <4uidnZIni7JrXwPbnZ2dnUVZ_rignZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote:

> It must be said that in mid-96 when the '97 Wrangler TJ was released there
> was a huge uproar over the redesign, mainly with the redesign of the
> suspension. (No leaf springs? No bone-jarring ride? It's not a Real Jeep!) I
> think with every redesign you get purists that just can't handle it, and
> long for the good old days. Anyone here remember attnews?

Brian

attnews was the first person on RAMJ+W I ever killfiled. ;) Very poor
signal-to-noise ratio.

I also remember folks saying that leaf spring conversions would be the
biggest after-market "upgrade" for TJs. Hah!


B

In article <4uidnZIni7JrXwPbnZ2dnUVZ_rignZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote:

> It must be said that in mid-96 when the '97 Wrangler TJ was released there
> was a huge uproar over the redesign, mainly with the redesign of the
> suspension. (No leaf springs? No bone-jarring ride? It's not a Real Jeep!) I
> think with every redesign you get purists that just can't handle it, and
> long for the good old days. Anyone here remember attnews?

Brian

attnews was the first person on RAMJ+W I ever killfiled. ;) Very poor
signal-to-noise ratio.

I also remember folks saying that leaf spring conversions would be the
biggest after-market "upgrade" for TJs. Hah!


B

In article <4uidnZIni7JrXwPbnZ2dnUVZ_rignZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote:

> It must be said that in mid-96 when the '97 Wrangler TJ was released there
> was a huge uproar over the redesign, mainly with the redesign of the
> suspension. (No leaf springs? No bone-jarring ride? It's not a Real Jeep!) I
> think with every redesign you get purists that just can't handle it, and
> long for the good old days. Anyone here remember attnews?

Brian

attnews was the first person on RAMJ+W I ever killfiled. ;) Very poor
signal-to-noise ratio.

I also remember folks saying that leaf spring conversions would be the
biggest after-market "upgrade" for TJs. Hah!


B

In article <4uidnZIni7JrXwPbnZ2dnUVZ_rignZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote:

> It must be said that in mid-96 when the '97 Wrangler TJ was released there
> was a huge uproar over the redesign, mainly with the redesign of the
> suspension. (No leaf springs? No bone-jarring ride? It's not a Real Jeep!) I
> think with every redesign you get purists that just can't handle it, and
> long for the good old days. Anyone here remember attnews?

Paul Nelson

I like my 03 Rubicon even though it costs a lot more to lift it than the JK.
Sometimes I wish the TJ were narrower on some of the trails I ride - can't
imagine the extra width of a JK. I've never had much trouble with the TJ
not being wide enough for stability.

The JK's huge advantage for off-roaders is that you can lift it for a lot
less money.

Paul Nelson
03 Rubicon - 4.5 RE lift - Tom Woods driveshaft - 1" body - 35 BFG MT/KM
(coming very soon)

in article 1184791538.410883.168290@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.c om,
txjeep7@gmail.com at txjeep7@gmail.com wrote on 7/18/07 3:45 PM:

> So... is all this anti-JK sentiment just "sour grapes" but people
> who are slow to change (and perhaps a bit unhappy/jealous that they
> bought a TJ and now something has eclipsed it)? Or is there some
> real, material failing in the JK that I need to be aware of before
> trekking to a dealership to lay down my cash for one?

Paul Nelson

I like my 03 Rubicon even though it costs a lot more to lift it than the JK.
Sometimes I wish the TJ were narrower on some of the trails I ride - can't
imagine the extra width of a JK. I've never had much trouble with the TJ
not being wide enough for stability.

The JK's huge advantage for off-roaders is that you can lift it for a lot
less money.

Paul Nelson
03 Rubicon - 4.5 RE lift - Tom Woods driveshaft - 1" body - 35 BFG MT/KM
(coming very soon)

in article 1184791538.410883.168290@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.c om,
txjeep7@gmail.com at txjeep7@gmail.com wrote on 7/18/07 3:45 PM:

> So... is all this anti-JK sentiment just "sour grapes" but people
> who are slow to change (and perhaps a bit unhappy/jealous that they
> bought a TJ and now something has eclipsed it)? Or is there some
> real, material failing in the JK that I need to be aware of before
> trekking to a dealership to lay down my cash for one?

Paul Nelson

I like my 03 Rubicon even though it costs a lot more to lift it than the JK.
Sometimes I wish the TJ were narrower on some of the trails I ride - can't
imagine the extra width of a JK. I've never had much trouble with the TJ
not being wide enough for stability.

The JK's huge advantage for off-roaders is that you can lift it for a lot
less money.

Paul Nelson
03 Rubicon - 4.5 RE lift - Tom Woods driveshaft - 1" body - 35 BFG MT/KM
(coming very soon)

in article 1184791538.410883.168290@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.c om,
txjeep7@gmail.com at txjeep7@gmail.com wrote on 7/18/07 3:45 PM:

> So... is all this anti-JK sentiment just "sour grapes" but people
> who are slow to change (and perhaps a bit unhappy/jealous that they
> bought a TJ and now something has eclipsed it)? Or is there some
> real, material failing in the JK that I need to be aware of before
> trekking to a dealership to lay down my cash for one?

Paul Nelson

I like my 03 Rubicon even though it costs a lot more to lift it than the JK.
Sometimes I wish the TJ were narrower on some of the trails I ride - can't
imagine the extra width of a JK. I've never had much trouble with the TJ
not being wide enough for stability.

The JK's huge advantage for off-roaders is that you can lift it for a lot
less money.

Paul Nelson
03 Rubicon - 4.5 RE lift - Tom Woods driveshaft - 1" body - 35 BFG MT/KM
(coming very soon)

in article 1184791538.410883.168290@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.c om,
txjeep7@gmail.com at txjeep7@gmail.com wrote on 7/18/07 3:45 PM:

> So... is all this anti-JK sentiment just "sour grapes" but people
> who are slow to change (and perhaps a bit unhappy/jealous that they
> bought a TJ and now something has eclipsed it)? Or is there some
> real, material failing in the JK that I need to be aware of before
> trekking to a dealership to lay down my cash for one?

txjeep7@gmail.com

Ah, ok, so the complaints seem to be twofold:

1) Longer Wheelbase. A valid worry for 4-wheeling, but I bet the
complaints are overblown. I currently drive a CJ Scrambler, and the
main difference between my rig and the smaller CJ5s/CJ7s on the trail
is that when they have to do a 3 point turn, I have to do a 5 point
turn. A pain in the ***, to be sure, but doesn't come into play in
most wheeling situations, and a worthwhile tradeoff for the improved
stability and the ability to bring a couple guests, a ginormous
cooler, tent, toolbox, and plenty of other gear to camp at the
wheeling site... not to mention the occasional ability to haul a load
of dirt or heavy cargo home from Lowe's. (I don't use my scrambler
for people-hauling, but I imagine an additional benefit of the JK
would be third row seats.) All in all, methinks this issue is a
wash.

2) Smaller 3.8L engine. I can agree that smaller engines are rarely a
satisfying change, but 3.8L vs 4.0L is really a pretty minor
difference (unless someone's aware of a particularly significant
failing of the 3.8??? I recall the GM-sourced V6 used on the
Cherokees in the 1980s was supposedly a complete peice of s---...
hopefully this engine isn't also a weak sister?) I'd be more worried
about the increased size of the vehicle relative to the engine size,
especially with the "Unlimited" trim level. 3.8L is probably plenty
to push a 2500lb TJ. I wonder, though, how much the JK weighs....
I bet it's more, don't you?

One can always hope that in a model year or two, Chrysler puts their
reliable 5.9L in a Wrangler... or, if you really want to make your
mouth water.... maybe they could steal a page from the Dodge
division and make an "SRT" model with the 6.1L Hemi or, god save my
bank account, the 8.3L Viper! And I suspect Chrysler execs would
love to do this too.... but I bet they won't. New fleet emissions
and mileage standards, California (CARB) rules, and general bad
press and political hostility in congress are rapidly making the V-8s
and V-10s of this world a thing of the past in everything but large
work trucks and tow vehicles, and the occasional Corvette or
Mustang.