Trucks! show on Spike - Jeep buildup
01-19-2004, 07:06 AM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Trucks! show on Spike - Jeep buildup
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:22:20 +0000, Bulletsnbrains wrote:
> Hi Pat,
>
> After watching a 2nd time... They actually installed 33". Stacey
> bloopered 35" near the end of the episode. I too thought the driveline
> angles and for that matter the D35 axle in the rear won't hold up to
> much stress if he digs into lockers and such. Stacey did mention the
> need for re-gear if they ever went to 35's, but the X came with
> 3.07's?!? or 3.55 ratio R&P right? Even 33's are a bit much for those
> ratios. From the sound of it, most of the rest of the build up will be
> window dressing. T.R. Roll cage, front and rear bumpers, winch and
> lights and such.
>
>
> Brian
Oh well - better 33's than 35's, I guess. The stock 3.07 ratio on the X
is not up to either size, to say nothing of the axles and the driveline
angle. Even the optional 3.73 gears (which I have, and suffer with poor
fuel mileage due to my 31" tires) are not that great with the 33" choice.
There is an interesting discussion on JU about this buildup, where one
participant is advancing an argument that the weld-on long-arm bracket has
actually compromised the service-life of the vehicle's frame (due to the
welding locations on the frame, apparently). Also complaints about using
a kit requiring changes which make a return to stock much more difficult
affecting the vehicle's resale value.
All in all, a disappointing show. I feel sorry for the poor dad and kid,
who appear to have genuinely trusted this character to install appropriate
modifications. In my opinion, they now have a compromised vehicle which,
at least for the intended driver, is a less capable, less reliable, less
economical and more dangerous one than they started with, for both on- and
off-road use. I hope the next episodes address some of these issues,
rather than just blingifying the thing.
PLM
--
[ ]
__OIIIIO__
|||=oo=|||
||| |||
> Hi Pat,
>
> After watching a 2nd time... They actually installed 33". Stacey
> bloopered 35" near the end of the episode. I too thought the driveline
> angles and for that matter the D35 axle in the rear won't hold up to
> much stress if he digs into lockers and such. Stacey did mention the
> need for re-gear if they ever went to 35's, but the X came with
> 3.07's?!? or 3.55 ratio R&P right? Even 33's are a bit much for those
> ratios. From the sound of it, most of the rest of the build up will be
> window dressing. T.R. Roll cage, front and rear bumpers, winch and
> lights and such.
>
>
> Brian
Oh well - better 33's than 35's, I guess. The stock 3.07 ratio on the X
is not up to either size, to say nothing of the axles and the driveline
angle. Even the optional 3.73 gears (which I have, and suffer with poor
fuel mileage due to my 31" tires) are not that great with the 33" choice.
There is an interesting discussion on JU about this buildup, where one
participant is advancing an argument that the weld-on long-arm bracket has
actually compromised the service-life of the vehicle's frame (due to the
welding locations on the frame, apparently). Also complaints about using
a kit requiring changes which make a return to stock much more difficult
affecting the vehicle's resale value.
All in all, a disappointing show. I feel sorry for the poor dad and kid,
who appear to have genuinely trusted this character to install appropriate
modifications. In my opinion, they now have a compromised vehicle which,
at least for the intended driver, is a less capable, less reliable, less
economical and more dangerous one than they started with, for both on- and
off-road use. I hope the next episodes address some of these issues,
rather than just blingifying the thing.
PLM
--
[ ]
__OIIIIO__
|||=oo=|||
||| |||
01-19-2004, 07:06 AM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Trucks! show on Spike - Jeep buildup
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:22:20 +0000, Bulletsnbrains wrote:
> Hi Pat,
>
> After watching a 2nd time... They actually installed 33". Stacey
> bloopered 35" near the end of the episode. I too thought the driveline
> angles and for that matter the D35 axle in the rear won't hold up to
> much stress if he digs into lockers and such. Stacey did mention the
> need for re-gear if they ever went to 35's, but the X came with
> 3.07's?!? or 3.55 ratio R&P right? Even 33's are a bit much for those
> ratios. From the sound of it, most of the rest of the build up will be
> window dressing. T.R. Roll cage, front and rear bumpers, winch and
> lights and such.
>
>
> Brian
Oh well - better 33's than 35's, I guess. The stock 3.07 ratio on the X
is not up to either size, to say nothing of the axles and the driveline
angle. Even the optional 3.73 gears (which I have, and suffer with poor
fuel mileage due to my 31" tires) are not that great with the 33" choice.
There is an interesting discussion on JU about this buildup, where one
participant is advancing an argument that the weld-on long-arm bracket has
actually compromised the service-life of the vehicle's frame (due to the
welding locations on the frame, apparently). Also complaints about using
a kit requiring changes which make a return to stock much more difficult
affecting the vehicle's resale value.
All in all, a disappointing show. I feel sorry for the poor dad and kid,
who appear to have genuinely trusted this character to install appropriate
modifications. In my opinion, they now have a compromised vehicle which,
at least for the intended driver, is a less capable, less reliable, less
economical and more dangerous one than they started with, for both on- and
off-road use. I hope the next episodes address some of these issues,
rather than just blingifying the thing.
PLM
--
[ ]
__OIIIIO__
|||=oo=|||
||| |||
> Hi Pat,
>
> After watching a 2nd time... They actually installed 33". Stacey
> bloopered 35" near the end of the episode. I too thought the driveline
> angles and for that matter the D35 axle in the rear won't hold up to
> much stress if he digs into lockers and such. Stacey did mention the
> need for re-gear if they ever went to 35's, but the X came with
> 3.07's?!? or 3.55 ratio R&P right? Even 33's are a bit much for those
> ratios. From the sound of it, most of the rest of the build up will be
> window dressing. T.R. Roll cage, front and rear bumpers, winch and
> lights and such.
>
>
> Brian
Oh well - better 33's than 35's, I guess. The stock 3.07 ratio on the X
is not up to either size, to say nothing of the axles and the driveline
angle. Even the optional 3.73 gears (which I have, and suffer with poor
fuel mileage due to my 31" tires) are not that great with the 33" choice.
There is an interesting discussion on JU about this buildup, where one
participant is advancing an argument that the weld-on long-arm bracket has
actually compromised the service-life of the vehicle's frame (due to the
welding locations on the frame, apparently). Also complaints about using
a kit requiring changes which make a return to stock much more difficult
affecting the vehicle's resale value.
All in all, a disappointing show. I feel sorry for the poor dad and kid,
who appear to have genuinely trusted this character to install appropriate
modifications. In my opinion, they now have a compromised vehicle which,
at least for the intended driver, is a less capable, less reliable, less
economical and more dangerous one than they started with, for both on- and
off-road use. I hope the next episodes address some of these issues,
rather than just blingifying the thing.
PLM
--
[ ]
__OIIIIO__
|||=oo=|||
||| |||
01-19-2004, 07:06 AM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Trucks! show on Spike - Jeep buildup
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:22:20 +0000, Bulletsnbrains wrote:
> Hi Pat,
>
> After watching a 2nd time... They actually installed 33". Stacey
> bloopered 35" near the end of the episode. I too thought the driveline
> angles and for that matter the D35 axle in the rear won't hold up to
> much stress if he digs into lockers and such. Stacey did mention the
> need for re-gear if they ever went to 35's, but the X came with
> 3.07's?!? or 3.55 ratio R&P right? Even 33's are a bit much for those
> ratios. From the sound of it, most of the rest of the build up will be
> window dressing. T.R. Roll cage, front and rear bumpers, winch and
> lights and such.
>
>
> Brian
Oh well - better 33's than 35's, I guess. The stock 3.07 ratio on the X
is not up to either size, to say nothing of the axles and the driveline
angle. Even the optional 3.73 gears (which I have, and suffer with poor
fuel mileage due to my 31" tires) are not that great with the 33" choice.
There is an interesting discussion on JU about this buildup, where one
participant is advancing an argument that the weld-on long-arm bracket has
actually compromised the service-life of the vehicle's frame (due to the
welding locations on the frame, apparently). Also complaints about using
a kit requiring changes which make a return to stock much more difficult
affecting the vehicle's resale value.
All in all, a disappointing show. I feel sorry for the poor dad and kid,
who appear to have genuinely trusted this character to install appropriate
modifications. In my opinion, they now have a compromised vehicle which,
at least for the intended driver, is a less capable, less reliable, less
economical and more dangerous one than they started with, for both on- and
off-road use. I hope the next episodes address some of these issues,
rather than just blingifying the thing.
PLM
--
[ ]
__OIIIIO__
|||=oo=|||
||| |||
> Hi Pat,
>
> After watching a 2nd time... They actually installed 33". Stacey
> bloopered 35" near the end of the episode. I too thought the driveline
> angles and for that matter the D35 axle in the rear won't hold up to
> much stress if he digs into lockers and such. Stacey did mention the
> need for re-gear if they ever went to 35's, but the X came with
> 3.07's?!? or 3.55 ratio R&P right? Even 33's are a bit much for those
> ratios. From the sound of it, most of the rest of the build up will be
> window dressing. T.R. Roll cage, front and rear bumpers, winch and
> lights and such.
>
>
> Brian
Oh well - better 33's than 35's, I guess. The stock 3.07 ratio on the X
is not up to either size, to say nothing of the axles and the driveline
angle. Even the optional 3.73 gears (which I have, and suffer with poor
fuel mileage due to my 31" tires) are not that great with the 33" choice.
There is an interesting discussion on JU about this buildup, where one
participant is advancing an argument that the weld-on long-arm bracket has
actually compromised the service-life of the vehicle's frame (due to the
welding locations on the frame, apparently). Also complaints about using
a kit requiring changes which make a return to stock much more difficult
affecting the vehicle's resale value.
All in all, a disappointing show. I feel sorry for the poor dad and kid,
who appear to have genuinely trusted this character to install appropriate
modifications. In my opinion, they now have a compromised vehicle which,
at least for the intended driver, is a less capable, less reliable, less
economical and more dangerous one than they started with, for both on- and
off-road use. I hope the next episodes address some of these issues,
rather than just blingifying the thing.
PLM
--
[ ]
__OIIIIO__
|||=oo=|||
||| |||
01-19-2004, 06:10 PM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Trucks! show on Spike - Jeep buildup
"Patrick Mills" <plm1954_R_E_M_O_V_E@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.01.19.12.06.55.731831@ix.netcom.com. ..
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:22:20 +0000, Bulletsnbrains wrote:
>
> > Hi Pat,
> >
> > After watching a 2nd time... They actually installed 33". Stacey
> > bloopered 35" near the end of the episode. I too thought the driveline
> > angles and for that matter the D35 axle in the rear won't hold up to
> > much stress if he digs into lockers and such. Stacey did mention the
> > need for re-gear if they ever went to 35's, but the X came with
> > 3.07's?!? or 3.55 ratio R&P right? Even 33's are a bit much for those
> > ratios. From the sound of it, most of the rest of the build up will be
> > window dressing. T.R. Roll cage, front and rear bumpers, winch and
> > lights and such.
> >
> >
> > Brian
>
> Oh well - better 33's than 35's, I guess. The stock 3.07 ratio on the X
> is not up to either size, to say nothing of the axles and the driveline
> angle. Even the optional 3.73 gears (which I have, and suffer with poor
> fuel mileage due to my 31" tires) are not that great with the 33" choice.
I am running 3.73s with my 30" and getting about 18mpg. that is quite good
compared to the 11mpg I was getting with my 3.07 stockers. What are you
considering poor gas milage??
> There is an interesting discussion on JU about this buildup, where one
> participant is advancing an argument that the weld-on long-arm bracket has
> actually compromised the service-life of the vehicle's frame (due to the
> welding locations on the frame, apparently). Also complaints about using
> a kit requiring changes which make a return to stock much more difficult
> affecting the vehicle's resale value.
>
> All in all, a disappointing show. I feel sorry for the poor dad and kid,
> who appear to have genuinely trusted this character to install appropriate
> modifications. In my opinion, they now have a compromised vehicle which,
> at least for the intended driver, is a less capable, less reliable, less
> economical and more dangerous one than they started with, for both on- and
> off-road use. I hope the next episodes address some of these issues,
> rather than just blingifying the thing.
>
> PLM
>
> --
> [ ]
> __OIIIIO__
> |||=oo=|||
> ||| |||
Too true. They could easily spend another grand regearing to get back
performance, not to mention a good SYE kit to reduce vibs. Of course then
he is going to try to use it off road and snap an axel so he will need HD
axels, (okay make that a couple of grand.)
Jeremy
01-19-2004, 06:10 PM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Trucks! show on Spike - Jeep buildup
"Patrick Mills" <plm1954_R_E_M_O_V_E@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.01.19.12.06.55.731831@ix.netcom.com. ..
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:22:20 +0000, Bulletsnbrains wrote:
>
> > Hi Pat,
> >
> > After watching a 2nd time... They actually installed 33". Stacey
> > bloopered 35" near the end of the episode. I too thought the driveline
> > angles and for that matter the D35 axle in the rear won't hold up to
> > much stress if he digs into lockers and such. Stacey did mention the
> > need for re-gear if they ever went to 35's, but the X came with
> > 3.07's?!? or 3.55 ratio R&P right? Even 33's are a bit much for those
> > ratios. From the sound of it, most of the rest of the build up will be
> > window dressing. T.R. Roll cage, front and rear bumpers, winch and
> > lights and such.
> >
> >
> > Brian
>
> Oh well - better 33's than 35's, I guess. The stock 3.07 ratio on the X
> is not up to either size, to say nothing of the axles and the driveline
> angle. Even the optional 3.73 gears (which I have, and suffer with poor
> fuel mileage due to my 31" tires) are not that great with the 33" choice.
I am running 3.73s with my 30" and getting about 18mpg. that is quite good
compared to the 11mpg I was getting with my 3.07 stockers. What are you
considering poor gas milage??
> There is an interesting discussion on JU about this buildup, where one
> participant is advancing an argument that the weld-on long-arm bracket has
> actually compromised the service-life of the vehicle's frame (due to the
> welding locations on the frame, apparently). Also complaints about using
> a kit requiring changes which make a return to stock much more difficult
> affecting the vehicle's resale value.
>
> All in all, a disappointing show. I feel sorry for the poor dad and kid,
> who appear to have genuinely trusted this character to install appropriate
> modifications. In my opinion, they now have a compromised vehicle which,
> at least for the intended driver, is a less capable, less reliable, less
> economical and more dangerous one than they started with, for both on- and
> off-road use. I hope the next episodes address some of these issues,
> rather than just blingifying the thing.
>
> PLM
>
> --
> [ ]
> __OIIIIO__
> |||=oo=|||
> ||| |||
Too true. They could easily spend another grand regearing to get back
performance, not to mention a good SYE kit to reduce vibs. Of course then
he is going to try to use it off road and snap an axel so he will need HD
axels, (okay make that a couple of grand.)
Jeremy
01-19-2004, 06:10 PM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Trucks! show on Spike - Jeep buildup
"Patrick Mills" <plm1954_R_E_M_O_V_E@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.01.19.12.06.55.731831@ix.netcom.com. ..
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:22:20 +0000, Bulletsnbrains wrote:
>
> > Hi Pat,
> >
> > After watching a 2nd time... They actually installed 33". Stacey
> > bloopered 35" near the end of the episode. I too thought the driveline
> > angles and for that matter the D35 axle in the rear won't hold up to
> > much stress if he digs into lockers and such. Stacey did mention the
> > need for re-gear if they ever went to 35's, but the X came with
> > 3.07's?!? or 3.55 ratio R&P right? Even 33's are a bit much for those
> > ratios. From the sound of it, most of the rest of the build up will be
> > window dressing. T.R. Roll cage, front and rear bumpers, winch and
> > lights and such.
> >
> >
> > Brian
>
> Oh well - better 33's than 35's, I guess. The stock 3.07 ratio on the X
> is not up to either size, to say nothing of the axles and the driveline
> angle. Even the optional 3.73 gears (which I have, and suffer with poor
> fuel mileage due to my 31" tires) are not that great with the 33" choice.
I am running 3.73s with my 30" and getting about 18mpg. that is quite good
compared to the 11mpg I was getting with my 3.07 stockers. What are you
considering poor gas milage??
> There is an interesting discussion on JU about this buildup, where one
> participant is advancing an argument that the weld-on long-arm bracket has
> actually compromised the service-life of the vehicle's frame (due to the
> welding locations on the frame, apparently). Also complaints about using
> a kit requiring changes which make a return to stock much more difficult
> affecting the vehicle's resale value.
>
> All in all, a disappointing show. I feel sorry for the poor dad and kid,
> who appear to have genuinely trusted this character to install appropriate
> modifications. In my opinion, they now have a compromised vehicle which,
> at least for the intended driver, is a less capable, less reliable, less
> economical and more dangerous one than they started with, for both on- and
> off-road use. I hope the next episodes address some of these issues,
> rather than just blingifying the thing.
>
> PLM
>
> --
> [ ]
> __OIIIIO__
> |||=oo=|||
> ||| |||
Too true. They could easily spend another grand regearing to get back
performance, not to mention a good SYE kit to reduce vibs. Of course then
he is going to try to use it off road and snap an axel so he will need HD
axels, (okay make that a couple of grand.)
Jeremy
01-20-2004, 05:48 PM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Trucks! show on Spike - Jeep buildup
In article <pan.2004.01.19.12.06.55.731831@ix.netcom.com>, Patrick Mills
<plm1954_R_E_M_O_V_E@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> blingifying
heh
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
<plm1954_R_E_M_O_V_E@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> blingifying
heh
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html