Jeep

A peek at offroading (which is both grassroots and a motorsport) might be interesting for the magazine, actually. There are a lot of sub-disciplines and a lot of really interesting fabrication going on. It's like racing, but without rules!

Some of the off-road racers are truly bonkers, and I learn things every time I talk to a hard-core wheeler. There's a revolution going on right now in rig design in rock racing - I saw a race a couple of years ago at the Easter Jeep Safari that had one of those defining moments where one buggy immediately made all the more traditional entries in the event obsolete and outdated. It would have been like watching the first ground effects cars.

These guys have to be able to blast over whoops and around corners at speed, then get over stuff like this. Imagine trying to design a rig that would do that.

Off-roaders even have the same sort of conceptual breaks we have in paved racing. The Suzuki guys are the LBCs of the field, going for agile, light and small and not much power. The Jeep guys seem to think that any problem can be solved with bigger tires, more power and more articulation. The full-size guys are the same, but more so. The Land Rover guys are all on imaginary month-long trips through Africa and seem more intent on getting to a particular place instead of going over a particular obstacle.

miatame wrote:

Joe Gearin wrote: and miatame---- no need to burn...... how the Jeep performs on-road is at least as important as how it performs off pavement. (where will it spend more time?) I'm sure we will have both sides of the argument represented.

OK I just realized David's review is online. What did I say about burning the issue? How do I burn an online article? OK Sorry David, I love ya, but you are way wrong on this. "The Jeep Wrangler received the new TJ platform starting with the 2007 model." - WRONG, it is the JK, TJ was previous. "I’d have to go with the Subaru Forester instead." - You just lost a LOT of credit here. That's like saying I'd take a Honda Accord Wagon over a Miata because you can't store anything in a Miata. Come on dude, bring something else to the table. Did you used to work for CR?

I just read the review as well. I don't even know what to say....

Keith wrote: Off-roaders even have the same sort of conceptual breaks we have in paved racing. The Suzuki guys are the LBCs of the field, going for agile, light and small and not much power. The Jeep guys seem to think that any problem can be solved with bigger tires, more power and more articulation. The full-size guys are the same, but more so. The Land Rover guys are all on imaginary month-long trips through Africa and seem more intent on getting to a particular place instead of going over a particular obstacle.

Pic fixed.

And you are dead on about the segments. The part about Rover guys being on imaginary expeditions got a chuckle.

RossD wrote: Thats kinda how living with a jeep day to day can be, you have to take the annoying "hello" punches to party like they do.

Excellent analogy. I don't know of any Jeep guy who will profess that they are super comfortable or have a good looking interiors. They just do what they do.

miatame wrote:

RossD wrote: Thats kinda how living with a jeep day to day can be, you have to take the annoying "hello" punches to party like they do.

Excellent analogy. I don't know of any Jeep guy who will profess that they are super comfortable or have a good looking interiors. They just do what they do.

Exactly. But complaining about the road manners of a Jeep is similar to complaining about how the suspension in a Z06 is too stiff for a commuter.

In reply to DILYSI Dave:

Yup. Its the reverse side of that coin.

I had a 2004 Wrangler Willys Edition and it was my favorite car of all I owned.

Keith wrote: Off-roaders even have the same sort of conceptual breaks we have in paved racing. The Suzuki guys are the LBCs of the field, going for agile, light and small and not much power. The Jeep guys seem to think that any problem can be solved with bigger tires, more power and more articulation. The full-size guys are the same, but more so. The Land Rover guys are all on imaginary month-long trips through Africa and seem more intent on getting to a particular place instead of going over a particular obstacle.

As a former owner of an FSJ, I'm quoting Keith's remark for truth..

Keith wrote: Off-roaders even have the same sort of conceptual breaks we have in paved racing. The Suzuki guys are the LBCs of the field, going for agile, light and small and not much power. The Jeep guys seem to think that any problem can be solved with bigger tires, more power and more articulation. The full-size guys are the same, but more so. The Land Rover guys are all on imaginary month-long trips through Africa and seem more intent on getting to a particular place instead of going over a particular obstacle.

Ahem, as the owner of a Land Cruiser for almost a week now, I'm insulted by your failure to include 'Yotas.

Keith wrote: The Land Rover guys are all on imaginary month-long trips through Africa and seem more intent on getting to a particular place instead of going over a particular obstacle.

Well, though I do not have a Land Rover (Jeep XJ instead) I AM on a month long (5weeks actually, June 19th to July 25th) trip to Alaska, and YES, it is the destination, having a vehicle capable of getting you there and back (in our case, the Arctic Ocean) IS the whole point.

Your entire post was well said, you should be an adjunct contributing author to the Magazine.

I can say that about Land Rover owners because I is one You just don't see a lot of roof tents on Jeeps...

On reflection, I'm not sure the full size guys put a lot of emphasis on articulation. I think they're mostly interested in the biggest tires and the mostest horsepower.

Toyota? They seem to be mostly interested in articulation and body damage. If there was a GRM $20xx challenge for offroaders, I'd guess that half of the entries would be based on old Toyota pickups.

Keith wrote: I can say that about Land Rover owners because I is one You just don't see a lot of roof tents on Jeeps... On reflection, I'm not sure the full size guys put a lot of emphasis on articulation. I think they're mostly interested in the biggest tires and the mostest horsepower. Toyota? They seem to be mostly interested in articulation and body damage. If there was a GRM $20xx challenge for offroaders, I'd guess that half of the entries would be based on old Toyota pickups.

It's true. Toyota guys aren't happy until their vehicle looks like something they dragged out of the junkyard, AFTER it had been through the crusher.

Something must be "going on" at Chrysler, as P.J. O'Rourke has done a similar piece for this month's Car and Driver (sorry, I hate to plug ANYTHING on here that doesn't advertise already in GRM). P.J. came to the opposite conclusion that Dave did. And now that I think about it, aren't Jeeps a California/Florida "fixture"?

It seems I might be the only one with pictures. I wouldn't function without my jeep. I get it muddy all the time and I love every minute. Its a performer only a different kind.

I don't have much to offer other than DILYSI Dave and I need to hang out more. I had perma-grin for hours after a "Holy E36 M3, how the berkeley are we going to get out of this mess" ride in the jeep.

Just took ownership of my 3rd jeep. Everything that needed to be said here has been said, but i will still express my displeasure at the quality and tone of the review.

Still want one

Vigo wrote: Just took ownership of my 3rd jeep. Everything that needed to be said here has been said, but i will still express my displeasure at the quality and tone of the review.

Yeah. I think I've had about 14 Jeeps from a 46 CJ-2A to 2000 grand cherokees (and lots in between) and they TOTALLY missed the boat here. I know this is a sports car magazine but if there are this many readers that have owned Jeeps and get it, how is it that this magazine misses it this bad?

FWIW, Joe followed David's review with one of his own, and his is much more in line with the thoughts in this thread. I wish David had had time to go Jeeping with us at the Mitty, but he had a job to do.

DrBoost wrote:

Vigo wrote: Just took ownership of my 3rd jeep. Everything that needed to be said here has been said, but i will still express my displeasure at the quality and tone of the review.

Yeah. I think I've had about 14 Jeeps from a 46 CJ-2A to 2000 grand cherokees (and lots in between) and they TOTALLY missed the boat here. I know this is a sports car magazine but if there are this many readers that have owned Jeeps and get it, how is it that this magazine misses it this bad?

Couldn't agree more. I own all types of cars and I'm on my 4th Jeep. That review is a joke.

Don't get mad, because I really don't know. Is a Wrangler that much better offroad than everything else? If I can buy a 4X4 Tacoma or something and do some serious off roading and have better onroad ride and handling, and pay less upfront, and have better reliability, and have better safety, so on and so forth, I can see the point of the review.

On a related note, how do other Jeep products do off road? For instance a Grand Cherokee or a Liberty.

Hey, they are "Trail Rated".

I drove 4cyl. CJ's a lot and I was always amazed at what they could do. Pull tree's, plow snow, tow the modified home when the tow vehicle died. No creature comforts but when you are 18 who cares.

Otto_Maddox wrote: Don't get mad, because I really don't know. Is a Wrangler that much better offroad than everything else? If I can buy a 4X4 Tacoma or something and do some serious off roading and have better onroad ride and handling, and pay less upfront, and have better reliability, and have better safety, so on and so forth, I can see the point of the review. On a related note, how do other Jeep products do off road? For instance a Grand Cherokee or a Liberty.

Is it better offroad? Yes.

Everything else outside of the F250 4x4 has gone to independent suspension on at least one end. While that does indeed improve the on-road ride, handling, etc., it makes for an inferior off roader. That alone makes the Jeep better.

There are some other decent ones. For instance the H3 had an offroad package with 4.56 gears, a 4:1 transfer case, lockers, etc. Basically the same ingrediants as a Wrangle Rubicon. But it's still got an IFS.

It also depends what you are looking for off road. David's review mentioned an Outback as a substitute vehicle. If an Outback will go where you want to, then you're not going off road. IFS isn't as much a hinderance if playing in mud is your thing. But for getting into rocks, creekbeds, ruts, etc., it's hard to beat straight axles.

The other Jeep branded vehicles besides the Wrangler suffer the same weaknesses as the rest of the world. The Cherokee was the last straight axle SUV. It's awesome, but it's replacement (the Liberty) is no better than the Toyotas, et al.

DILYSI Dave wrote: If an Outback will go where you want to, then you're not going off road.

you owe this guy an apology for your statement.

http://thesuperu.com/

I had an 86 toyota truck with IFS. I owned it right after my wrangler. Seriously, stock for stock they went the same places with no drama from either vehicle. Sure a SFA is better when you start getting crazier and can be built stronger cheaper.. But will 99% of the buying public get the incremental benefit? m3h