wish I needed a new Jeep

[kognito]

I'd be all over this (http://www.jeep.com/en/lifetime_powertrain_warranty/)

not sure if this is national, or just northeast, but how can you beat lifetime powertrain warrenty

(and I wonder when newsbot will report it!!)

[bren]

(and I wonder when newsbot will report it!!)

....a few days ago :p

[kognito]

....a few days ago :p


Oppps, missed it. I didn't know this offer was on all Chrysler products.

Maybe the warrenty will only last as long as the company does!

[lemming]

probably doesn't cover the electronics portion (the pricier bits these days) that control the tranny or the engine.

:-D

but it's better than a warranty that ends at 36k miles.

[lupinsea]

Bah. . . I'd end up voiding the warranty as soon as I fitted a lift and bigger tires. . . which would probably be within a week or two of getting the Jeep.

Still, it's kind of cool.

It'd be nice to know that when an axle snaps it's covered under warranty. It would definitely make things more interesting on the trail.

[lemming]

what's the feedback on the new Wrangler (what is the chassis code? XJ? YJ?)?

just curious.

i know the 3.8litre v6 is a big difference.

[hfh330i]

I had a Wrangler rental this past week in S.F. It was a lot more refined than the Jeep my brother had in highschool. Not sure what year that was a late 80s/early 90s model year. (Had the square headlights; HO 4.0l straight six.) I've always been a fan; but not something I would want to commute to work in or drive 100+ miles. In San Fran its just about perfect with its good power and short, manuverable, wheelbase.

[bren]

...the Jeep my brother had in highschool. Not sure what year that was a late 80s/early 90s model year. (Had the square headlights; HO 4.0l straight six.)

That sounds like a 92+.

[FC]

what's the feedback on the new Wrangler (what is the chassis code? XJ? YJ?)?

just curious.

i know the 3.8litre v6 is a big difference.

I can't believe how expensive the new Rubicon unlimited is ($30K+), but I would definitely like to pick up a used one down the road when they get closer to $10K or so.

[lupinsea]

You'll be waiting a while, FC. . .

And hfh330i, your brother's Jeep is probably 2 generations removed in the Jeep linage from what you drove recently.


The new Wranglers are designated the "JK." And no, I'm not just kidding.

JK - 2007+
TJ - 1997 - 2006
YJ - 1987 - 1996
CJ - 1942 - 1986 (various types of CJs)





Feedback on the new Wranglers:

I've not driven the new Wrangler (don't want to tempt myself) but have been following the various on-line discussions closely. This seems to be the thrust of it . . .

GENERAL VIEW POINTS

Old 'n Crusty:
There are those for whom any change is a massive sell-out and eeeevil move agaist "their" Jeep legacy by those corporate bastards who control Jeep. They see the new "JK" Wrangler ('07+) as a move in the wrong direction on nearly every front from the engine choice, to increasing use of plastics, to interior design, to use of CV joints in the driveshafts, to the more contemporary exterior styling, blah blah blah. Sort of reminds me of Corvette owners, 911 owners, etc. etc. They sound like the same people poo-pooing the TJ when it came out in '97.

Give 'em a Break:
Then there are others who are willing to give the new Jeep a break and see how it goes. This group doesn't necessarily like the styling aspect but appreciate modern updates and features.

The Family Man:
This is almost a new customer for the Wrangler. And is sort of like the family guys that flocked to the RX-8. The new 4-door ranglers offer a way for the family guy to have his cake and eat it too. He get's a pretty darn good off-road / activity vehicle that's rough and tumble but also practical enough to haul his family around.

Those that actually own the new Jeeps (including previous long-time Jeep owners) have almost nothing but good to say about them. Especially those taking them off-road and running them hard.



CONTENTIOUS SPECIFIC ISSUES

There are specific areas on the new JK that spark debate. Here are a few of them.

Power Plant:
Jeep got rid of the 4 cyl. engine and the I-6. The only engine available in the JK for the US market is a now the 3.8L V6 . . . sourced from a mini-van. :eek: A lot of the old n' crusty Jeepers can't stand the though of getting rid of the 30+ year old design of Jeep's 4.XL I-6 engine. It was very crude compared to anything from BMW, got winded above 3000 rpm, and gulped down fuel. But, it was nigh bullet-proof and had lots of low-end grunt (~85% of torque at idle) and for the Old 'n Crusties the world is ending starting to end. (Think 911 aficionados and thier air-cooled 911s)

The new 3.8L V6 doesn't seem that bad. It has higher torque and HP numbers but generates them in the mid-range, not low-down where off-roaders want them. And indeed they don't seem to have the low-end grund of the old 4.0L engines. It's a slight decrease in grunt, some notice it, others don't. However, the improved mid-range should make it a bit better on the freeway. Fuel economy is up with the 4-door owners reporting 19-25 mpg on stock rigs. Huge improvement. My Jeep gets 14 mpg. . . on the highway . . . maybe (but it's modified, used to get 16.5 mpg stock)

And the 3.8L has been around since the early / mid 90's I believe so it's had, what? 10-15 years to prove itself.

Still. Jeeps have always had barely adequate power, even with the 4.0L, and were never speed demons. The new 3.8L fits very well in with the history of the Jeep in this regard.

Plastic! Grrrr:
The JKs have a lot more plastics than the TJs. Plastic fenders, plastic front grill, plastic dash, plastic bumper and so forth. Some see this as making the new Wraglers weak but . . . I don't really care. The plastics seem to be stretegicall placed an thoughtfully used.

The fenders for instance are now completely plastic, all the way to the hood. They look a bit ugly but entirely functional. No more dented and rusted, beat up looking crunched fenders. . . and if the driver is so worried, they can be unbolted from the body in about 3-5 minutes and completely removed.

The bumpers look hideous but no serious off-roader keeps stock bumpers for long.

So, I'm not seeing the big deal here. Just so long as it doesn't show up in major structural areas.

Styling:
It's sort of ugly in its proportions compared to past Jeeps. Nearly everyone agrees on this point, including many new owners. And I'd have to agree.

Bigger, Heavier:
The new Jeeps have grow 5" in width and gained about 400 lb. They top out around 4000 lb. now (mine, stock, was ~3200 lb.). I don't like this but, like BMW, what do you do.

The TJs, YJs, and every other Jeep had a pretty tight interior. There wasn't a lot of elbow room. So, in this regard the extra 5" in width is nice. But for off-roading it can be a problem when you're trying to squeeze between trees. This is a major issue as far as I'm concerned in the NW. There are places I go where it's even tight for my Jeep.

This is especially the case for the 4-door Wrangler. I'd LOVE to have one, but with an extra 20"+ of wheel base I have no frick'n clue how I'd manuver it around on the NW trails. I figure about 1/4 - 1/3 of the trails would effectively be off-limits due to the wheel base issues. Which is a shame becausue it's utility value for my family would be great: SUV-like cargo capacity with Wrangler fun and offroad prowess.



POSITIVES OF THE NEW WRANGLER

Drive Train:
The drive from the transfercase to the axles has been significantly beefed up and even the weaker axle has had it's problematic c-clip design eliminated.

Easier Tire Fitment
The new JKs have bigger wheel wells and can more easily fit larger tires. I believe a 33" tire can fit without needing a lift. . . and mild 2-3" lifts can fit massive 35" tires. This is good. Incomparison, TJs would need substantial (6") lifts to fit the 35" tires and there was a lot of drivetrain, suspension, and steering components affected.

So it's easier and cheaper to fit larger tires and it keeps the JK's C.O.G. lower with lower lifts.

Better Suspension Design:
The new JKs move to a better suspension with a longer control-arm design that is fully boxed in. . . this replaces the stubby short arm design of the TJ with it's stamped sheet metal control arms.

This smooths out the ride and makes the suspension components stronger.

Also, an improved steering system tightens up steering control and response (compared to older Jeeps).

Better Weight Distribution:
Jeeps have had 50/50 weight distributions for a while, but with a shorter engine block and a gas tank relocated to in-front of the rear axle the JKs suck all this weigh in between the axles making the Jeep more stable.

Stronger Frames:
Torsional rigidity of the frame and body has improved nearly 100%.

Electronics w/ Off-road In Mind
The JKs come standard with a lot of electronic stability and anti-roll programs that we are seeing on many other vehicles. While good for the street they can be annoying on the trail. So it's a good thing that these can be switched off.

Also, below about 5 mph, the ABS system lets the tires lock up, something good off-road, as it really lets the tires get a good bite on steep, loose terrian rather than letting the tire perpetually roll on what computers mistakenly think is a slipery surface.

Details
Finally, there's the little things. Like the re-design on control arm brakets to reduce binding. Intriduction of a steel cross member under the radiator to protect it. The easy-fold rear seats so they don't need to be entirely removed.

[Theo]

I tooled around in a late 70's CJ-7 with a 304 and 3spd manual. Had glasspacks exiting through the sides. Had to watch not burning yourself getting in our out. Had it in the early 80's. Was a fun ride for about a year.