The Jeep Wrangler Unlimited is pretty cool

[FC]

I didn't get to drive it. I had no time and it was raining out, but since the dealership is less than a mile away, I went to take a quick peek.

As the brochure says, it's basically a teh same size as the Cherokee in much a much cooler form. My brother has a Cherokee so I am not making this assessment totally out of my ass.

It obviously is more modern and with a nicer interior, etc. With me sitting comfortably in the driver's seat, I had a "just right" amount of room sitting behind it. I'd say about as roomy and maybe a hair less than the E46 in the back. The cargo area is not as big as I had hoped, but still, it is very usable. Not too deep, but very tall and perfectly square. Though with the hard top on and the soft-top retracted, you loose some space. The hardtop is very cool.

While I didn't drive it, I see a one driving to the same train station whre I drop my wife off. I dunno if the dude was flooring it, but it didn't seem dog-slow. Granted, it had just one person in it.

This car is as cool to me as a any cool sportscar. I was reading the brochure last night and was pretty giddy just thinking about having one. I hope this mild obsession passes. Driving in front of a row of these twice a day and staring at them during the long red light doesn't help.

I'll add more when I drive it later this year.

Pointless waffling follows...

The thing I find interesting is the trim options. At first glance it makes sense:

X - A base version
Sahara - the compromise setup to make it as much of a DD as possible
Rubicon - All-out off-roading model.

The problem I have is that the X, once optioned with some basic stuff, like good rear differential (LSD or locking), and the hardtop, etc you get very close to the Sahara, which is nice, but rather pansie in that the colors are pretty lame and it tries too hard to be civilized. Oh and it only comes with the option for a rear LSD. IMO, if you are getting a Wrangler and they offer a locking rear diff, why not take it? Again, this all assuming the car isn't your only/primary car. Other than those couple for issues, the Sahara is actually a pretty good value. But it touches $30K. That brings up the Rubicon. Yes, it costs more. Similarly equipped, it's 3-4K more. But it's so bad ass in terms of looks, and hardware it's almost hard to pass up. I'm sure with reasonable tires, it would ride far better.

The issue for me is that I would (if ever) buy one of these used, and dealers, for the purpose of keeping the cost lower than a Sahara, keep the X's pretty stripped - which wouldn't have stuff I would really want, like a hard top, tow-bar, LSD or locking rear diff, etc. If the car is a seldom-driven car, why not just get a Rubicon in the used car market?

[bren]

Originally Posted by FC

That brings up the Rubicon....I'm sure with reasonable tires, it would ride far better.

Perfect. LOL

[clyde]

Man, that thing is such a nutsack extension.

[Optimus Prime]

Originally Posted by clyde

Man, that thing is such a nutsack extension.

I have never ever wanted my nutsack extended, and I've never heard anybody else ever comment that they wished their significant other had a bigger nutsack.



I did check out the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited at the auto show and thought the interior was complete dog shit. It felt like crap, it looked like crap, it even smelled a bit like crap. I could never be happy with one of those.

[lupinsea]

Drive it some time, FC. . . you might change your mind.

The new Wranglers drive better than my era . . . but it's on-road manners are still compromised by it's suspension design (which is awesome on the trails) and probably no where near what modern SUVs are.

Power wise, Wranglers always had "just enough" power. . . . as in, just enough to move the Jeep. If you drive "normally" the way most other people drive they'll probably be fine. Just don't expect great performance out of the engine. . . think slow mini-van speed.

As for the X vs. Sahara vs. Rubicon. . .

Well, you have the brochures and will figure something out for you. But for me I'd either go X or Rubicon. In my mind the Sahara only offers cosmetic upgrades and, well, it's a Jeep so what's the point? . . . actually "I" would go Rubicon but that's because I'd put all that awesome offroad capability to use. For you? Would you use the Rubi's capabilities? Do you really want all that fancy cosmetic stuff on the Sahara trim line? I can tell you that the Wrangler's basic 4x4 system does an amazing job even in severe conditions . . so if you're looking for snowy road, gravel mountain routes, or heck, even some serious offroad trail conditions, then the X will be more than plenty traction wise.

I don't want to talk you out of a Rubi, I think they're awesome and hopefully you'd use it offroad. But if you have zero intention of doing that . . .


An option is to get an X and then fix it up the way you want. Toss on your own wheels/tires. Or put on your own tow-bar/rear bumper. You'd likely get your Jeep outfitted for less with more robust aftermarket parts.







Anyways

People need to adjust the metric by which they measure a Wrangler. It's not a car, it's not an SUV, it's not a truck, certainly not a sports car. It's a Jeep.

Its a utilitarian vehicle designed for the outdoors. It'll take you places you'd be surprised you can drive. And it'll handle bad weather, crappy roads, snow, floods, and mud holes with grace.

On good days it turns into a convertible. VERY convertible. The windshield folds down and the doors come off in addition to the top coming down. This offers a sense of openness not found in anything short of a motorcycle. There are myriad ways to configure any wrangler to fit your needs / environmental conditions.

And the interior, while "shitty" is probably one of the best set up interiors for dealing with wet, muddy, dirty passengers (you know, who actually get outdoors and play in nature). The carpets fit poorly but that is because you can unsnap them and remove the from the vehicle. Why? So you can HOSE OUT the interior. Yeah, that's right, how many other vehicle can you spray out the passenger cabin with a garden hose?

And it's drive train is also designed toward this ruggedness. Solid live axles at each end are durable, simple, offer tremendous flexibility, and safely encase all drivetrain components (no rubber SV boots to tear). They use an "old school" locking transfercase to switch between 2WD, 4Hi and 4Lo. In the case of the Rubicons that 4-low is a 4:1 crawl ratio for extra low-end grunt. So there's no shifting of power front/rear . . . it's always 50/50 power distrubution and each axle always has power to it. No computerized mumbo-jumbo to get in the way.

[ARCHER]

Originally Posted by lupinsea

Drive it some time, FC. . . you might change your mind.

The new Wranglers drive better than my era . . . but it's on-road manners are still compromised by it's suspension design (which is awesome on the trails) and probably no where near what modern SUVs are.

Power wise, Wranglers always had "just enough" power. . . . as in, just enough to move the Jeep. If you drive "normally" the way most other people drive they'll probably be fine. Just don't expect great performance out of the engine. . . think slow mini-van speed.

As for the X vs. Sahara vs. Rubicon. . .

Well, you have the brochures and will figure something out for you. But for me I'd either go X or Rubicon. In my mind the Sahara only offers cosmetic upgrades and, well, it's a Jeep so what's the point? . . . actually "I" would go Rubicon but that's because I'd put all that awesome offroad capability to use. For you? Would you use the Rubi's capabilities? Do you really want all that fancy cosmetic stuff on the Sahara trim line? I can tell you that the Wrangler's basic 4x4 system does an amazing job even in severe conditions . . so if you're looking for snowy road, gravel mountain routes, or heck, even some serious offroad trail conditions, then the X will be more than plenty traction wise.

I don't want to talk you out of a Rubi, I think they're awesome and hopefully you'd use it offroad. But if you have zero intention of doing that . . .


An option is to get an X and then fix it up the way you want. Toss on your own wheels/tires. Or put on your own tow-bar/rear bumper. You'd likely get your Jeep outfitted for less with more robust aftermarket parts.







Anyways

People need to adjust the metric by which they measure a Wrangler. It's not a car, it's not an SUV, it's not a truck, certainly not a sports car. It's a Jeep.

Its a utilitarian vehicle designed for the outdoors. It'll take you places you'd be surprised you can drive. And it'll handle bad weather, crappy roads, snow, floods, and mud holes with grace.

On good days it turns into a convertible. VERY convertible. The windshield folds down and the doors come off in addition to the top coming down. This offers a sense of openness not found in anything short of a motorcycle. There are myriad ways to configure any wrangler to fit your needs / environmental conditions.

And the interior, while "shitty" is probably one of the best set up interiors for dealing with wet, muddy, dirty passengers (you know, who actually get outdoors and play in nature). The carpets fit poorly but that is because you can unsnap them and remove the from the vehicle. Why? So you can HOSE OUT the interior. Yeah, that's right, how many other vehicle can you spray out the passenger cabin with a garden hose?

And it's drive train is also designed toward this ruggedness. Solid live axles at each end are durable, simple, offer tremendous flexibility, and safely encase all drivetrain components (no rubber SV boots to tear). They use an "old school" locking transfercase to switch between 2WD, 4Hi and 4Lo. In the case of the Rubicons that 4-low is a 4:1 crawl ratio for extra low-end grunt. So there's no shifting of power front/rear . . . it's always 50/50 power distrubution and each axle always has power to it. No computerized mumbo-jumbo to get in the way.

I agree with Lup.

Had the Unlimited been out when I bought my '05 Rubicon, it would still be in my garage. I see a few in my area that have been thoughtfully lifted and outfitted for the trail. They look fantastic, are as capable as one will find and get "reasonable" fuel economy. The real beauty is in their simplicity if you care to turn the wrench on it - probably one of the last bastions of its kind in todays automotive world as far as purpose-built machines go.

I'm seriously considering ditching the F-250 for an Unlimited Rubicon, given the price of diesel.

BTW, Lup... know anyone in the market for a set of five '05 OEM Moabs in excellent condition? Mine are for sale.

[FC]

Originally Posted by lupinsea

Drive it some time, FC. . . you might change your mind.

The new Wranglers drive better than my era . . . but it's on-road manners are still compromised by it's suspension design (which is awesome on the trails) and probably no where near what modern SUVs are.

Power wise, Wranglers always had "just enough" power. . . . as in, just enough to move the Jeep. If you drive "normally" the way most other people drive they'll probably be fine. Just don't expect great performance out of the engine. . . think slow mini-van speed.

As for the X vs. Sahara vs. Rubicon. . .

Well, you have the brochures and will figure something out for you. But for me I'd either go X or Rubicon. In my mind the Sahara only offers cosmetic upgrades and, well, it's a Jeep so what's the point? . . . actually "I" would go Rubicon but that's because I'd put all that awesome offroad capability to use. For you? Would you use the Rubi's capabilities? Do you really want all that fancy cosmetic stuff on the Sahara trim line? I can tell you that the Wrangler's basic 4x4 system does an amazing job even in severe conditions . . so if you're looking for snowy road, gravel mountain routes, or heck, even some serious offroad trail conditions, then the X will be more than plenty traction wise.

I don't want to talk you out of a Rubi, I think they're awesome and hopefully you'd use it offroad. But if you have zero intention of doing that . . .


An option is to get an X and then fix it up the way you want. Toss on your own wheels/tires. Or put on your own tow-bar/rear bumper. You'd likely get your Jeep outfitted for less with more robust aftermarket parts.







Anyways

People need to adjust the metric by which they measure a Wrangler. It's not a car, it's not an SUV, it's not a truck, certainly not a sports car. It's a Jeep.

Its a utilitarian vehicle designed for the outdoors. It'll take you places you'd be surprised you can drive. And it'll handle bad weather, crappy roads, snow, floods, and mud holes with grace.

On good days it turns into a convertible. VERY convertible. The windshield folds down and the doors come off in addition to the top coming down. This offers a sense of openness not found in anything short of a motorcycle. There are myriad ways to configure any wrangler to fit your needs / environmental conditions.

And the interior, while "shitty" is probably one of the best set up interiors for dealing with wet, muddy, dirty passengers (you know, who actually get outdoors and play in nature). The carpets fit poorly but that is because you can unsnap them and remove the from the vehicle. Why? So you can HOSE OUT the interior. Yeah, that's right, how many other vehicle can you spray out the passenger cabin with a garden hose?

And it's drive train is also designed toward this ruggedness. Solid live axles at each end are durable, simple, offer tremendous flexibility, and safely encase all drivetrain components (no rubber SV boots to tear). They use an "old school" locking transfercase to switch between 2WD, 4Hi and 4Lo. In the case of the Rubicons that 4-low is a 4:1 crawl ratio for extra low-end grunt. So there's no shifting of power front/rear . . . it's always 50/50 power distrubution and each axle always has power to it. No computerized mumbo-jumbo to get in the way.

I agree with 100%. I understand what a Wrangler is about. That is why I like it. Now, that doesn't mean I will go do serious off roading often. But I do expect to have several experiences through places normal cars (or at least MY other cars) will not be able to get through. Try going to any state park in this area in the spring or after rainy summer rainstorm and the roads/trails parking areas are are a muddy, rocky mess. The family convertible thing is also extremely appealing. I love that you can hose off the interior and in fact am bummed about no vinyl seats (although being a convertible, cloth seats are probably good to prevent 3rd degree burns in hot, sunny, summer days. I don't expect it to be refined or ride nicely. I expect it to be pretty bruttish and crappy on the street. I'm ok with that. It will be rarely driven. The only time I will care about the ride in the street is on the way to having fun - like hwy drives to NH, etc.

I am not trying to argue that I need this car. But it fills a niche and performs all the dirty work so the other cars (all of them, sporty, low, nice) don't have to. It's a luxury, a toy. If I were to spend $$$ on a snowmobile and a jet ski nobody would care. But I think of spend money on a Wrangler and all of a sudden some of you start telling me it doesn't make sense for me to buy one?

I see this potential future wrangler purchase as nothing more than a cooler and more expensive version of the Jeep Cherokee idea I've floated around a lot in the past here.

Would a Wrangler be underused if I owned one? Sure, but so are many people's pick up trucks. And not for lack of wanting.

If I buy a weekend sportscar, I honestly feel it would actually make less sense than a wrangler. A roadster would be used purely for fun drives. It would perform no other fucntion than to attempt to make me smile. A Wrangler would actually do stuff no other car in the garage can do and perform other needs better.

FWIW, other options for the spare SUV include the 4Runner, TLC, GM SUV, etc. I just feel that if it's going to fill a niche, better go all out and get something special. The idea of taking the whole family + dog in a convertible jeep out for ice cream in the summer seems like fun. They hold their value ridiculously well too, so that's good.

Anyhow, I don't feel I need to explain myself, but I just did anyhow. This was simply a thread on my impressions of the car.

[lupinsea]

Originally Posted by FC

I agree with 100%. I understand what a Wrangler is about. That is why I like it. Now, that doesn't mean I will go do serious off roading often. But I do expect to have several experiences through places normal cars (or at least MY other cars) will not be able to get through. Try going to any state park in this area in the spring or after rainy summer rainstorm and the roads/trails parking areas are are a muddy, rocky mess. The family convertible thing is also extremely appealing. I love that you can hose off the interior and in fact am bummed about no vinyl seats (although being a convertible, cloth seats are probably good to prevent 3rd degree burns in hot, sunny, summer days. I don't expect it to be refined or ride nicely. I expect it to be pretty bruttish and crappy on the street. I'm ok with that. It will be rarely driven. The only time I will care about the ride in the street is on the way to having fun - like hwy drives to NH, etc.

I am not trying to argue that I need this car. But it fills a niche and performs all the dirty work so the other cars (all of them, sporty, low, nice) don't have to. It's a luxury, a toy. If I were to spend $$$ on a snowmobile and a jet ski nobody would care. But I think of spend money on a Wrangler and all of a sudden some of you start telling me it doesn't make sense for me to buy one?

I see this potential future wrangler purchase as nothing more than a cooler and more expensive version of the Jeep Cherokee idea I've floated around a lot in the past here.

Would a Wrangler be underused if I owned one? Sure, but so are many people's pick up trucks. And not for lack of wanting.

If I buy a weekend sportscar, I honestly feel it would actually make less sense than a wrangler. A roadster would be used purely for fun drives. It would perform no other fucntion than to attempt to make me smile. A Wrangler would actually do stuff no other car in the garage can do and perform other needs better.

FWIW, other options for the spare SUV include the 4Runner, TLC, GM SUV, etc. I just feel that if it's going to fill a niche, better go all out and get something special. The idea of taking the whole family + dog in a convertible jeep out for ice cream in the summer seems like fun. They hold their value ridiculously well too, so that's good.

Anyhow, I don't feel I need to explain myself, but I just did anyhow. This was simply a thread on my impressions of the car.

Ah. . . sorry about that. I just wanted to make sure you weren't setting yourself up for, um, disappointment in the ride/handling department. From reading other posts you seem very particular in your other cars.

I didn't want to talk you out of it. . . hell, I think they're fun as all get-out! They're just a different kind of fun than sports cars and performance sedans. And you're right, the Wranglers are a very particular breed that I think would fulfill many of your needs/wants in a utility vehicle while offering some fun features the others won't (convertivle, doors off, etc., etc.).

To my warped Jeeper mind they seem like a logical choice if one doesn't do a lot of heavy towing.

As for retaining their value. . . Oof! Tell me about it. That's good for owners. . . bad for potential used Wrangler buyers.

[bren]

Originally Posted by FC

I understand what a Wrangler is about.

I've spent a bit of time on Jeep forums and can't say I've ever seen anyone come in ask about "reasonable" tires for their Rubicon.

[lupinsea]

Originally Posted by clyde

Man, that thing is such a nutsack extension.

Or you can get the smaller truck nuts. Looks like they even fit on Jeeps.






.