Yup, more waffling...

[lupinsea]

Originally Posted by FC

Damn, lup. I was reminiscing about past waffling and I got to this post. Then I realized that this exact idea from your post is what I've had on my mind all week. Especially the bold line.

Sorry, I think you have a serious addiction to perseverating.


Oh, I know you're interested in the 4-door Wranglers . . . but also test out a 2-door for comparison (Wrangler vs. Wrangler). It could be interesting. I suspect they'll be a bit different.

I think you'll miss rwd + smoothness (both things that zhp offers).

As FC points our the Wrangler is RWD (and 4WD). If he wants smoothness, let some air out of the tires.






It's all for FC to figure out but I really like having wide discrepancies in driving experience. . . it amplifies one vs. the other. And you can't get much more different than between a Wrangler and . . . well, just about anything else. But especially if you have a Wrangler and a sporty car (V70R, MINI, ZHP, etc.).

It's one reason I was trying to suggest that if FC wants a Wrangler he get a Wrangler and then figure out his other car line-up. Because almost anything else he gets will be so different from said Wrangler.

Where as, yes there'd be a difference betwee the ZHP, sports car, MINI, etc. but it wouldn't be as dramatic.

[equ]

I had a 80mph on the highway in mind when I said smoothness, and the rear wheel drive for turns. Anyway, you know what I mean.

[FC]

Originally Posted by lupinsea

Sorry, I think you have a serious addiction to perseverating.

Guilty as charged (obviously). There are reasons for this. There is a history and a story behind this, but it's pretty personal. Let's just say it was a coping mechanism from a long time ago. It has stuck around.

Originally Posted by lupinsea

Oh, I know you're interested in the 4-door Wranglers . . . but also test out a 2-door for comparison (Wrangler vs. Wrangler). It could be interesting. I suspect they'll be a bit different.

Maybe, but I want the ability to take the wife, kid(s) and dog plus some light cargo out and about. So in that sense, it will have to be a 4-door. If I test drive a 2-door it will be the last-gen Rubicon, but honestly I probaly won't bother.

Originally Posted by lupinsea

As FC points our the Wrangler is RWD (and 4WD). If he wants smoothness, let some air out of the tires.

It's all for FC to figure out but I really like having wide discrepancies in driving experience. . . it amplifies one vs. the other. And you can't get much more different than between a Wrangler and . . . well, just about anything else. But especially if you have a Wrangler and a sporty car (V70R, MINI, ZHP, etc.).

It's one reason I was trying to suggest that if FC wants a Wrangler he get a Wrangler and then figure out his other car line-up. Because almost anything else he gets will be so different from said Wrangler.

Where as, yes there'd be a difference betwee the ZHP, sports car, MINI, etc. but it wouldn't be as dramatic.

The different experience is a big deal to me. Not that any good roadster wouldn't feel different and great compared to the ZHP (nevermind V70R), but that is why the Elise seems so appealing to me. As a toy, it would be a very different experience.

If it were MY decision alone, I frankly would never trade the ZHP for an MCS. As my mom said the other day when presented with the idea (and she is as clueless about cars as anyone can be), "your [ZHP] seems like a LOT mroe car than [the MCS]." But I have other cars to compliment a Mini, and I no longer have the long commute I used to have. Plus it would be a new car, and woudl make my wife very happy.

[FC]

Originally Posted by equ

I had a 80mph on the highway in mind when I said smoothness, and the rear wheel drive for turns. Anyway, you know what I mean.

I do know what you mean. But I rarely take the 330i on the highway for long drives anymore. The V70R is pretty smooth past 100.

[lupinsea]

Originally Posted by FC

Maybe, but I want the ability to take the wife, kid(s) and dog plus some light cargo out and about. So in that sense, it will have to be a 4-door. If I test drive a 2-door it will be the last-gen Rubicon, but honestly I probaly won't bother.

Well, for someone who was considering a 911 because it had rear seats . . . the 2-door Wrangler would have limo-like comfort compared to a 911 rear seats.

You "can" do a 2-door wrangler, they seat 4. But it'd be like a MINI. Only difference is that you don't have to bend down with the Jeep so it'd be sort of easier putting a kiddo in the back.

On the other hand, I almost burst out laughing when we babysat for some friend's kids. We used the Jeep and took them out to the movies. It was funny trying to watch the kids climb (litterally climb) into the Jeep. They had problems getting their feet over the rocker panel. So I just picked them up and set them in the back. They really liked being up high, though, once in the Jeep.


But undoubtedly the 4-door would be perfect for a family in the Jeep realm. You get more rear legroom, wider rear seat, easier rear-seat access, and more cargo room (with or without the rear seat). With the rear seat folded flat the 4-door's cargo area is down right cavernous compared to my TJ.









So . . . um, would you get a stick or auto in your Wrangler?

Auto = 4 spd
Stick = 6 spd

I purposely chose the auto in my Jeep but that was purely because I wanted it for off-roading. While I do like it in traffic and around town I might have sought out a stick if I didn't do as much offroading. Or at least, not the level of stuff I get into. Not to say you can't offroad in a stick . . they do quite well, but when it get's REALLY hairy the auto's do much better. Smoother and more controled.

[FC]

Originally Posted by lupinsea

Well, for someone who was considering a 911 because it had rear seats . . . the 2-door Wrangler would have limo-like comfort compared to a 911 rear seats.

You "can" do a 2-door wrangler, they seat 4. But it'd be like a MINI. Only difference is that you don't have to bend down with the Jeep so it'd be sort of easier putting a kiddo in the back.

On the other hand, I almost burst out laughing when we babysat for some friend's kids. We used the Jeep and took them out to the movies. It was funny trying to watch the kids climb (litterally climb) into the Jeep. They had problems getting their feet over the rocker panel. So I just picked them up and set them in the back. They really liked being up high, though, once in the Jeep.


But undoubtedly the 4-door would be perfect for a family in the Jeep realm. You get more rear legroom, wider rear seat, easier rear-seat access, and more cargo room (with or without the rear seat). With the rear seat folded flat the 4-door's cargo area is down right cavernous compared to my TJ.









So . . . um, would you get a stick or auto in your Wrangler?

Auto = 4 spd
Stick = 6 spd

I purposely chose the auto in my Jeep but that was purely because I wanted it for off-roading. While I do like it in traffic and around town I might have sought out a stick if I didn't do as much offroading. Or at least, not the level of stuff I get into. Not to say you can't offroad in a stick . . they do quite well, but when it get's REALLY hairy the auto's do much better. Smoother and more controled.

Well, I need to account for the dog too, which is why the unlimited is a given. Whatever Jeep/SUV we get has to be slushie to free up MT's on all the other cars.

.............



Anyhow, in true ME fashion, I find myself waffling back to my original PLAN (see? it was a good plan all along ).

The PLAN in its latest revision was for the BMW to be replaced by a sportscar (newish Boxster/Elise) and an old (sub-$5K) Cherokee.

I keep thinking that the Cherokee would do (for my purposes) all that the Wrangler Unlimited would but would save me $25k+. I would give up it being a new car, being cooler and having a convertible top, but for a car I wouldn't use very much, I think I rather save the $25K for now. If it turns out it was all wishfull thinking and don't/can't use it as much as I thought I would, then no harm done. I can keep the beater without feeling guilty, or sell it having lost what, $2K? If it turns out we use it a ton, I could then buy a used Unlimited down the road for a lot less than a new one costs now. I still will test-drive them, but I doubt it would lead to anything except looking forward to one a few years down the road. It may be best to wait until our youngest is a toddler anyhow to get more "family use" out of a family convertible.

So what sobered me up? Well, reading a few feedback posts to reviews where some
guys argued my own point - how is it better than a Cherokee? I think it is, but not $25K better - at least not when I'm not 100% sure about the extent of its use. The other was that when I went to pick up my wife from the train last night, there was a guy picking up his wife in a base 987 in silver. It was as vanilla as it could get (though it did have 987S rims), yet it still looked, sounded (and I know it drives) awesome.

Further pushing the sportscar idea is the new development that my mom will now be babysitting our kid at our house. That means 1-2 times a week, I have no babies in the car at all, just me and my wife. Add the 20 times a year my wife takes him to work + vacations + the possibility (if we get pregnant again) that she could be home for 4-6 months + weekends and all of a sudden the sportscar could really get some reasonable amount of use.

Swapping the ZHP for a MINI is very much still in the cards, but getting one would not deter me from getting the sportscar.

[lupinsea]

The logic of a Cherokee vs. Wrangler makes a lot of sense in your situation. But you do give up the convertableness as you point out. How much is that worth to you? Plus the Wranglers have more cargo volume, too. I think even with the rear seats up, too. The Cherokees seem smaller in comparison. . . it could be because they're shorter in body height (more stationwagon proportion) than the Unlimited Wranglers.

Edmunds lists used 2007 Unlimited X's at $19.5k now. In a year or so when you're ready to pull the trigger on a Cherokee/Wrangler they'll probably be down a bit more. Enough? I don't know.

Of course, IF you do go the Wrangler route I'd argue for the Unlimited X line. The Saharas/Rubicon's really wouldn't get you much but some cosmetic stuff that you'd take advantage of. And if you're not going to be driving the vehicle that much, does it make sense to get all the goo-gahs or to keep it simple? And is it worth the $5k premium (used) to get the offroad goodies on the Rubicon edition.

If you get into offroading you can still do a lot without the Rubi . . . heck, most of the guys I run with don't have lockers. I don't even have lockers (but good LSDs).

Anyways, the Cherokees are a more logical choice in a $$/Use consideration.




2004 TJ Wrangler Unlimiteds are now down to $15.6k. My era of Jeep again, so it's a 2-door but with a stretched body. Not as much room as the new 4-door Wranglers but it's cheaper yet still has more room than than my original short wheel base Jeep.

[FC]

Originally Posted by lupinsea

The logic of a Cherokee vs. Wrangler makes a lot of sense in your situation. But you do give up the convertableness as you point out. How much is that worth to you? Plus the Wranglers have more cargo volume, too. I think even with the rear seats up, too. The Cherokees seem smaller in comparison. . . it could be because they're shorter in body height (more stationwagon proportion) than the Unlimited Wranglers.

Edmunds lists used 2007 Unlimited X's at $19.5k now. In a year or so when you're ready to pull the trigger on a Cherokee/Wrangler they'll probably be down a bit more. Enough? I don't know.

Of course, IF you do go the Wrangler route I'd argue for the Unlimited X line. The Saharas/Rubicon's really wouldn't get you much but some cosmetic stuff that you'd take advantage of. And if you're not going to be driving the vehicle that much, does it make sense to get all the goo-gahs or to keep it simple? And is it worth the $5k premium (used) to get the offroad goodies on the Rubicon edition.

If you get into offroading you can still do a lot without the Rubi . . . heck, most of the guys I run with don't have lockers. I don't even have lockers (but good LSDs).

Anyways, the Cherokees are a more logical choice in a $$/Use consideration.




2004 TJ Wrangler Unlimiteds are now down to $15.6k. My era of Jeep again, so it's a 2-door but with a stretched body. Not as much room as the new 4-door Wranglers but it's cheaper yet still has more room than than my original short wheel base Jeep.

Yeah, I thought about those too. It depends when I get a back-up SUV. If my brother sells his '00 Cheorkke next year and I can pick it up for 4K or less, I think I would get it to try it out. We'll see what Wrangler prices look like when I'm ready.