Jeep makes unreliable products

y2kcrawler

y2kcrawler

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Location
Lake Wylie, SC
I have got to thinking about how Jeep seems to make their vehicles so that you have to upgrade. Why is it that they are supposed to be a leading 4x4 producer yet in order to actually get some wheeling accomplished you have to upgrade everything. For instance the axles that come in the wrangler, they usually have to be replaced in the rear with an 8.8 or 9" from a ford yet if you lift an explorer these axles are sometimes standard in these vehicles, and i think explorers are terrible off road with their push button 4x4. I know when you lift a vehicle above 4" you have to change the drivetrain angle and lower the oil pan and all that mess but you would think since majority of Jeep owners do modifications to their vehicles, they would put some stronger products in them. Is this due to new disposable generation where plastic is replacing alot of the metal on cars. For instance the new Jeeps, I have not seen one metal bumper, they are all plastic. The interior is plastic everywhere, even plastic around the winshield frame. Anyone else think that car manufacturers are getting cheaper with thier work?
 
y2kcrawler said:
Anyone else think that car manufacturers are getting cheaper with thier work?
Click to expand...

Clearly, yes, they are, especially with the American-based companied floundering for profits. They pretty much have to (based on their business model).

However, you do have to keep in mind that from an engineering standpoint, the mfg's job is to design a vehicle that is the right balance of performance and cost, based on how THEY package it together. They cannot be expected to design it for what somebody else might add to it/do later.
Maybe the stock axles aren't good with 35" tires and lockers and hard drive angles. But you know what - they work just find with the tires and differentials and angles they designed it with... and in the conditions this design was targeted for (e.g. not hardcore wheeling).
 
Agreed! Todays vehicles are designed for the street. Just be glad there are things like wranglers still being made. At least we have a decent platform to start with. Who else makes anything that CAN be modded for trails. Who wants to do a SAS on a new vehicle... not very many!

When you look at total vehicles produced compared to those that really do see the trail you'll understand. We're a rare breed.
 
Rubicon
 
It's all demographics and marketing now. They want you to "feel" you can go anywhere, not actually want to go out and try it. Look at the H2/Tahoe.
 
it's all about making soccer moms feel safe in the snow.
 
BigRedB2 said:
i dont like anything past 1995.
Click to expand...

Sounds like life must suck for you then, doesn't it? Worst freakin statement I've ever seen. I guess back in 95 the Corvette was at its best, and the YJ suspension was just freakin knarley, and the new Tacoma had never been better, and Z71 ruled the road with its underpowered 350...yup, everything after 1995 was shit.

EDIT, I do agree though that so many trucks are getting lower, way too fuel hungry, and that mfg's care less and less about the enthusiast and the ease of customization.
 
In addition to... More and more things are plastic/sheet metal to save weight to get better fuel economy. In most cases it is also cheaper in a competitive market. It's just the way it is. When you start modifying your car you begin to offset one thing after another.

If you drive a Jeep and don't modify it, usually they're OK - they do have their problems, but for the most part nothing major. My only complaint are American car transmissions. Way too many failures...
 
You dont HAVE to modify anything on a Jeep. It will last 200,000+ miles in stock form, and I had a blast in my stock Cherokee in Moab.

Now, the fact that you WANT to modify your Jeep is a different story.

95%+ of Jeep owners will never modify a thing.

The fact Jeep came out with the Rubicon is pretty awesome, and that vehicle needs very little to be a capable offroader.

If you want something more than that, suck it up and build your own.
 
gavan said:
You dont HAVE to modify anything on a Jeep. It will last 200,000+ miles in stock form, and I had a blast in my stock Cherokee in Moab.
Click to expand...


Yeah, jeeps now may be POSs, but there's well over 300,000 on the 2 XJs in the driveway (97 and a 95). They're DDs and get regular beatdowns on the trails. Stock drivelines/axles on both, 31s on one, 33s on the mine. I can almost guarantee I'll be sick of mine before its dead.

As for new cars, it simply sounds like you're listing more reasons not to buy a new vehicle. Me, I'll keep buying used XJs as long as they're around. I love the fact that I've done literally NOTHING maintenance-wise to my rig other than buy a new battery, brake pads, dizzy, plugs and wires and oil changes in the past 6 years and it still starts first try in single digit weather (I work nights for a ski resort, so she's seen some cold).

Oh, forgot I did have the pumpkins open about 2 years ago when I was doing my ZJ disc conversion, so add in some new 80-90. :flipoff2:

Of course, most jeeps are not XJs with 8.25s so I can see where other people are coming from.
 
Zachs said:
Sounds like life must suck for you then, doesn't it? Worst freakin statement I've ever seen. I guess back in 95 the Corvette was at its best, and the YJ suspension was just freakin knarley, and the new Tacoma had never been better, and Z71 ruled the road with its underpowered 350...yup, everything after 1995 was shit.

EDIT, I do agree though that so many trucks are getting lower, way too fuel hungry, and that mfg's care less and less about the enthusiast and the ease of customization.
Click to expand...

WTF dude? do you drive a land rover or something?

i apologize for having an opinion.


next time i need a preference for something, i will check in with you first.
 
rbo1577186 said:
In addition to... More and more things are plastic...
Click to expand...


That is the problem i have with things after 95. everthing feels cheap and disposable. They arent making cars to last anymore. WHen you think of the classics we have today, the ones that are 25 years and older, take a look at them. Now, take a look at what we have today. What is still going to be on the road in 25 years?

Some one above me mentioned a jeep will last 200,000 miles if you dont modify it....BFD. the FJ60's will run for 400,000 miles...and thats with 35 inch tires and wheeling it every summer.
 
I gotta agree on the "new vehicles won't last ten years" thing. Some will, but the owner will put a ton of cash into it to get it there. I look at the new 7 series and think, hoo wee that is gonna be expensive when it goes out of warranty! Pay for my kids college education will ya!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedB2
i dont like anything past 1995.

Sounds like life must suck for you then, doesn't it? Worst freakin statement I've ever seen. I guess back in 95 the Corvette was at its best, and the YJ suspension was just freakin knarley, and the new Tacoma had never been better, and Z71 ruled the road with its underpowered 350...yup, everything after 1995 was shit.

EDIT, I do agree though that so many trucks are getting lower, way too fuel hungry, and that mfg's care less and less about the enthusiast and the ease of customization.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to expand...

your statements are the worst ive ever heard..

he was just telling you what he thinks..and you have to be a nay say...friggin troll

i agree with bigredb2..most things now a days are wayyy to expensive for what you get..plastic everywhere...i got 33's on my 89 stock silverado ..try and do that now

you probably do drive a land rover..

and the 350 was not underpowered..
 
wrong, the 95 TBI 350 only made 200 HP. the vortecs only made 250 HP. That is, by far, underpowered. They tow well, but greatly underpowered considering I have a 3.2L Acura that makes more HP and TQ and gets 29 MPG!
 
i would love to see you cute little acura haul a jeep

is there a line out there that says if something is underpowered..i would enjoy racing your acura with my 88 silverado
 
y2kcrawler said:
since majority of Jeep owners do modifications to their vehicles, they would put some stronger products in them.
Click to expand...
WRONG! You've got it all wrong. For every guy like us who buys a vehicle and mods the crap out of it for the trails, there are 10 or more who leave it bone stock. Look in the newspaper. Have any trouble finding a bone stock Jeep for sale? Of course you don't. WE'RE the minority, not the ones who never change more than the oil. The Jeep engineers are building for their main customers. Also, consider how few people start off with a brand new vehicle when the go to start building a trail rig. Very few. It would be dumb to engineer stuff for us, because we usually buy used anyway.
 
I must say that the new JKs have some pretty cool stuff from the factory for trail riding....bumpers,winches,sway bar discos, and now a 35 spline dana60 avail. this summer for the rear of a JK. Sounds like maybey a V8 in the future for a Rubicon option....we will see what happens.
 
My little V6 makes 260 horses. If the acura had a full frame it would have no problem hauling a jeep. The truck may have low end torque, but there is still no reason that motor should not make 300 horses. Trust me I've had many full size chevys and this car would walk it.

But enough of that, this is way off topic.
 
hayhayhay said:
i would enjoy racing your acura with my 88 silverado
Click to expand...

You'd get smoked like a crack fiend with a fresh rock.

Gmachine said:
My little V6 makes 260 horses. If the acura had a full frame it would have no problem hauling a jeep. The truck may have low end torque, but there is still no reason that motor should not make 300 horses. Trust me I've had many full size chevys and this car would walk it.
Click to expand...

Low-end torque is what you need for towing. But I guess you're right.. since my old Cummins came with only 190hp, it couldn't possibly tow anything as well as a Honda Ridgeline.. :shaking:

Anyway, back on topic.. people are never happy.. If D-C came out with a Jeep thing with the axles from a 3/4 ton Dodge CTD, an Atlas II t-case, a 6.1L Hemi, a real frame, and steel bumpers, you would all bitch because of its $50k+ pricetag.
 
Rich said:
, you would all bitch because of its $50k+ pricetag.
Click to expand...


Lol, then the landrover guys would have a reason to justify driving a jeep. "It cost $50k....it must be good offroad!"
 
You have to understand that all vehicles produce are produced for the general public and not custom designed for your personal requirments. If they were custom designed they would cost so much that no one would buy them.


This is why I would never go buy a new any thing and then modify it. it would for me cost to much.

For my self just building some from basicly scratch gets me what I want and does not cost me 20-30k.

I will have less than 6500 in my 78 Cherokee when done. and I could not buy any thing new that would have as much power or capablity for any price.
 
Gmachine said:
wrong, the 95 TBI 350 only made 200 HP. the vortecs only made 250 HP. That is, by far, underpowered. They tow well, but greatly underpowered considering I have a 3.2L Acura that makes more HP and TQ and gets 29 MPG!
Click to expand...

Gmachine said:
My little V6 makes 260 horses. If the acura had a full frame it would have no problem hauling a jeep. The truck may have low end torque, but there is still no reason that motor should not make 300 horses. Trust me I've had many full size chevys and this car would walk it.

But enough of that, this is way off topic.
Click to expand...

The above two statements are about the worst two comparisons I have ever read.

Wanna hook a chain to your 260 Acura/Honda horses against 90 Kubota horses? :driver:That makes about as much sense as the Acura - Chevy truck comparison.

<><Fish
 
Back
Top