Not funny

[97RangerXLT]

The one thing that Jeep nailed it on is having an extremely capable 4x4 right off the dealer lot with no modifications. With the possible exception of the Toyota FJ Cruiser, no other manufacturer has done that in the last 40 years. The new Bronco will change that big time, and Fiat/Chrysler/Jeep knows it and is running scared.

Many Jeep owners refuse to see it or believe it.

AJ

 

[19Walt93]

Honestly I think Jeeps are great vehicles with just minor quirks like totally unreliable engines, bad transmissions, horrific electronics, their tendency to spontaneously catch fire, steering setups that border on suicidal, and an almost mythical ability to rust. But other than that they are perfectly fine...

One of the other dealers in our parts and service managers club also had Jeep, he said they were the biggest piece of crap he'd ever seen but they had the most loyal owners. Same idea as Mercedes, the owners shrug off the cost of fixing them and forgive their quirks rather than admit to themselves how badly they got taken.

 

[19Walt93]

Hey Ill give that jeep made one damn good engine in the inline 4.0, but I mostly just hate jeep owners better than thow attitude, if you put the right equipment in almost any 4x4 thay are all just as capable, with slight differences in wheel base,approach and departure angles, inherent to said design. Jeeps just tend to come off the lot with alot of goodies, and you JustEmptyEveryPocket for them as well. And most of them just end up mall crawlers, it's so funny to see a guy d.d with 35 in m.t's it's like tossing money out the window, both in gas and tire life.

The "Jeep" 4.0 wasn't a Jeep. GM was designing a new six cylinder to replace the old stovebolt in the late 50's and the first design was determined to be too heavy for what they wanted so they sold the design to AMC. Rambler built 199's, 232's, and 258's using the design and it morphed into the 4.0. The first 3 engines ate cams, typical of Chevy, I assume/hope that 4.0's got a roller cam but don't know. If that engine is the best part of a Jeep, it's not saying much.

 

[Dirtman]

The last couple years the 4.0 was still offered Jeep had managed to turn even that into a pile of junk... they had paper thin cylinder walls and we're prone to cracking and overheating. The ones from the late 80's to mid 90's faired pretty well as far as reliability.

Once jeep started using the 4.7 V8 and 3.8 V6, walking became a much more reasonable means of transportation.

 

[09fx4guy]

The "Jeep" 4.0 wasn't a Jeep. GM was designing a new six cylinder to replace the old stovebolt in the late 50's and the first design was determined to be too heavy for what they wanted so they sold the design to AMC. Rambler built 199's, 232's, and 258's using the design and it morphed into the 4.0. The first 3 engines ate cams, typical of Chevy, I assume/hope that 4.0's got a roller cam but don't know. If that engine is the best part of a Jeep, it's not saying much.

Let me just begin this by saying I do love my Ford Ranger. However, I also own a 92 Cherokee 2 door, which I am fond of as well.

Frankly, I would say that the 4.0 is a pretty solid engine. If I recall correctly, the AMC 6 cylinder was developed off of a Nash engine, not from Chevy. (Granted, there were plenty of Chevy parts that ended up on them over the years, until the Chrysler takeover). Many of them last for hundreds of thousands of miles with little trouble besides oil changes, etc. (other than the leaky cork valve cover gaskets). Dirtman is right, once they had the stupid cylinder head change in 2000-2001, they became more prone to cracking the head even with the slightest bit of overheating. As long as you kept the coolant system clean, they would be ok.

Yes I know the frames on YJ's and TJ's rotted out almost as bad as the Toyota Tacoma's. But at least you can buy replacement frames for them.

I think the reputation for Jeep's being driven by people who are not as nice as Ford owners, has been over the past 10-15 years. I have run into my fair share of mall crawlers with 07+up Wranglers who never go off-road but still like to drive on the highway with their doors off. Some of the older Jeep owners are usually nicer.

I remember one winter at school some guy commenting about my Ranger not being lifted like his Jeep, how he could go through anything with his lifted truck. I had a chuckle watching him get stuck in the snow / ice with one front and one rear tire spinning.

 

[black_demon69]

I remember one winter at school some guy commenting about my Ranger not being lifted like his Jeep, how he could go through anything with his lifted truck. I had a chuckle watching him get stuck in the snow / ice with one front and one rear tire spinning.

Thats what you call KARMA

 

[Eddo Rogue]

Everyone loves my Ranger. My buddies have some badass built to hell rigs, including jeeps. They all love my Ranger.

 

[Dirtman]

My friend was a die hard Jeep fanatic. He owned 2 grand Cherokees, a commander, and 2 wranglers.

Cherokee #1 - had the 4.0 but the transmission failed catastrophically. Was replaced and then had never ending electrical problems relating to the transmission as well as random electrical failures with things like the door locks, lights, etc and then finally the transmission died completely again so he sold it...

Commander - 4.7 engine dropped a valve seat and destroyed cylinder #8. Wasn't worth replacing the engine so he sold it.

Cherokee #2 - 4.7 engine dropped a valve seat and destroyed cylinder #8 and blew a head gasket, wasn't worth replacing the engine (even after he spent a fortune replacing a swiss cheese oil pan and replacing half the wires in the engine bay that had just melted or fallen apart) so he sold it...

Wrangler #1 - went through 3 transmissions before giving up and he sold it...

Wrangler #2 - the 3.8 engine blew a head gasket and was replaced, then never ending electrical problems with the transmission, finally the engine blew the head gasket again and he sold it...

So he finally stopped by Jeeps and bought a GMC Acadia for his wife about a year ago. It's been back to the dealer 3 times now for transmission problems. The only vehicle he's owned that hasn't been a massive failure is his F250 but I can't get it through his head to just stick to Fords.

 

[Blmpkn]

The one thing that Jeep nailed it on is having an extremely capable 4x4 right off the dealer lot with no modifications. With the possible exception of the Toyota FJ Cruiser, no other manufacturer has done that in the last 40 years. The new Bronco will change that big time, and Fiat/Chrysler/Jeep knows it and is running scared.

Many Jeep owners refuse to see it or believe it.

AJ

Can an fj or a new Bronco complete the Rubicon trail bone stock?

Not trying to be a Jeep nut here, just curious lol.

 

[Dirtman]

Can an fj or a new Bronco complete the Rubicon trail bone stock?

Not trying to be a Jeep nut here, just curious lol.

A stock Rubicon looks no more if not less capable than a sasquatch bronco...

 

[Snoranger]

Can an fj or a new Bronco complete the Rubicon trail bone stock?

Not trying to be a Jeep nut here, just curious lol.

Yes... The new Bronco has done it.

 

[don4331]

The one thing that Jeep nailed it on is having an extremely capable 4x4 right off the dealer lot with no modifications. With the possible exception of the Toyota FJ Cruiser, no other manufacturer has done that in the last 40 years. The new Bronco will change that big time, and Fiat/Chrysler/Jeep knows it and is running scared.

Ranger Rover 4x4s might have been a bit boutique, but the original was still being solid up here 35 years ago, and it plus the Range Rover Classics were certainly capable 4x4s.

Can an fj or a new Bronco complete the Rubicon trail bone stock?

Not trying to be a Jeep nut here, just curious lol.

Can't a '08 stock Ranger regular cab short box 4x4 with FX4 package (Torsen rear locker and stock 255/70R16s) complete Rubicon trail bone stock? I know there are photos of stock TTB Rangers successfully completing.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Ranger Rover 4x4s might have been a bit boutique, but the original was still being solid up here 35 years ago, and it plus the Range Rover Classics were certainly capable 4x4's

Nowhere the price or product support Jeep has though.

I would love to snag a YJ or TJ someday.

The jokes on him... You can’t rescue one if no one has one yet.

Some may say there is a pile of them at MAP that could use rescued...

Ranger Rover 4x4s might have been a bit boutique, but the original was still being solid up here 35 years ago, and it plus the Range Rover Classics were certainly capable 4x4's

Nowhere near the price or product support in the US Jeep has though. For most Rovers they may as well not exist for the average Joe.

I would love to snag a YJ or TJ someday... a Disco would be fine too.

 

[Dirtman]

Another point for the bronco, the engine and transmission (auto) have been proven reliable, they aren't new. The 7 speed manual sounds awesome but that's gonna need some real world abuse but otherwise the 10 speed and 2.7 have done their job and have very little failure rates.

The Rubicon already has a track record for bad engines and transmissions...

 

[19Walt93]

Let me just begin this by saying I do love my Ford Ranger. However, I also own a 92 Cherokee 2 door, which I am fond of as well.

Frankly, I would say that the 4.0 is a pretty solid engine. >>If I recall correctly, the AMC 6 cylinder was developed off of a Nash engine, not from Chevy.<< (Granted, there were plenty of Chevy parts that ended up on them over the years, until the Chrysler takeover). Many of them last for hundreds of thousands of miles with little trouble besides oil changes, etc. (other than the leaky cork valve cover gaskets). Dirtman is right, once they had the stupid cylinder head change in 2000-2001, they became more prone to cracking the head even with the slightest bit of overheating. As long as you kept the coolant system clean, they would be ok.
Nope. The flathead Rambler six was a Nash derivative, the ohv family was a Chevy cast off.