-
Last Call Guest on these Group Buy Deal Items from Baja Designs
Shopping JK/JL'S for dummies
- Thread starter YotaAtieToo
- Start date
-
- Tags
- jeep
It’s a fixed amount + a per mile amount. Formula for per mile is based off 21mpg and gasoline average price for the month local to me.
You might be right. I think I’ll need to test drive both to see if I can live with the 3.6 and big tires though.
This is higher than I wanted to spend but looks like an XR package, so that should be 4.56 and the wide track axles. Maybe I could get away with not regearing those?
What issue other than CP4 is the eco diesel plagued with?
YotaAtieToo
Thick skull
- Thread starter
- #213
For one, it's not going to be completely un drivable with stock 3.xx or 4.10s.
Two, regearing isn't the end of the world. Just take whatever extra money you'd spend on the diesel or xr package or whatever and plan for a regear.
5.13s or whatever is going to be way better than 4.56s
Two, regearing isn't the end of the world. Just take whatever extra money you'd spend on the diesel or xr package or whatever and plan for a regear.
5.13s or whatever is going to be way better than 4.56s
I’m not paying this kinda money, but it’s 5:14s on a 3.6 so I asked and it’s 13-14 around town and up to 17 highway.
www.facebook.com
YotaAtieToo
Thick skull
- Thread starter
- #215
I’m not paying this kinda money, but it’s 5:14s on a 3.6 so I asked and it’s 13-14 around town and up to 17 highway.
I'd plan on a 3.6, put your 37s on and see how it is. Then figure out the ideal gears. I think that will be your best value vs a diesel.
To play devil's advocate, the diesel JT does interest me for the performance and versatility. Ie: towing small trailers, ect.
I feel like this isn’t the right train of thought but why not just go cheap 3.6 Sport for ~$10k less and swap my 1 tons in?
Tech Tim
Your AD Here....
I like the 3.6 over the 2.0.
Yes, the 2.0 is zippy like DMG said, but that's only if it has the E-torque. The problem I see with the 2.0 is they sound like sewing machines once they hit 40K or so and sound like they're going to fall apart.
2.0 has turbo issues, I know a few that have replaced turbos before 50K miles. They also melt the coolant reservoirs, so plan on swapping in an aftermarket aluminum one.
I've got no issue with the E-Torq system other than it adds more complexity. You've got a 48v battery under the Jeep about where the rear seat is. Then there is a whole separate cooling system for that battery with coolant lines that go from the cooler up front to the battery in the back, all pushed by a small electric pump.
The extra torque when you first start rolling is nice. Wish they pushed them in the 3.6s more.
We haven't seen issues with the e-torque here at work, but we're aftermarket parts sales, not a dealership. Haven't seen issues on the JL/JT forums either, people that have them, love them.
I would love to play with one of those e-torque 48v batteries a bit for a winching application. Could you imagine running a 8274 under full pull load only pulling 200 amps?
If I was buying a 2 door, I might think about a 2.0, but would probably still go with the 3.6.
3.6s have their issues too, but they are smooth and powerful for what they are. Dirty oil can cause big issues. Change the oil frequently and keep that oil clean, clean, clean. Also install a Baxter adapter or some sort of pre-oiler to help prevent that rattle on start-up.
I am still open to the 3.6, but the 2.0 only seems nice on paper and I don't think is a good option for me for reasons you stated and others.
From my research, if I wanted to avoid E-Torq for less complexity + rear storage, am I looking at 2024+ only? Seems like 2021-2023 it became a default for 3.6 auto? I don't want to go older than 2021, ideally 22-23 at the oldest.
Yeah part of it is I am a contrarian and want to do it differently than everyone else... but that's a little hard when I am literally talking about the most basic cookie cutter setup possible, a Wrangler JL on 37s
It's also hard calculating the "maybe" costs of the Diesel. Straight up, getting 20mpg beats 14mpg in short time offsetting the higher purchase cost. If it was 25-30 that's an even bigger gap to cover. The "maybe" comes in with warranty costs if not deleting, deleting costs if deleting, CP4 if replacing, catastrophic oil cooler and coolant failures if they happen... are they guaranteed to happen? Probably not. Are they likely? Seems possible that it's likely...
I didn't like the nervousness with my F250 and the CP4, where I was frequently thinking about it in the back of my head until I got the DCR. Now that I've read up on the Eco Diesels it's not just the CP4 it seems like... so it's not a single shot part cannon approach.
I'm going to try test driving some options in the next few weeks. To date, the only JL I've driven was a 392
Tech Tim
Your AD Here....
IMO the first gen 3.6 in the JK is a more reliable engine long term than the 2018+ 3.6 (PUG) in the JLs/JTs.
The E-Torque 3.6 is fairly rare around here, we don't see too many. Maybe they were all sent to CA for emission reasons?
YotaAtieToo
Thick skull
- Thread starter
- #221
For one, the rear D60u won't work with the stock gas tank.
But mostly because you said you wanted something you could be wheelin within a week or 2 of buying it.
Plus, if that's the route you wanted to go, the resale value of the rubicon axles closes the price difference quite a bit.
Yeah, I think it’s a dumb idea to go JY tons since it would be a daily and I specifically don’t want a jack stand project.
However… going Sport, then picking up a set of built Rubicon D44s with gears, Reid knuckles, RCVs, trusses etc that drop right in for $3,500-$4,500 might not be a dumb idea.
It’s probably $3k to pay someone to regear a JL, and if I can sell the Sport axles for $1k-$1,500 it’s close to a wash with my weekend time. Question is does the 2.72 case hold up with the 8spd or am I swapping to a Rubicon case or Atlas and opening that can of worms
YotaAtieToo
Thick skull
- Thread starter
- #223
It's not always that easy, we both know how used parts go sometimes.
$3k sounds high, but I guess thats probably what it is now a days. Again, I don't think it will be undriveable with 4.10s by any means.
I don't believe the 2.72 cases are a known problem.
For what you're talking about, I think the rubicon or mojave is the way to go. Save the garage time for the MJ and go enjoy the JL.
'84 Bronco II
El Chingón
I doubt you'll have an issue with the 2.72 case, and with the 8 speed, I'd prefer the 2.72 ratio anyway over the 4:1. This is coming from a guy who swapped the 2.72 case out for a 4:1 with a 6 speed JL. With 5.38s like I am running in my JL, the 8 speed and 2.72 case will have a 69:1 crawl ratio which is plenty for an automatic. The manual on the other hand absolutely needs the 4:1.
Some food for thought, for any given axle ratio, an 8 speed JL with the 2.72 transfer case will have a lower crawl ratio than a TJ Rubicon with the 4:1 transfer case and 42RLE.
YotaAtieToo
Thick skull
- Thread starter
- #225
I'm also of the thought that a 4:1 seems overkill for most use with the 8 speed.
I wouldn't let it stop me from getting a rubicon though. I'd imagine it would be a pretty straight forward swap to go back to a 2.72 case?
I wouldn't let it stop me from getting a rubicon though. I'd imagine it would be a pretty straight forward swap to go back to a 2.72 case?
I know the used part dance well, and I’d like to stay away from that… but I think I need to crunch some numbers on that more before ruling it out completely because it might be too good to pass up. It depends if I’m ok with a stripper model or not. I’m going to test drive one and see if crank windows and stripper model is okay at ~$25k
Anything much over that might as well go Rubicon.
That’s WFO price, roughly, but I’ll shop around.
Maybe, but getting 10mpg with 4.10s and 37s makes this math hard to justify
I guess your point is that it doesn’t need to be a right away thing.
What’s the Mojave advantage? Not read up on Mojave’s. I’ve seen guys do it with a M186 front but I already tend to be a nervous over thinker so the stock front M210 and a loaded 4 door with camp gear and family already stresses me
Fair point.
Do you think it was worth it going the sport route and selectively modifying and adding the built axles like you did, or if you did it again would you just spring for Rubicon at the get go? Do you daily yours?
The goal is maximum comfort for the wife, I’m thinking more control with lower ratios gets that. But, I’m not a terrible driver either and I’m sure can make a 2.72 and automatic ride nice.
I doubt I’d go back if I had it, but might be willing to try without it first I guess.
YotaAtieToo
Thick skull
- Thread starter
- #228
I know the used part dance well, and I’d like to stay away from that… but I think I need to crunch some numbers on that more before ruling it out completely because it might be too good to pass up. It depends if I’m ok with a stripper model or not. I’m going to test drive one and see if crank windows and stripper model is okay at ~$25k
Anything much over that might as well go Rubicon.
That’s WFO price, roughly, but I’ll shop around.
Maybe, but getting 10mpg with 4.10s and 37s makes this math hard to justify
I guess your point is that it doesn’t need to be a right away thing.
What’s the Mojave advantage? Not read up on Mojave’s. I’ve seen guys do it with a M186 front but I already tend to be a nervous over thinker so the stock front M210 and a loaded 4 door with camp gear and family already stresses me
In short a mojave has all the rubicon parts except 4:1 and a front locker. But has a better frame, stronger brackets and better shocks. I'm sure there is more to it, I just feel like the specs would fit my use better and I can always add a front locker.
Fair point.
Do you think it was worth it going the sport route and selectively modifying and adding the built axles like you did, or if you did it again would you just spring for Rubicon at the get go? Do you daily yours?
The goal is maximum comfort for the wife, I’m thinking more control with lower ratios gets that. But, I’m not a terrible driver either and I’m sure can make a 2.72 and automatic ride nice.
I doubt I’d go back if I had it, but might be willing to try without it first I guess.
'84 Bronco II
El Chingón
Fair point.
Do you think it was worth it going the sport route and selectively modifying and adding the built axles like you did, or if you did it again would you just spring for Rubicon at the get go? Do you daily yours?
The goal is maximum comfort for the wife, I’m thinking more control with lower ratios gets that. But, I’m not a terrible driver either and I’m sure can make a 2.72 and automatic ride nice.
Depends on what kind of a deal you can get, what model year, and how hard you are actually going to wheel. For the $16,000 I saved getting a Sport, I would say it was well worth it for me. Depends on what your time is worth and what your end goal is. The Rubicon is the easy button, but Jeep price gouges you for it. If you are going to run 37-39" tires and actually wheel trails that require tires that big a Rubicon makes sense. If you are going to run 33-35" tires and stick to easy/moderate trails, a Sport is really all you need. If you are going to wheel it hard on 39"+ tires, start with a Sport because you are going to be swapping out all of the Rubicon parts anyway.
I don't daily my Jeep, but I could. It is a stupid vehicle to daily though unless you just like throwing away money
Seriously, I wouldn't want the 4:1 with the 8 speed auto. If you are running low enough axle gears that it isn't a pig on the highway, then 1st gear in 4 low is going to be pointless. Even with the 4.10s in the basic Rubicon, it has a 77:1 crawl ratio which is starting to get silly with an automatic.
$16k is more than I am seeing saving in my searches, I definitely agree with your decision there.Depends on what kind of a deal you can get, what model year, and how hard you are actually going to wheel. For the $16,000 I saved getting a Sport, I would say it was well worth it for me. Depends on what your time is worth and what your end goal is. The Rubicon is the easy button, but Jeep price gouges you for it. If you are going to run 37-39" tires and actually wheel trails that require tires that big a Rubicon makes sense. If you are going to run 33-35" tires and stick to easy/moderate trails, a Sport is really all you need. If you are going to wheel it hard on 39"+ tires, start with a Sport because you are going to be swapping out all of the Rubicon parts anyway.
I don't daily my Jeep, but I could. It is a stupid vehicle to daily though unless you just like throwing away money
Seriously, I wouldn't want the 4:1 with the 8 speed auto. If you are running low enough axle gears that it isn't a pig on the highway, then 1st gear in 4 low is going to be pointless. Even with the 4.10s in the basic Rubicon, it has a 77:1 crawl ratio which is starting to get silly with an automatic.
I’m looking about a $10k delta from Sport to Rubicon in the used year/mileage ranges I’m looking at.
I don’t like throwing away money, but you wouldn’t believe it based off my actions
… it’s either throw it away on the 3/4 ton daily for work, or park that and throw away money on a Wrangler.I guess I could park the truck, buy a Prius, and pay it off in less than 3 years and then pocket the majority of the work reimbursement less operating costs of the Prius… but that doesn’t sound as exciting as taking the family wheeling
I’m probably a blend of the scenarios you said… could I do the Rubicon trail on 33-35s in a 4 door JL? Probably. Would my wife and family enjoy the belly dragging and lines I’d have to take? Probably not, but they likely wouldn’t notice anyways the difference 37s make. We’re talking not intentionally doing hard lines, just getting out there to camp and enjoy the friends and family and sport along the way.
In 4-5 years, could I see it on tons and being my dedicated hardcore wheeler? Yes… but I don’t want to plan for that now, I’ll just let that evolve naturally.
I’m not ruling out a Sport now.
Idk, being able to air those down and still having comparable height would be nice
Wheel the sport on 37s until you bend the front housing then swap in the tons
'84 Bronco II
El Chingón
I guess I could park the truck, buy a Prius, and pay it off in less than 3 years and then pocket the majority of the work reimbursement less operating costs of the Prius… but that doesn’t sound as exciting as taking the family wheeling
Why not both? My Focus literally paid for itself in the first year I owned it compared to continuing to daily drive my Superduty. Now I just drive my Superduty when I need to do truck things, and my Wrangler is only driven for fun. The Wrangler and truck get less than half the fuel mileage the Focus gets, and I can buy a set of tires for the Focus for what one tire on the Jeep or truck cost. Plus the focus is a lot more fun to huck around corners and slice through traffic. Keeps the daily wear and tear off the vehicles I actually care about too. Especially with gas prices hanging around $4/gallon, I can't imagine daily driving a Wrangler on 37" tires just because you might go off roading once a month
EDIT:
I was able to get a much better deal on my Sport than I could get on a Rubicon. The cheapest Rubicon I found when I was shopping was $41K, my Sport was less than $25K out the door with all the incentives Jeep was offering at the time.
EDIT #2:
The transfer cases are a direct interchange, you just have to reprogram the ratio in the computer with J Scan or another programmer.
Last edited:
DMG
Red Skull
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Member Number
- 495
- Messages
- 2,791
The JL front housings get broken or bent in fender benders. Last rebuilder I did, the front axle was the most expensive part. I bet he can get a couple thousand for it if it's in a desirable ratio and not bentIdk, being able to air those down and still having comparable height would be nice
Wheel the sport on 37s until you bend the front housing then swap in the tons
Tech Tim
Your AD Here....
The t-cases hold up pretty well. The only ones we see torn up are the AWD cases in the 392s.
Yep.... Either truss it or plan on replacing it.
Was gunna say that, truss it to buy some time, wheel smart and don’t get in a fender bender
Plus this way makes for more forum activity lol
New Post
“So my new JL housing is already bent…”
You had me thinking hard last night. Ran numbers on a Prius, looks attractive, until I realized I lose out on the mileage arbitrage.Why not both? My Focus literally paid for itself in the first year I owned it compared to continuing to daily drive my Superduty. Now I just drive my Superduty when I need to do truck things, and my Wrangler is only driven for fun. The Wrangler and truck get less than half the fuel mileage the Focus gets, and I can buy a set of tires for the Focus for what one tire on the Jeep or truck cost. Plus the focus is a lot more fun to huck around corners and slice through traffic. Keeps the daily wear and tear off the vehicles I actually care about too. Especially with gas prices hanging around $4/gallon, I can't imagine daily driving a Wrangler on 37" tires just because you might go off roading once a month
Since the F250 pulls double duty as all weekend personal miles and family road trips etc, I can report just average inflated business miles into the system each week and it’ll never catch my odometer since I log so many miles. Net effect is personal miles + get covered. This was the wink wink nod nod from management when they pulled fuel cards for personal use and went to reported mileage reimbursement for accounting purposes.
Switching to the Prius would actually cost me money versus the routine I have now. Several hundred dollar difference, with the F250 ahead.
I’m thinking the Wrangler would get enough mileage racked up, even with the f250 on the side pulling some misc personal usage miles, that I could keep it going to get personal usage covered by the reimbursement program.
You had me thinking maybe Lightning, or Silverado diesel, or Power Boost F150 instead of the F250 + a wrangler but idk if it truly pans out to be worth it.
And that’s for a 2dr, wild. ****s so expensive these days.