Light vs. Heavy weight wheeling rigs

[IowaOffRoad]

I've always favored as light of a weight wheeling rig that can be build for the job. My first dedicated rig that I ever built is my current one. When I started I had a goal of 3000# without me in it. With spare and jack, I landed around 3400# (for reference it is a 1983 Toyota pickup, 35's, bobbed, homemade bed to fit bobbed frame, fabbed rollbar, just enough bumper and tow point, winch with steel cable, 20R and '85 trans/t-case). With tools, cooler and stuff probably 3550#.

I wheel with mostly Jeeps, mostly YJ Wranglers. A TJ and a couple of XJ's, a ZJ, and a Geo Tracker. The same guy with the TJ used to run a SB Comanche, welded rear, 32's. He had about the same $ amount invested (read:not much) in that as I do in the Toy. It got around off-road about as well as his f/r locked TJ on 35's.

I've been telling the Wranger guys for years that their shit is heavy and that's why they break more to go the same placed I do, or sometimes not even get there. Usually these conversations occur when they are trying to figure out why the toy seems to be as, or more capable than their Jeep. I do not think there is anything magical about a Jeep, Toyota, or anything else. As I grew up in a dirt-track racing part of the country, it's always been power, weight, and traction regardless of the platform. They always claimed their Jeeps weighed what I did so that couldn't be the issue.

Recently, my TJ guy and one of the YJ guys finally put their rigs on a scale. Even without all the stuff they might carry on the trail, the YJ weighed about 4350# and the TJ weighed about 4500#. Now they are speaking to me about weight and what I did and why I did it.

On the other hand, our recent trip to Kansas Rocks where it rained 5 inches while we were there, another friend of ours who just decided to come along in his 98 chevy x-cab with 35's did as good on most trails or obstacles as we did. It was greasy as shit and he could put the power down where most of us just spun.

So, what's everybody's preference, and why? Not a full-size vs. jeep discussion about exterior dimensions/body damage/wheel base questions, more of a relative discussion of size/tire size vs. weight.

 

[SLOWPOKE693]

Put a D30 or D35 under your Yota and report back on how bulletproof it still is. :laughing

 

[IowaOffRoad]

This is funny because I recently scored a D30/D44 set out of a JK with Elockers while at the self-service junkyard. My TJ buddy was with me. Told him I was going to sell them. He asked me why I didn't want them for the Toy? I told him I wasn't going backwards in strength. He thought I was joking. I sold them for $1000 profit to a Jeep guy. My spool and lunchbox locker in the Toy works perfectly fine for me.

 

[Slander]

Unfair comparison. Having owned a yj that broke evrey trip and now a heavy ass Tacoma that doesn't, it's the shitty parts that jeeps are made out of as the main root cause of the reliability. Additionally the wheel base on a Toyota truck has more advantages over a jeep and probably helping avoid breakage.

 

[IowaOffRoad]

Guess I should add/clarify. I know breakage factors in, but I was kinda looking at overall wheeling ability. Obviously the fun of not fixing another broken axleshaft/driveshaft when you get traction is a benefit.

 

[Weasel]

Light is always better but light and strong is very $$$$. Heavier and strong is $$.

As for what works the best. Filling tires with water and unimog axles are heavy but the buggy they are under will put wheel most anything.

 

[YotaAtieToo]

Jeeps(pre jk) aren't inherently heavy, it's just all the shit they put on them. Some Toyota guys are the same way.

My buddy had a 1 ton yj, 258/5 speed, doubler/205, links and full cage. It was 3850 on race scales. Lighter than half of outlr Toyota buddies.

Also, those jk axles are mostly better than a Toyota axle in every way

 

[Squamch]

Also, those jk axles are mostly better than a Toyota axle in every way

No shit? How so?

 

[Eric]

There is a reason why Jeeps are BY FAR the most common rigs running the trails; its because they have found the optimum when considering weight, cost, and utility. Toyotas and Samurotas are also great trail rigs but when taking into account all of the relevant criteria they are not Jeeps. The numbers are the numbers. Now go to your corner and cry.

 

[IowaOffRoad]

So, what's everybody's preference, and why? Not a full-size vs. jeep discussion about exterior dimensions/body damage/wheel base questions, more of a relative discussion of size/tire size vs. weight.

I know that no topic ever stays on point, but my original post was just giving examples from my experience. Nothing against the Jeeps at all. I just prefer Toyota's as they are not belly button like the Wrangler's are. Bash whatever you want, but I was fishing for pros, cons, preferences when discussing weight of the various wheeling rigs, not which brand is better. As far as Jeeps go, I'm gonna own me a 1947 Jeep CJ-2A one day. My dad learned how to drive on a brand new one when he was 5 years old.

Yet...

There is a reason why Jeeps are BY FAR the most common rigs running the trails; its because they have found the optimum when considering weight, cost, and utility. Toyotas and Samurotas are also great trail rigs but when taking into account all of the relevant criteria they are not Jeeps. The numbers are the numbers. Now go to your corner and cry.

There's nothing magical about a Jeep, if there was they would be building more of them overseas for foreign markets where off-road capability is not just for fun, but an actual necessity. Go to Africa, Australia, India, SE Asia, S. America and see what they are using.
Jeep, or at least Bantam, Willys, and Ford, do get credit for perfecting the original design, but there is as good, if not better out-of-the-box stuff elsewhere in the world now.
I would argue the Mahindra Roxor has more real "Jeep" in it than the current Wrangler, considering their lineage extends mostly unchanged from the Kaiser 'knock-down kits' they were assembling in the 50's and 60's, then they built off that. The new Mahindra THAR sold in India is basically a TDI CJ-7 with independent front suspension.
As far as going in the corner and crying, I'd like to think nobody needs to be validated by their internet friends by their choice of wheeling rig. If you do, you are probably in the wrong place.

 

[YotaAtieToo]

No shit? How so?

Well the rear is bigger in every single way, housing, shafts, ring gear, ect.

Front, if it really was a D30 with a elocker, and not stock Rubicon D44. Is probably really close. Smaller ring gear, but Hp and stiffer housing. Axle shafts are probably a wash stock 27 spline on both at the smallest point. 40 year old birf vs a tiny 760 u joint.....

As far as built up. I don't know, you can sink a lot of money into either and still break it.

Not saying I'd swap Toyota axles out for jk axles, but they're a lot different than the older d30/d44s.

 

[holdmypocket]

I'm at a crossroads with my 78 F150. My early Bronco buddies say keep the hi pinion d44 and 9 inch and just run 37's, get RCVs and 35 spline axles and i'll be fine. BUT, I already have a 05+ d60, and using stock super duty axles is cheaper or hardly more expensive than upgrading half ton shit. It's a bit more work but since I'll be driving this thing to the trail and back I think I'll have more fun not having to worry about if I'm being too hard on my shit. I mean, that's the priority right? More fun, less worry?

 

[IowaOffRoad]

Front, if it really was a D30 with a elocker, and not stock Rubicon D44.

Can confirm that it was a D30. Came out of a Sahara package (confirmed with VIN check) someone stuck a rubicon sticker on. No 241OR tcase. Aftermarket electric lockers. Were regeared to 4:88 though. Burnt in a fire front to back, hence the self-serve salvage yard offering. Around here the only TJ and up wranglers that make it in them are fires or completely totaled. Pulled the covers to make sure the internals were good and cycles the lockers before I sold them. Didn’t want to sell junk. Bad karma.

 

[YotaAtieToo]

I'm at a crossroads with my 78 F150. My early Bronco buddies say keep the hi pinion d44 and 9 inch and just run 37's, get RCVs and 35 spline axles and i'll be fine. BUT, I already have a 05+ d60, and using stock super duty axles is cheaper or hardly more expensive than upgrading half ton shit. It's a bit more work but since I'll be driving this thing to the trail and back I think I'll have more fun not having to worry about if I'm being too hard on my shit. I mean, that's the priority right? More fun, less worry?

God do those bronco guys like to yank it to the hp44 and 9"

They're pretty good compared to what else was out there at the time.

By the time you swap everything out but the housings and are still weaker than bone stock SD axles, you'll be real pissed when the rear housing twists up.

"just do rcv's and 35 spline shafts" isn't just that. You'll want to upgrade the front knuckles and ball joints. The rear 3rd should be replaced too. Then disc brakes. Keep in mind, those rcv's are smaller than Toyota birfs

Obviously, it depends on the type of wheel in and driving you want to do. But, on a full size, 1/2 ton stuff rarely works out.

Bonus is that people are paying top dollar for those old axles.

 

[arse_sidewards]

There is a reason why Jeeps are BY FAR the most common rigs running the trails; its because they have found the optimum when considering weight, cost, and utility. Toyotas and Samurotas are also great trail rigs but when taking into account all of the relevant criteria they are not Jeeps. The numbers are the numbers. Now go to your corner and cry.

Exactly. You have to strike a balance between mom-mobile characteristics and off road charactereistics in order to actually sell new vehicles in any market and a lot of that mom-mobile shit adds weight.

There's nothing magical about a Jeep, if there was they would be building more of them overseas for foreign markets where off-road capability is not just for fun, but an actual necessity. Go to Africa, Australia, India, SE Asia, S. America and see what they are using.

There's this thing called a supply chain and existing infrastructure. Companies like Isuzu, Mahindra, Suzuki, Mitsubishi and Nissan all sell 3rd world shitboxes that run the whole range from 90s Sammy tin can to modern Jeep. They sell tons of them over in the third world because they have dealers and parts supply chains that let people economically run and repair the vehicles. FCA doesn't bother because the Wrangler as it stands is too upscale for those markets and for whatever reason they don't build a stripper one. I suspect that they took a look at their portfolio and decided that they don't have enough shit that would sell in those markets to be worth spending hundreds of millions to try and break into those markets.

And for what it's worth South America basically runs on Ford trucks and economy car based crossovers exported from north America.

I agree there's nothing magical about jeep but the people who think that just because something is or isn't sold in some particular third world shithole means much of anything are exactly the kind of dumbass neanderthals that are holding human society back.

 

[Bebop]

Light is always better but light and strong is very $$$$. Heavier and strong is $$.

This.

 

[IowaOffRoad]

There's this thing called a supply chain and existing infrastructure. Companies like Isuzu, Mahindra, Suzuki, Mitsubishi and Nissan all sell 3rd world shitboxes that run the whole range from 90s Sammy tin can to modern Jeep. They sell tons of them over in the third world because they have dealers and parts supply chains that let people economically run and repair the vehicles. FCA doesn't bother because the Wrangler as it stands is too upscale for those markets and for whatever reason they don't build a stripper one. I suspect that they took a look at their portfolio and decided that they don't have enough shit that would sell in those markets to be worth spending hundreds of millions to try and break into those markets.

And for what it's worth South America basically runs on Ford trucks and economy car based crossovers exported from north America.

I agree there's nothing magical about jeep but the people who think that just because something is or isn't sold in some particular third world shithole means much of anything are exactly the kind of dumbass neanderthals that are holding human society back.

First, the supply chain and infrastructure has existed in various forms for years, hence the Knock Down Kits sold through various subsidiaries and licensees. As mopar has become the only parts supply for FCA and it looks like nothing has changed with Stellantis there’s full integration there. Most of the parts are manufactured in and around these ‘shithole’ lands as well. Since AMC became partly owned by Renault up to now, every company that has owned them has tried to push them into these market. They are viewed as a somewhat fragile luxury by the locals. Most off-road capable vehicles in many parts of the world, while necessary to get around, when new are a luxury item. Land cruisers and land rovors are more expensive in real dollars than here, not less. If there was high profit margins to be had, it would be worth breaking into if they thought it would sell, especially as they are a ‘global’ company as of the last 13 years. Now, it has brought cool stuff like the J8 used by the Egyptian military, so they are willing to build a stripped model. Since they do, it would just make good business sense to try to sell more of them in markets that would accept a decontented Jeep with some different than American features.
As far as me thinking like a ‘dumbass Neanderthal holding human society back’, I would say thinking the preferences of a large chunk of human society over decades when it comes to transportation selection that helps keep them alive while also being aware of every single thing that you pointed out in your post beforehand doesn’t mean what you think it means.
Jeep has done well charging premium money for decades with a good, but average product. There is a reason why both GM and Ford (and several Chinese companies) were interested in buying Jeep off the Daimler/Cerberus slag-heap before their own financial woes. The brand. That brand has plenty of weight worldwide and everyone knows it (yes, referring back to sales outside NA). The marketing and image are worth it because of the premium they get over cost of manufacture. There is a reason Ford developed the Bronco and are killing cars in North America. Profit margins are high in that market sub-segment, which Jeep has had to themselves for 40 years (30 if you count Samurai, 15 if you count Hummer). If you’re a Jeep fanboi, then good for you, because the next few years Jeep is either going to get better, or cheaper, or both. Hummer was a lesson for the industry. 95% of buyers are just using it for transportation. You need an image to stand apart from everyone else. Hummer was very profitable while it lasted, considering their rebadged Yukon/Canyon nature. Given a few more years they would have attempted a direct wrangler competitor (had designs on the table when they ceased as a brand). Jeep has been very careful at crafting an image over the last couple decades, not entirely false, about their products. We shall see if it holds up once the bronco is out a few years.

 

[woods]

Back in the day, I wheeled a Samurai on 30" retreads, t/c gears, and a mini spool. My buddy wheeled a 2.5T truggy on 46s. We did all the same trails. Took different lines, but it worked out just fine.

I prefer the light rigs.

 

[Bebop]

Back in the day, I wheeled a Samurai on 30" retreads, t/c gears, and a mini spool. My buddy wheeled a 2.5T truggy on 46s. We did all the same trails. Took different lines, but it worked out just fine.

I prefer the light rigs.

Same.

But there's shit you can't do with a light rig (like going fast), and vice versa.

 

[welndmn]

I'm at a crossroads with my 78 F150. My early Bronco buddies say keep the hi pinion d44 and 9 inch and just run 37's, get RCVs and 35 spline axles and i'll be fine. BUT, I already have a 05+ d60, and using stock super duty axles is cheaper or hardly more expensive than upgrading half ton shit. It's a bit more work but since I'll be driving this thing to the trail and back I think I'll have more fun not having to worry about if I'm being too hard on my shit. I mean, that's the priority right? More fun, less worry?

I think building a older Dana 44 at this point is crazy. The 2005+ Dana 60's are normally $500-$1500 and just so much better stock than all the money you can put into those dana 44's.
9"'s are still cool, but only after a few grand is thrown at them.

 

[YotaAtieToo]

Exactly. You have to strike a balance between mom-mobile characteristics and off road charactereistics in order to actually sell new vehicles in any market and a lot of that mom-mobile shit adds weight.


There's this thing called a supply chain and existing infrastructure. Companies like Isuzu, Mahindra, Suzuki, Mitsubishi and Nissan all sell 3rd world shitboxes that run the whole range from 90s Sammy tin can to modern Jeep. They sell tons of them over in the third world because they have dealers and parts supply chains that let people economically run and repair the vehicles. FCA doesn't bother because the Wrangler as it stands is too upscale for those markets and for whatever reason they don't build a stripper one. I suspect that they took a look at their portfolio and decided that they don't have enough shit that would sell in those markets to be worth spending hundreds of millions to try and break into those markets.

And for what it's worth South America basically runs on Ford trucks and economy car based crossovers exported from north America.

I agree there's nothing magical about jeep but the people who think that just because something is or isn't sold in some particular third world shithole means much of anything are exactly the kind of dumbass neanderthals that are holding human society back.

Jeeps are sold all over the world.

No body wants them, because a dana 35c can't even hold up to stock tires. People don't like being stranded for weeks on the side of a "road" being passed by land cruisers, hi luxs, patrols, jimnys, mitu's and isuzus.

Jeeps before 07 usually had pretty good engine and trans, but everything down stream of that was garbage. Tiny axles worked fine when they were 2000lbs and 30 hp. But jeep figured they keep the same basic axles for the next 60 years

Also, I don't hate Jeeps, if you look above. I actually think a yj or tj is the absolute best build platform there is...... After you swap the axles and tcase out.

 

[YotaAtieToo]

I think building a older Dana 44 at this point is crazy. The 2005+ Dana 60's are normally $500-$1500 and just so much better stock than all the money you can put into those dana 44's.
9"'s are still cool, but only after you throw the stock axle away and buy all after market.

X's 2

 

[Eric]

There's nothing magical about a Jeep, . . .

Except that taking into account all relevant criteria they DOMINATE the offroad market. I'm struggling to think of another vehicle in all of history that has dominated a market segment anywhere close to what Jeep has accomplished. Looks pretty magical to me.

P.S. I dont care about what people drive in 3rd world shit holes.

 

[IowaOffRoad]

Except that taking into account all relevant criteria they DOMINATE the offroad market.

Google dominates search and Amazon dominate shopping by all relevant criteria. Socialism is dominating our politics right now, I guess we should just all bow down to its superiority? Nobody believes that's a good thing anymore, now do they?

Plenty of people buy stock Jeeps and leave them that way. Most people who wheel them end up ditching a lot of the Jeep stuff, just like every other brand does too. I know you will point out all the 4cyl toys running 60's. Bunch of full-size guys running 4BTs and Rockwells too. I subscribed to JP magazine up until magazine armageddon 2 years ago and never wheeled a Jeep. I read it for the ideas they gave me, not because they were extolling the virtues of the brand as-built. They are just a canvas to paint on, just like every other brand. The 7 slot grill gets in some people blood, just like Chevy bow-tie, John Deere Green, and Cat Yellow. Yes and the Toyota whatever the fuck you want to call it. And the bitten Apple and the Android robot thing. You can't help it. I like my Toyota but have no animosity towards your preferences, and only counterpoint the fanbois because they are so pissy about justifying their choices.
Yes, if you think I'm talking about you, then I am.

 

['84 Bronco II]

How is this even a discussion?

It is silly to try to compare completely different vehicles with different drivers and make the assessment their weight was the primary factor in the differences in their performance.

Theoretically, if it were possible to have two identical vehicles with identical C.O.G. heights, front/rear weight bias, and identical sprung to unsprung weight ratio, and the only difference being overall weight, the lighter rig would outperform the heavier one in every way. The thing that confuses people though is that WHERE you carry that weight is often far more important that overall weight.

Bepop touched on heavier rigs being faster. That isn't exactly a true statement. The real issue is the ratio of sprung weight to unsprung weight. In offroad rigs with big beadlocked tire and wheel packages and solid axles, they have a ton (literally in some cases ) of unsprung weight. Therefore, in order to achieve acceptable high speed suspension performance, there needs to be a considerable amount of sprung weight to achieve a decent ratio of unsprung to sprung weight. A high-end Factory side by side will smoke most "go-fast" trail/rock buggies. Just look how well a couple of embarrasingly stock Can Ams did at King of the Hammers in the 4400 class this year on 35" tires. It should have got a lot of 4400 teams re-thinking their builds.

On the other end of the spectrum, competition and hardcore recreational crawlers fill their tires with water in order to lower their C.O.G. and increase their tractive force; especially when the suspension isn't putting much force on a tire near full droop. If they could achieve the same C.O.G. height, weight distribution, and sprung to unsprung weight ratio without putting water in their tires, the rig without water would perform better since it doesn't have to carry a few hundred more pounds up stupid steep obstacles. That being said, they would probably still add water anyway to get even lower C.O.G. heights and better tractive force.

People like to complain about light rigs breaking, but the real problem is that the components need to be matched. Less overall weight generally means less stress on parts, so you don't need as beefy of drivetrain components to run the same terrain as a heavier rig. You also don't need as much power to maintain the same level of performance. You just need to be smart about where you add and take away material and use more efficient designs. Obviously if you don't match your components well and try to go too light in one area, you are going to have breakage. Conversely, I have seen "overbuilt" rigs that aren't reliable because even though they have big beefy parts, they break them due to the added stress from all the additional weight.

Like has been mentioned by others though, a lot of it comes down to economics. You can have strong, heavy, and cheap, or strong, light, and expensive. Light and cheap usually isn't very strong.

 

[Clb]

Light

West coast, yota truck(guessing @4k) mostly trails/ snow, not run sand or deserts yet.
it served well on everything I point it at, I am cautious wil skinny pedal, and pick good lines.
if I had unlimited funds I would have done links but that most likely would not shed and weight.
big heavy rig gets tow truck duties when carnage happens but I have towed an ?xj buggy? Outta con with mine .

 

[IowaOffRoad]

'84 Bronco II, I guess I thought I was fishing for opinions from a diverse group that wheels many different terrains. At least that was the question I thought I was asking. I wasn't looking for judgement of which was better, more of a "I wheel "X" terrain type with "Y" rig and have "Z" experience. I would do "A" different and "B" the same if I had to do it over again." Something like that.

Please don't call me jimmyletters...

 

[gt1guy]

Enough money can make anything perform reliably.

 

[ScottRS]

Bepop touched on heavier rigs being faster. That isn't exactly a true statement. The real issue is the ratio of sprung weight to unsprung weight. In offroad rigs with big beadlocked tire and wheel packages and solid axles, they have a ton (literally in some cases ) of unsprung weight. Therefore, in order to achieve acceptable high speed suspension performance, there needs to be a considerable amount of sprung weight to achieve a decent ratio of unsprung to sprung weight.

With 42's, steel beadlocks, liners, and two steer 60's, I'm probably a little over that literal ton of unsprung weight. And better than half of that is rotating weight, which needs a lot of horsepower to motivate it. It's a snowballing cycle. Lighter is better, at least till you can't afford it. Past that, it's still better, just out of reach.

On the other end of the spectrum, competition and hardcore recreational crawlers fill their tires with water in order to lower their C.O.G. and increase their tractive force; especially when the suspension isn't putting much force on a tire near full droop. If they could achieve the same C.O.G. height, weight distribution, and sprung to unsprung weight ratio without putting water in their tires, the rig without water would perform better since it doesn't have to carry a few hundred more pounds up stupid steep obstacles. That being said, they would probably still add water anyway to get even lower C.O.G. heights and better tractive force.

And when water wasn't enough, we went to steel shot, tungsten shot, lead shot, to the point that by 2010 crawlers were being built where the CG was within the tire height.

Same sort of thing we did back when I was helping build go-fast-turn-left cars, even weight-mandated sportsman class. If it's to the right of the left door skin and you can cut it out, cut it out and move it down and left.

 

[Eric]

Google dominates search and Amazon dominate shopping by all relevant criteria. Socialism is dominating our politics right now, I guess we should just all bow down to its superiority? Nobody believes that's a good thing anymore, now do they?

Plenty of people buy stock Jeeps and leave them that way. Most people who wheel them end up ditching a lot of the Jeep stuff, just like every other brand does too. I know you will point out all the 4cyl toys running 60's. Bunch of full-size guys running 4BTs and Rockwells too. I subscribed to JP magazine up until magazine armageddon 2 years ago and never wheeled a Jeep. I read it for the ideas they gave me, not because they were extolling the virtues of the brand as-built. They are just a canvas to paint on, just like every other brand. The 7 slot grill gets in some people blood, just like Chevy bow-tie, John Deere Green, and Cat Yellow. Yes and the Toyota whatever the fuck you want to call it. And the bitten Apple and the Android robot thing. You can't help it. I like my Toyota but have no animosity towards your preferences, and only counterpoint the fanbois because they are so pissy about justifying their choices.
Yes, if you think I'm talking about you, then I am.

OMG. What the fawk are you talking about? I made a statement of fact. The numbers are undeniable. I did not even make any statement about my own preference . . . mainly because I don't have one and don't give a fawk about such silly shit.