Building an Expedition TJ, give me your opinions

[Lawrence]

We were looking for a trailer/camper so that the whole family can be comfortable while going away for the weekend. The requirement was to be able to go through the Mojave Trail with ease, anything harder than that and we are setting up camp and going wheeling without the trailer from there. So, we bought a Kimberley Kamper.

Here is the TJ as it sits today, and I am not sure it will meet our needs anymore.

2004 Sport, 4 speed auto, D30/D44 w/ ARB and 4.88 gears, 35x12.5x17 Toyo Open Country MT, 17x9 OMF Beadlocks, Currie steering, RE Long Arm 4.5" springs + ACOS up front and rear 5.5" springs, Currie Antirock, Hanson front bumper with Warn 9.5 Ti, Hanson rear bumper, rocker guards, rock Hard cage, various skids, CO2 tank.

The type of wheeling we do is varied, but nothing so extreme that it would scare the family. I don't have a problem taking anything and everything off and starting over, so if you have any ideas on how to set it up or what works for you, I'd like to hear them.

Thanks.

[MossMan]

Where specifically does it fail do meet your needs? It's obviously very capable offroad so are you looking for better on road manners, better reliability, more room?

[ujoint]

Yea, sounds like you have a pretty good setup. Onboard air would be a nice addition, as well as a gas tank & steering box skid :) Don't know where you could get any of that ;)

[Lawrence]

Although there are a few things which bug me, it doesn't fail to meet my needs per se. I am wondering how you guys are set-up and if there is a better combo I haven’t thought of.

Better road manners are always a bonus. Reliability hasn’t been a factor so far but should I be concerned? More room would be nice but not physically feasible, and it usually means packing more junk.

On the skids, I am good except for the two you mentioned. Steering skid is not a necessity at this point, although if I find one that works with the Hanson Bumper, I’ll slap it on. Gas tank skid, I am on the fence. I either get one and call it the day, or run like this until I bash the tank so that I have a good excuse to get the Genright.

I had forgotten about the air stuff, added it to the OP.

[MossMan]

I would think you should be good to go. The only real complaint that could exist is lack of space and lack of power; both of which would be most easily remedied with a different vehicle. Other than that, add some OBA and maybe some other things like alloy shafts etc. if reliability is a concern and be good to go. I wouldn't worry about a gas tank skid. I've never bashed one in after repeated abuses.

[Lawrence]

The only real complaint that could exist is lack of space and lack of power; both of which would be most easily remedied with a different vehicle.
Thanks MossMan. No problem on the lack of room, that's why I have the trailer :D As for the power, yes it could use more but buying a different vehicle is not an option. The Jeep is my toy and I like it.


Other than that, add some OBA and maybe some other things like alloy shafts etc.
I already have this covered with a CO2 tank. I thought about alloy shafts, but I am not sure they are a necessity at this point.

[ntsqd]

My take would be to drop it down to less lift and 33-10.50 or 255/85 R16 tires. Going lower & narrower respectively will offer better road manners, and by leaving the gearing alone it will feel like it has more power.

Last weekend I was on the Dusy-Irshim and one of the group had a Rubi Unlimited on 35's and what looked like a 2" Nth Degree short arm kit. It was an Nth Degree, I'm guessing about the height based on the pivot point relocation distance.
He had zero trouble with that trail, even in the 2-3" of snow that we had on the second day.

[goodtimes]

Obviously, the vehicle is quite capable. If you are running the easier trails, there is really little you need to do with the jeep. Even the gas tank and steering box skid are complete overkill. If you are running harder trails, yes, they are a good thing...but the easy/moderate trails with the ground clearance you have, you are in great shape.

Personally, I would focus on the trailer....making sure it has everything you want/need. Hot water, shower, 'fridge/freeze, etc....what ever it is that will make it more comfortable for the family, which translates to them coming along more often. You can never under estimate just how good ice cream is after a hot day on the trail....having it in the trailer can do a serious make over to your well being after a long, hot, dusty day on the trail....

[ntsqd]

snip....
You can never under estimate just how good ice cream is after a hot day on the trail....having it in the trailer can do a serious make over to your well being after a long, hot, dusty day on the trail....
1st confirmation! Worked wonders!

[Lawrence]

My take would be to drop it down to less lift and 33-10.50 or 255/85 R16 tires. Going lower & narrower respectively will offer better road manners, and by leaving the gearing alone it will feel like it has more power.

It has been on my mind, going to a 33" tire for more power and also lowering it down enough to clear them.


Obviously, the vehicle is quite capable. If you are running the easier trails, there is really little you need to do with the jeep. Even the gas tank and steering box skid are complete overkill. If you are running harder trails, yes, they are a good thing...but the easy/moderate trails with the ground clearance you have, you are in great shape.

Yes, the Jeep is overkill for what I do, but I drive to the trail, have fun all weekend, and I need to drive back. As you pointed out, skids and alloy shaft are not a necessity, just trying to set it up so that it tows easily and still remains reliable on the trail.


Personally, I would focus on the trailer....making sure it has everything you want/need. Hot water, shower, 'fridge/freeze, etc....what ever it is that will make it more comfortable for the family, which translates to them coming along more often. You can never under estimate just how good ice cream is after a hot day on the trail....having it in the trailer can do a serious make over to your well being after a long, hot, dusty day on the trail....
That's why we got the Kimberley Kamper. Tent camping was fine, but we sometimes passed up on some trips because we didn't want to rough it too much. Now, it will be luxury... There will be a few mods to the trailer, like solar panels and fridge to keep that ice cream nice and cold :D

[SavageSunJeep]

I am thinking that with 4:88 gears and a auto trans, 33 might be a real short tire for you.

I have a chart RPM/Tire diameter and gear ratio that might be worth your while to take a look at:

http://www.savagesun4x4.com/rpm-gear_chart.html

That said, a major factor in any kind of expedition travel is to do predictive failure analysis on your rig. Meaning what is most likely to fail and how can I mitigate it on the trail...with the objective to get back to the trail head.

Go over your rig from bumper to bumper paying close attention to any mods you have made and anything that does not provide a fail-over. Look closely at your radiator :Astrologist:

[kjp98TJ]

i was thinking the same about the auto, but it's the 4 spd. should be fine. not optimal, but will work fine.
i'm running 4.88's and 33x10.5's, with a 5spd though. i love it. i can pull my loaded 416 all day w/o issue. up and down hills w/o shifting 4 times. i also rarely do highway driving/speeds. 65 is fine with me when i do. 33's would pretty much eliminate need for alloy axles, not that you'd need them now either, IMO.

sounds like a nice rig.

[SavageSunJeep]

i was thinking the same about the auto, but it's the 4 spd. should be fine. not optimal, but will work fine.
i'm running 4.88's and 33x10.5's, with a 5spd though. i love it. i can pull my loaded 416 all day w/o issue. up and down hills w/o shifting 4 times. i also rarely do highway driving/speeds. 65 is fine with me when i do. 33's would pretty much eliminate need for alloy axles, not that you'd need them now either, IMO.

sounds like a nice rig.

My thoughts (should have said) were not at highway speeds where the auto 4 sp/4:88 should keep it in 4th with no issues, but rather at lower off road speeds.

All that said, I am only tossing out some thoughts based upon my preceptions, not facts. Of the 50+ cars I have owned in my life and ordering almost every car I have owend since the early 70's I have only owned 3 automatics in the entire time and that is because there were shared cars with my wife.

So take my thoughts with a grain of salt and let me know what you learn so I can get a bit smarter too...sadly I think my days with a stick are slowly grinding to a halt to some health problems.

[jeepboyd]

That's why we got the Kimberley Kamper. Tent camping was fine, but we sometimes passed up on some trips because we didn't want to rough it too much. Now, it will be luxury... There will be a few mods to the trailer, like solar panels and fridge to keep that ice cream nice and cold :D

how much does the KK weigh b/c your jeep is rated to tow only 2k lbs, brakes and wheelbase are primary reasons for this.( I like your setup mine is very similar 4" lift 35" bfg m/t 4.56's locked f/r.) I would consider maybe buying a different jeep like a 04-06 unlimited ,it can tow 3500 lbs stock, then build it to better perform the duties you want it to( ie: 3" lift, 285/75/16 tires , 4.56's at least 1 locker ) just my opinion, my main concern is the weight of what you're trying tow when the KK is fully loaded. good luck with what ever decsion you make

[Lawrence]

Don & kjp98TJ – Thanks for the info. A couple of days ago, I did some testing with 33s and it surprised me. The combo was much better than I thought and this leads me to believe that 4.88+33s or 5.13s+35s are pretty sweet combos for the 4-speed auto. See my highway rpms at http://www.jeepbbs.net/forums/showthread.php?p=112432#post112432

Don – What do you mean by lower off road speeds?

Jeepboyd – The KK weighs about 1,900 lbs dry, nothing to worry about. I often see many TJs pulling pop up campers, and those are also around 1,800 lbs. I have seen even worse.

Now, I believe that the reason the TJ is rated to tow 2,000 lbs is that we live in a sue-happy nation. If DC were to rate the TJ at 4,000 lbs (the way it is in many other countries), some idiot would get a 4,000 lbs trailer, load it with stuff, get in a wreck, and then turn around and sue DC. With them setting the load rating the way it is, it gives them a 2,000 lbs safety margin for a lawsuit.

The braking is not an issue at all. The KK has hydraulic over-ride disc brakes, and the TJ has the big brake kit. Stopping the whole thing is a breeze. Also, the trailer is incredibly well balanced, the back end of the TJ doesn't squat much when I hook it up, and the trailer tracks very well.

On a side note, I would have definitely preferred an Unlimited, but I couldn’t find one I liked and now I have my TJ.

[SavageSunJeep]

Don & kjp98TJ – Thanks for the info. A couple of days ago, I did some testing with 33s and it surprised me. The combo was much better than I thought and this leads me to believe that 4.88+33s or 5.13s+35s are pretty sweet combos for the 4-speed auto. See my highway rpms at http://www.jeepbbs.net/forums/showthread.php?p=112432#post112432

Don – What do you mean by lower off road speeds?



Since it is an auto I am thinking ??? that with the 4:88's and 33's you might be geared too low??? Possible "walking" between 1st and 2nd gear a lot??

What is your transfer case ratio in low?

[Lawrence]

Since it is an auto I am thinking ??? that with the 4:88's and 33's you might be geared too low??? Possible "walking" between 1st and 2nd gear a lot??

What is your transfer case ratio in low?
Got you, I have whatever the stock ratio is. Have to find out

[SavageSunJeep]

Got you, I have whatever the stock ratio is. Have to find out
I think it is 2.73:1 in low range as I remember unless you have a Rubicon or Rubicon transfer case swapped in, then it is 4:1

I have a discussion on my web site on the Rock Crawling Index. You might wish to read it to gain additional insight into crawl ratios.

http://www.savagesun4x4.com/rock_crawling_index_rci_dis.html

[jeepboyd]

that's cool , just be careful with the panic stops and think about a extra tranny cooler with the towing you're planning on, from my experience the 4 spd auto in the tj's is shift happy btwn 3rd and 4th

[Lawrence]

that's cool , just be careful with the panic stops and think about a extra tranny cooler with the towing you're planning on, from my experience the 4 spd auto in the tj's is shift happy btwn 3rd and 4th
Yep, definitely no racing, and I forgot to mention that the tranny cooler was already thought of.

[86cj]

Don & kjp98TJ – Thanks for the info. A couple of days ago, I did some testing with 33s and it surprised me. The combo was much better than I thought and this leads me to believe that 4.88+33s or 5.13s+35s are pretty sweet combos for the 4-speed auto. See my highway rpms at http://www.jeepbbs.net/forums/showthread.php?p=112432#post112432

Don – What do you mean by lower off road speeds?

Jeepboyd – The KK weighs about 1,900 lbs dry, nothing to worry about. I often see many TJs pulling pop up campers, and those are also around 1,800 lbs. I have seen even worse.

Now, I believe that the reason the TJ is rated to tow 2,000 lbs is that we live in a sue-happy nation. If DC were to rate the TJ at 4,000 lbs (the way it is in many other countries), some idiot would get a 4,000 lbs trailer, load it with stuff, get in a wreck, and then turn around and sue DC. With them setting the load rating the way it is, it gives them a 2,000 lbs safety margin for a lawsuit.

The braking is not an issue at all. The KK has hydraulic over-ride disc brakes, and the TJ has the big brake kit. Stopping the whole thing is a breeze. Also, the trailer is incredibly well balanced, the back end of the TJ doesn't squat much when I hook it up, and the trailer tracks very well.

On a side note, I would have definitely preferred an Unlimited, but I couldn’t find one I liked and now I have my TJ.

I looked at your link to the jeepbbs Lawrence,

I have been thinking this over every time I turn the OD off and set the cruise at 2750 RPM. I run the stock 3:73 (for now) and 4spd Auto with 33" 285's.

My question to you guys is under real world loads at freeway speeds, can the trans hold the OD gear except on real steep grades when regeared?

Right now even a bridge overpass in Ohio or wind gust will cause a downshift from 4th into 2nd. My worry is if I can't pull OD gear with 4:56 or 4:88 the cruising RPM in 3rd will be 3500+ and force me into the slow lane to often.

The LJ will pull most Mtns in 3rd gear but with alot of throttle input so it works OK for now. I just don't use OD really at all, but do get 15MPG at 70 MPH.

[Lawrence]

I looked at your link to the jeepbbs Lawrence,

I have been thinking this over every time I turn the OD off and set the cruise at 2750 RPM. I run the stock 3:73 (for now) and 4spd Auto with 33" 285's.

My question to you guys is under real world loads at freeway speeds, can the trans hold the OD gear except on real steep grades when regeared?

Right now even a bridge overpass in Ohio or wind gust will cause a downshift from 4th into 2nd. My worry is if I can't pull OD gear with 4:56 or 4:88 the cruising RPM in 3rd will be 3500+ and force me into the slow lane to often.

The LJ will pull most Mtns in 3rd gear but with alot of throttle input so it works OK for now. I just don't use OD really at all, but do get 15MPG at 70 MPH.

First of all, the constant downshift you are experiencing is from running the 33s with 3.73s, any gear swap will help with this. Then, it depends how many mods you have to your Jeep. 4.56 gears with the 4-speed auto and 33s will put you back to stock, or thereabout. If your Jeep doesn't have too many mods (ie. not too overweight), it is fine for the most part. A lot of friends of mine are running this combo and they love it.

I have been running this same combo but with 35s (4.88 and 4-speed auto) and although I have been fairly happy with it, putting the 33s on last weekend was a real eye opener. With the 35s, the Jeep cruises very nicely, and it is almost able to hold the OD on steep grades when alone and no load. At 75 mph with the OD on, I turn about 2,300 rpms, and although it is acceptable, I personally like it closer to 2,500 as I think the Jeep runs better. Loaded with 3 people and my military trailer, I have to kick the OD off on some of the nasty grades we have here in SoCal to keep up with friends. I have taken the jeep to about 75 mph with the OD off and the rpms are still great IMO, turning around 3,250. Not once was I close to 3,500.

Now, with the 33s and the same 4.88 gear ratio, it was a different ballgame. The Jeep was much quicker and the freeway rpms with the OD on were outstanding. It gave me more power to compensate for the added weight of all the mods, and the rotational mass of those big tires. In grades where I usually turn the OD off to hold my speed, I didn’t have to with the 33s, it kept its speed nicely. So, when going on a day run with the family without the trailer, I believe it will be a great combo.

Now, when pulling the KK it will be a different story. I am able to pull it in OD for the most part, but obviously, on grades I will have to kick the OD off and that’s when the rpms jump a bit with this combo. On the other hand, anytime you have a trailer in Cali, you have to ride the 2 right lanes and go 55 mph. I also don’t want to put my family at risk, so I will be conservative. Even if I decide to cheat a little and run 60 mph with the OD off, I am looking at around 3,000 rpms, which is perfectly acceptable.

To answer your question, if you don't need all the power and you are concerned about gas mileage, I'd say go with 4.56 gears if you plan on keeping the 33s. It is a very good combo for most people. If you have a heavy vehicle and plan on towing frequently, I would go with the 4.88s. Just my opinion and I am sure others will have different views on this.

[ntsqd]

With an Auto I would suggest that a trans temp gauge be added to the mix, if not already present.

You can find on the net an argument to support any where you want to mount the temp sender. BowTie Over Drives dot com wants it in the pan of their trans', so that's where mine is placed.

[86cj]

Thanks for the input so quick. I was looking for a subjective opinion and you provided just that, thanks again.

The weight of your rig is a good gauge for me, you are heavier with the trailer and lighter without and also have a similar "Windprint".
My worry has more to do with the way the trans behaves than the math involved.

I feel like the 4:88 is for me, the LJ loaded is heavy. I don't mind slowing down for mountains, I just need to run 70-75 MPH regularly (the Jeep is very stable on the Hwy). If small grades or light wind make me turn the OD off it will take all my vacation time just to get out West.
I really don't mind turning the big RPM's at times, I just can't bear to set the criuse like that for the 500+ mile days we see when on the road.

(BTW it takes 3 of those days to reach Moab)

[Lawrence]

With an Auto I would suggest that a trans temp gauge be added to the mix, if not already present.

You can find on the net an argument to support any where you want to mount the temp sender. BowTie Over Drives dot com wants it in the pan of their trans', so that's where mine is placed.
I plan on installing a dual gauge to monitor temp differences between the in and the out. Something similar to this one but for temp transmission (50 F-350 F)

http://www.westach.com/gauge_images/2DC3-73W.gif

[roadkill]

there is a big thread over on ROF about gear selection (4.88 vs 5.13) and the auto tranny. the consensus has been that if you have the auto then 5.13s are the way to go with either 33s or 35s.

now for some first hand info. I regeared my 2006 auto Rubi Unlimited with 5.13s and I'm running 33s. I am armored up so I am not light at all. at 70 I'm pulling @ 2500 rpms if I remember correctly. its not my dd and around town I rarely hit 70. I pulled my M416 to the ranch a few weeks ago and had it loaded with a 150 quart ice chest, drinks, ice, food, and fishing poles, etc. along with the wife and son in the jeep. I have no idea of my total weight but I was not light. I had no problem cruising @ 65 but with the cruise. on a few larger hills the OD did kick out a few times. it wasn't that bad but I would have prefered it to stay in OD and keep on going. now with the cruise off I was able to keep it from downshifting but at the cost of 5-10 mph on the hills.

around town without a trailer in tow I have a lot more pep and the jeep never downshifts on overpasses or hills. if I had to do it over again I would still go with 5.13s. if I could get a deeper gear I would, that OD ratio in the 4 spd auto just plain sucks. I wish there was a way to convert the OD from the .68 or .69 (whichever one it is) to a .78 or .82, something a lot more reasonable and workable

if I had 35s I think the jeep would perform similiar to stock gears(4.10s) and 33s. its not that bad but performance is definately lacking in OD and at highway speeds

[Lawrence]

Thanks for the input so quick. I was looking for a subjective opinion and you provided just that, thanks again.

The weight of your rig is a good gauge for me, you are heavier with the trailer and lighter without and also have a similar "Windprint".
My worry has more to do with the way the trans behaves than the math involved.

I feel like the 4:88 is for me, the LJ loaded is heavy. I don't mind slowing down for mountains, I just need to run 70-75 MPH regularly (the Jeep is very stable on the Hwy). If small grades or light wind make me turn the OD off it will take all my vacation time just to get out West.
I really don't mind turning the big RPM's at times, I just can't bear to set the criuse like that for the 500+ mile days we see when on the road.

(BTW it takes of those days to reach Moab)
No problem. If you have a friend with 4.88s and 35s, go drive it as is. Then put your 33s on and feel the difference. That would be the best gauge. I think you would be surprised to see how well it holds the speed without having to take the OD off.

[Lawrence]

there is a big thread over on ROF about gear selection (4.88 vs 5.13) and the auto tranny. the consensus has been that if you have the auto then 5.13s are the way to go with either 33s or 35s.

I didn't read all 8 pages of the mumbo jumbo, but it seemed to me they all pretty much agreed that 5.13+35+4-speed auto was the way to go. I think so too, and it would be the same as 4.88+33+4-speed auto.

I am sure your 5.13+33 combo is fine, but I wonder if the you are sure about your rpms at 70 mph? 2,500 seems to be in line with what I had with the 33s and I would think they'd be a bit higher given your gear ratio. The only thing that would concern me with 5.13+33 would be high rpms with the OD off.

[robert j. yates]

Running the 32RH 3 speed auto with 35's and 4:56 gears means I am constantly running in the low 3k range on my tach on the highway. The 4.0 is perfectly fine with running in that range from my experience of almost 10 years with my Jeep. I've done plenty of 300-500 miles/day trips and its simply not been an issue.

If that sounds like BS then I suggest that folks look to what the TJ sports used to run with the 3 speed, 30's and 3:73's...what they would find is that they were running in the same low 3k range stock from the factory so worrying about pulling 3000-3500 up a hill with your OD off is simply worrying about nothing in my experience.

Now would I like an OD transmission....sure, but thats a different discussion.

[SavageSunJeep]

Running the 32RH 3 speed auto with 35's and 4:56 gears means I am constantly running in the low 3k range on my tach on the highway. The 4.0 is perfectly fine with running in that range from my experience of almost 10 years with my Jeep. I've done plenty of 300-500 miles/day trips and its simply not been an issue.

If that sounds like BS then I suggest that folks look to what the TJ sports used to run with the 3 speed, 30's and 3:73's...what they would find is that they were running in the same low 3k range stock from the factory so worrying about pulling 3000-3500 up a hill with your OD off is simply worrying about nothing in my experience.

Now would I like an OD transmission....sure, but thats a different discussion.

Glad you weighed in Robert. I knew you were running an auto and pulling a serious trailer too. :REOutArchery02:

Have you heard from Jason at Airpark Jeep here in Scottsdale? Ref your big rig requirements?

Speaking of BIG RIGS. Wife bought her bosses Caddy Escalade last week. Big engine of some kind, w/Supercharger, chipped, Volant cold air box, Borla headers and exhaust, etc etc, 22 in wheels...JEEZ. Her boss got it as a present from her hubby who is into fast movers...Aston Martin, Bentley, twin-turbo Porsche Ferrari, hopped up V8 Jeep etc...He has a "stable" of cars and they drive all of them.

[robert j. yates]

Glad you weighed in Robert. I knew you were running an auto and pulling a serious trailer too. :REOutArchery02:

Have you heard from Jason at Airpark Jeep here in Scottsdale? Ref your big rig requirements?



Yea....trailer came in heavy and the 3 speed is not happy LOL. I'm gonna live with it for as long as I can and then decide on a AW4 swap. As for the discussion on overdrives....there is nothing wrong with running a 4.0 at 3000-3500 for any sort of distance with a 3 speed so I doubt that it would have any effect on a TJ with the 4 speed. It might be a little noisy but hey, its a Jeep and with my rig, I can barely hear it over my top flapping anyways. I had 93,000 on my orignal 4.0 before I swapped in the built motor and frankly, the only thing wrong with it is that it was low on power for pulling the Horizon but it came that way stock. It was always a dog.

I'm trading emails with Jason now Don...he came in a bit high for my tastes but we'll see what he does the second time around. The CRD's have a $3500 incentive and left-over 07's should be discounted more than what he proposed IMO. We'll see.

[Diesel Joe]

Figure out a way to put a diesel engine in it..... My HZJ-60 land cruiser has a 4.2 liter diesel and a 50 gallon main tank. With the four 5 gallon cans I carry that's 70 gallons of fuel on board. My truck gets almost 30mpg at 60mph. So, that's a 2000 mile range. That opens you up to all kinds of options while traveling around....

The only time youve got to much fuel on board is when youre on fire!!!

[MossMan]

Figure out a way to put a diesel engine in it..... My HZJ-60 land cruiser has a 4.2 ilter diesel and a 50 gallon main tank. With the four 5 gallon cans I carry that's 70 gallons of fuel on board. My truck gets almost 30mpg at 60mph. So, that's a 2000 mile range. That opens you up to all kinds of options while traveling around.... Just an idea.

:Wow1: :jumping: That's impressive. If they ever do bring the JK out w/ a diesel option I'll be all over it.

[robert j. yates]

If they ever do bring the JK out w/ a diesel option I'll be all over it.

As would I but that aint' gonna happen in the near term which is why I am looking at a Grand CRD.

[SavageSunJeep]

Yea....trailer came in heavy and the 3 speed is not happy LOL. I'm gonna live with it for as long as I can and then decide on a AW4 swap. As for the discussion on overdrives....there is nothing wrong with running a 4.0 at 3000-3500 for any sort of distance with a 3 speed so I doubt that it would have any effect on a TJ with the 4 speed. It might be a little noisy but hey, its a Jeep and with my rig, I can barely hear it over my top flapping anyways. I had 93,000 on my orignal 4.0 before I swapped in the built motor and frankly, the only thing wrong with it is that it was low on power for pulling the Horizon but it came that way stock. It was always a dog.

I'm trading emails with Jason now Don...he came in a bit high for my tastes but we'll see what he does the second time around. The CRD's have a $3500 incentive and left-over 07's should be discounted more than what he proposed IMO. We'll see.

Great, tell Jason, I said AZVJC DISCOUNT++ and I said so. :arabia:

[OS-Aussie]

mmmmm strange selections with ratios 5.13 with 33's :Wow1:

Don - we will not talk about Moab last year and the pinion in the Dana 60.

I have had an Adventure Trailer and Rubicon since 2003 (stick) and had a few different configurations of tire sizes and ratios.

33's with the stock Rubicon ratios . Worked well but the CA hills did require lots of down shifting :( and being past by trucks.
http://www.osaussie.com/osaussie.com/photo/albums/ftpupload/mojave/w_FH000019.jpg

http://www.osaussie.com/osaussie.com/photo/albums/ftpupload/Xmas%202003/__HPIM1037.jpg

*****
Then I moved to 35's with 4.88 and a Kenny Belle Super charger. This was a good setup and allowed me to hold 2 gears higher the friends with Stock Rubicons on hills.
http://www.osaussie.com/osaussie.com/photo/albums/ftpupload/Death%20Valley/normal_HPIM1301.JPG
Still not too bad on the highway.

*****
Now I have moved to a 5.7 Hemi with 39.5's and 5.13 gears.
http://www.osaussie.com/osaussie.com/photo/albums/ftpupload/Other/normal_beach.jpg

This setup is different on the road depending on which tires I have on, however there is enough power to over take :wings:

My Jeep is heavy 5600 lbs and the trailer has dual 15 gal water tanks and 4 Jerry cans etc etc.


As for a diesel conversion have you looked at a 4BT I have been told that it should match up to your drive line as it is from the same parent company (Dodge).

I agree a JK 4 door with the 3.0 CRD is something to hope for........


But back to the topic.....

The 33's with something like 4.56's should be a good solution as bigger tires create more possible breakage issues. Do you have Dana 44's or smaller ???

[Lawrence]

Having recently tested both combos, I think that 33s+4.56s is ok, but 33s+4.88s is much better.

As far as diesel engines are concerned, I think it is pure marketing hype in the US:

According to the window stickers, the V6 JK 4x4 (and V6 GC 4x4) gets 15-19 mpg city/highway and the V6 GC-TD 4x4 gets 17-22 mpg city/highway (so probably would the JK-TD 4x4).

Here are some of the parameters:

I put about 600 miles a week on my vehicle, of which 80% is highway and 20% is city. This would mean 120 city miles and 480 highway miles per week. This is being generous as it is closer to 90-10, but I am factoring more city driving on the weekends with the family.

The V6 3.0 TD engine has a window sticker premium of $1,010. It is safe to assume the same premium would apply to the JK if DC were to stuff it in.

My local gas station sells 87 octane for $3.13/gal, and #2 diesel for $3.39/gal.

All of this means I would consume 33.25 gallons of 87 octane per week with the V6 JK, for a weekly cost of $104.07.

Were I to drive a GC-TD or JK-TD, I would use 28.88 gallons a week of #2 diesel, for a weekly cost of $97.90.

The weekly savings of driving the GC/JK-TD is therefore $6.17. Given my 600 weekly miles, I would have to drive the GC/JK-TD for 98,217.18 miles (or 3.15 years) just to break even. And this is assuming I stuff my $1,010 in a closet and don’t invest it.

Hardly the saving anyone thinks it is. Also, after close to 100K miles I’d be ready to trade in my Jeep, as I’d be tired of it and things would most likely stop working. Sorry, but DC is not known for the best quality.

Now, I know proponents of the TD will chime in with torque figures among other things, but I can’t think of a place where a TD would get me through that a gas engine wouldn't.

Personally, the only way I would consider a diesel Jeep is if DC got their head out of their arse and built a TD engine that could rival Japanese and European ones, and if oil companies would stop gouging consumers on the price of diesel fuel. That’s my $0.02.

[SavageSunJeep]

mmmmm strange selections with ratios 5.13 with 33's :Wow1:

Don - we will not talk about Moab last year and the pinion in the Dana 60.

I have had an Adventure Trailer

WOW, cool, when did you get the trailer?

[MossMan]

*****
Now I have moved to a 5.7 Hemi with 39.5's and 5.13 gears.
http://www.osaussie.com/osaussie.com/photo/albums/ftpupload/Other/normal_beach.jpg

This setup is different on the road depending on which tires I have on, however there is enough power to over take :wings:



That is a kick *** setup.! :jumping: :26_7_2: :clapsmile :Wow1:

[MossMan]

Having recently tested both combos, I think that 33s+4.56s is ok, but 33s+4.88s is much better.

As far as diesel engines are concerned, I think it is pure marketing hype in the US:

According to the window stickers, the V6 JK 4x4 (and V6 GC 4x4) gets 15-19 mpg city/highway and the V6 GC-TD 4x4 gets 17-22 mpg city/highway (so probably would the JK-TD 4x4).

Here are some of the parameters:

I put about 600 miles a week on my vehicle, of which 80% is highway and 20% is city. This would mean 120 city miles and 480 highway miles per week. This is being generous as it is closer to 90-10, but I am factoring more city driving on the weekends with the family.

The V6 3.0 TD engine has a window sticker premium of $1,010. It is safe to assume the same premium would apply to the JK if DC were to stuff it in.

My local gas station sells 87 octane for $3.13/gal, and #2 diesel for $3.39/gal.

All of this means I would consume 33.25 gallons of 87 octane per week with the V6 JK, for a weekly cost of $104.07.

Were I to drive a GC-TD or JK-TD, I would use 28.88 gallons a week of #2 diesel, for a weekly cost of $97.90.

The weekly savings of driving the GC/JK-TD is therefore $6.17. Given my 600 weekly miles, I would have to drive the GC/JK-TD for 98,217.18 miles (or 3.15 years) just to break even. And this is assuming I stuff my $1,010 in a closet and don’t invest it.

Hardly the saving anyone thinks it is. Also, after close to 100K miles I’d be ready to trade in my Jeep, as I’d be tired of it and things would most likely stop working. Sorry, but DC is not known for the best quality.

Now, I know proponents of the TD will chime in with torque figures among other things, but I can’t think of a place where a TD would get me through that a gas engine wouldn't.

Personally, the only way I would consider a diesel Jeep is if DC got their head out of their arse and built a TD engine that could rival Japanese and European ones, and if oil companies would stop gouging consumers on the price of diesel fuel. That’s my $0.02.


Well said. It's nice to dream about but in reality it's not that big a deal. :shakin:

[OS-Aussie]

WOW, cool, when did you get the trailer?

ah, 2003. I had to visit the AT secondary site in NorCal to pick it up.

[robert j. yates]

Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited 4X4 3.0 CRD
215 HP
376 TQ
7200 lb towing capacity
20/24 Official EPA Milage
21.1 gallon tank

Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited 4X4 Hemi 5.7L
330 HP
375 TQ
7200 lb towing capacity
14/19 Official EPA Milage
21.1 gallon tank

Jeep Unlimited Rubicon 4X4 3.7L
205 HP
240 TQ
3500 lb towing capacity
16/19 Official EPA Milage
21.6 gallon tank

Guess it all depends on what you want to do with your vehicle.

[OS-Aussie]

Well said. It's nice to dream about but in reality it's not that big a deal. :shakin:

[start rant]
Same problem with buying a hybrid, check the costs and there is not real drive to do it. But having said that we traded the wife's Escape in on one of the new 08 Escape hybrids and she loves it.

The place I believe a diesel works best is off road under load, the MPG does not plunge to OMG like a gas engine often does. A factory diesel would be the best selection rather than conversion as the closer to stock you can stay the better chance of spares and not suffering breakage. The vehicle of first choice for me when I moved to the states was a Defender 110 Diesel but...... ended up with a gas Rubicon. In honesty if mileage is the primary factor, 4x4s are not the right choice.

The US is different in vehicle choices due to how cheap gas is here. Funny that places with high prices use diesel, down side is they also have less power. Ah, the US and the race for HP and big rims. High HP gas or diesel will do less mileage .... simple - air and fuel = HP

I also believe that the 3.0 CRD from MB is also what is being called the world engine which several other companies in Europe will also use going forward.

I agree that currently pricing from car companies and fuel companies combined with government charges and regulations have created a market that does not support too many options. How many years did Jeep have that fossil 4.0 in line six in their cars. While everyone went high tech on the little 4 bangers the V8's and inline 6's in the US stayed safe due to no pressure to change.
[end rant]

I still love diesel even if only my F250 is the only diesel I currently have.
But it does not suit everyone, great thing about the car market.

Still want a 3.0 CRD JK however

[robert j. yates]

The place I believe a diesel works best is off road under load, the MPG does not plunge to OMG like a gas engine often does.

Add the words "on-road" and "travel range" to that quote and we would be in complete agreement. My neighbor has a 5.7L Hemi Grand and he gets nowheres near the milage that Jeep reports the vehicle is capable of unless he drives 65 on the freeway and only then does it creep up into the high teens. Towing for him makes iteven worse. Average driving returns pretty pathetic milage but since he lives rather close to his worksite, he does not mind that much. Thats really his only gripe with his truck...otherwise it has held up remarkably well.

Me...I drive 80 miles day to work and back so I need a fuel efficient vehicle. I also want a vheicle that will ocassionally flat tow my wrangler as well as my Horizon Trailer *AND* still get decent milage doing so. I don't want a truck. That doesn't leave me much choice in SUV's and Jeep is incentiving the heck out of the CRD Grands at the moment so they can be had at a discount if you play your cards right.

I would probably sell my TJ if Jeep did in fact put the 3.0 CRD into the JK but I just don't see it. They are having a heard enough time selling the Grands at the moment.

[Lawrence]

Then I moved to 35's with 4.88 and a Kenny Belle Super charger. This was a good setup and allowed me to hold 2 gears higher the friends with Stock Rubicons on hills.
http://www.osaussie.com/osaussie.com/photo/albums/ftpupload/Death%20Valley/normal_HPIM1301.JPG
Still not too bad on the highway.
Back on topic... I forgot to ask, did you run this setup for a while prior to the KB install? If so, can you give me your impressions? Then, if you could let me know what the KB did/didn't improve. I know you have a stick, but I wouldn't mind hearing about it. Thanks.

[OS-Aussie]

lots more power and less mileage. Best I got on the highway with stock gears and 33's was 17 mpg and with the 35's and 4.88 and SC not driving for good mpg I got as bad as 11 mpg (up to 80 mph with the trailer on (don't tell)). With the Hemi 5.13's and 39.5 tires and the 5 speed auto the best I have had is 15mpg. The only reason I changed from this setup to the Hemi was the change in tire size and the resulting need for HP for wheel speed in non expedition driving. Can you get better mileage than 11 mpg ? I don't know I never tried to max out on this aspect. But I guess that around 14 mpg was consistent. But then again with two cans on the rear and four or more in the trailer, what does it matter it's a Jeep not a Hybrid and even this sort of mileage is better than some of the big SUV's.

As far as power goes it is very hard to beat the Super charger for value and amount of power. Most bolt-ons add very little real power. $4k gets you SC and I did mine one weekend in the garage (not counting the computer reprogramming). I have used cold air, chips etc on the Jeep and nothing did as much for seat of the pants power, except the Hemi......

[robert j. yates]

lots more power and less mileage. Best I got on the highway with stock gears and 33's was 17 mpg and with the 35's and 4.88 and SC not driving for good mpg I got as bad as 11 mpg (up to 80 mph with the trailer on (don't tell)). With the Hemi 5.13's and 39.5 tires and the 5 speed auto the best I have had is 15mpg. The only reason I changed from this setup to the Hemi was the change in tire size and the resulting need for HP for wheel speed in non expedition driving. Can you get better mileage than 11 mpg ? I don't know I never tried to max out on this aspect. But I guess that around 14 mpg was consistent. But then again with two cans on the rear and four or more in the trailer, what does it matter it's a Jeep not a Hybrid and even this sort of mileage is better than some of the big SUV's.

As far as power goes it is very hard to beat the Super charger for value and amount of power. Most bolt-ons add very little real power. $4k gets you SC and I did mine one weekend in the garage (not counting the computer reprogramming). I have used cold air, chips etc on the Jeep and nothing did as much for seat of the pants power, except the Hemi......

Your experience pretty much replicates mine in some areas. I am averaging between 11 and 13 with my Hesco equiped 4.0 which basically means I lost about 1mpg as compared to stock. I can live with that as I was able to obtain another 30HP and 35lb/ft of torque over my stock dyno baseline.

The build cost me approximately 5K which puts me squarely into supercharger territory. The supercharger would have been a much easier install with alot less downtime but I also have as part of my build, a brand new motor which is something I would not have had with a supercharger install so I think in the long run, I am a bit further ahead from a relaibility and total cost POV. I had 93K on my stock 4.0 when it was swapped out and over time, I would not be comfortable with strapping a supercharger on a motor with that many miles on it and expect it to run for another 50-100K.

I also considered a V8 swap and looked at the hemi but that was getting into stupid money territory for me and I simply couldn't justify it mentally.

In the end, I think that getting any kind of decent fuel economy in a Wrangler is just not going to happen no matter what the build. More improtantly I think is getting reliable power to pull a trailer with. The good thing is that there are different choices for those with different preferences and wallets.

[OS-Aussie]

The good thing is that there are different choices for those with different preferences and wallets.

yep, if we had more money we could all drive Rovers :wings: :wings: :oops:

[Lawrence]

it's a Jeep not a Hybrid and even this sort of mileage is better than some of the big SUV's.

I agree that buying an SUV for its gas mileage prowess makes as much sense as convincing people that Santa Clause does exist. That’s not what I was after. I should have been clearer as I was merely interested in your 35+4.88 combo from a power/behavior standpoint. How did it do driving the Jeep by itself in various terrains, how did it do with the trailer on the same terrains, etc… Basically what you liked and didn’t.

[86cj]

OS-Aussie,

I am curiuos about what kind off mileage the Hemi would give with a 33x10.50 or the 33x11.50 285's...You have so much data already.....And the "ROF optimized" 5:13 ratio..... (those 39's got to be MPG killers).

If you soft pedaled it unloaded, then fully cramed towing on the open road at 70mph. I could then justify to myself the visit I made to AEV's shop and disscused the simple Hemi swap..

I just think the Hemi working less at high speed pushing the wind than the 4.0 could improve Hwy mileage a bit. Does your Hemi have cyl shut off ? My mileage drops due to the wind speed and direction alot. Around town I would not expect an improvement due to obvious juvenile behavior.


Oh and OS-Aussie that is a Big Bad Expo style rig for sure....A Hemi and a Maggiolina?:drool:

[Lawrence]

OS-Aussie,

I am curiuos about what kind off mileage the Hemi would give with a 33x10.50 or the 33x11.50 285's...You have so much data already.....And the "ROF optimized" 5:13 ratio..... (those 39's got to be MPG killers).

If you soft pedaled it unloaded, then fully cramed towing on the open road at 70mph. I could then justify to myself the visit I made to AEV's shop and disscused the simple Hemi swap..

I just think the Hemi working less at high speed pushing the wind than the 4.0 could improve Hwy mileage a bit. Does your Hemi have cyl shut off ? My mileage drops due to the wind speed and direction alot. Around town I would not expect an improvement due to obvious juvenile behavior.

I wouldn't do the Hemi swap for gas mileage purposes but rather for having the power available in just about any circumstances. I don't think gas mileage can be worse than what it is now, and if it is, so be it, at least it would be a lot of fun to drive.

AEV will do the swap for about $19K if you are patient, really really patient. On top of that, it would be your responsibility to make sure it passes emissions. Here in Cali, I know of 3 shops that have performed it, that can do it for about $15-$17K, and that can pass referee.

However, the downside to doing a Hemi swap is that it is not as simple as stuffing the engine and tranny in the TJ. You'd have to look at what the next weakest link will be and you'd have to most likely replace your axles, among other things. So, in reality, it becomes a lot more costly all of a sudden.

[OS-Aussie]

I don't think tire and gear size will change the mileage much due to the issue with the right foot. You are totally correct the rolling mass of the big tires eats the gas right up. However with more power and torque 33's would not require 5.13's or likely anything over 4.56.

On the Expedition size I just came back from a month away and the Jeep and AT never moved, as we took the Super Duty and RV instead to allow the wife to work remote via the Data Storm. Horses for courses ....

The Jeep is some what of a money pit as you suggest with upgrading ... one thing breaks another. The mod list is very long. The Hemi does have MDS but it is not being used due to which computer I have.

http://www.osaussie.com/osaussie.com/photo/albums/ftpupload/Clayton/greenacres037.jpg


However I think we did more and went more places when it was closer to stock and did not worry and not getting home so much.

A true expedition rig needs to get you home, which is likely more distance than you can walk. So things that don't ensure that are not very good mod's.

My Jeep has been more on the rock crawling side of the fence, more so than expedition side, hence some of the more over the top selections.

I often think a new Diesel Grand and King Kamper is a hard setup to beat here in the US. Being Australian has something to do with this also. In Australia however it would be either Toyota or Landy.

Did I get lost on this thread somewhere......

My view for Expeditions, is close to stock as possible to meet your needs and expected terrain. Know how to fix what you have and carry the spares and tools to do it yourself. I think sometimes we also get carried away with what we really need to get there and back. I know my grandfather traveled western Queensland in the 50's / 60's in a 2 wheel drive car and in the trunk he had one set of chains, a set of tire levers, patches and a hand pump. Even fixed flats by stuffing the tire with grass. Makes me think of split rims.....

Oh, stop me now...
:oops: :oops: