Yes Jeep did, sort of, try the Rubicon with the new IFS Liberty. They used
stock AT tires and had to be winched over most of the obstacles. Don't
think the truck made it anywhere near all the way through the trail and
suffered considerable customization by the country side. Really took b*lls
for them to even try a stock truck on that trail, however. Universal
response from the testers was NOT WITH THOSE SMALL TIRES. Unclear what you
would have to do to fit decent rubber under the truck. If its typical jeep,
its a 4" lift minimum.
Testers did praise Jeep for getting as much travel and ground clearance out
of the IFS as possible, unlike the Freelander. Funny they went with a new
V-6 instead of the tried and true inline 6. Even GM is seeing the light on
straight six engines for truck applications.
Aloha
Peter O.
>From: "Perrone Ford" <ford_p@nettally.com>
>Reply-To: lro@works.team.net
>To: <lro@Works.Team.Net>
>Subject: LRO: RE: Stock off-road (was Dodge front ends)
>Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 16:43:49 -0400
>
>Ohhh Marin...
>
> Your call on the Grand Cherokee was a big miss. The Grand Cherokee with
>the Quadra Drive will run circles around most of our trucks. It uses Zexel
>diffs front and rear (same system as the hummer) so it basically has the
>equivalent of softlockers on both ends! With some aggressive tires, its a
>VERY capable truck. This option is not available on the base Cherokee.
>The
>Mercedes Galendewagon is a pretty good offroader which has locking diffs
>front and rear. But at the current price of almost $150k, I'd have a TOUGH
>time taking it offroad!
>
> I'm not so sure about that F250/Chevy Silverado call either. I think the
>4wd systems are pretty weak. However the new Toyota TRD truck should be on
>the list. Its tough as nails and comes with a rear locker. REALLY gets you
>into and out of places. Under $30k too so its a good bargain.
>
> Oh, and Jeep really does test all its models on the Rubicon as a matter of
>routine so even the new Liberty has some roots away from the road.
>
>-P
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-lro@Works.Team.Net [mailto:owner-lro@Works.Team.Net]On
> > Behalf Of C. Marin Faure
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 4:28 PM
> > To: lro-digest@Works.Team.Net
> > Subject: LRO: Stock off-road (was Dodge front ends)
> >
> >
> > Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 09:44:59 -0400
> > From: "M. Tompkins" <mmglass@ix.netcom.com>
> > Subject: Re: LRO: Dodge front ends
> >
> > >So what can you drive off a dealer's showroom
> > floor that can be still considered a real off-road
> > vehicle?
> >
> > I rarely pay attention to vehicles except when I'm
> > in the market for one, which is not very often, so I'm
> > not all that familiar with everything that's on the
> > market these days. But I would say vehicles that will
> > perform well off-road as built are:
> >
> > Jeep Wrangler
> > Jeep Cherokee (not Grand Cherokee)
> > Toyota Land Cruiser/Lexus 450
> > Nissan Xterra
> > Land Rover Defender
> > Land Rover Discovery
> > Land Rover Range Rover
> > Mercedes something-wagon (not the ML320, etc.)
> > Hummer
> > Ford F-250 short wheelbase 4wd
> > Chevy equivelant to the F-250
> >
> > Some of these are pretty gussied up with fancy interiors,
> > power-everything,
> > etc. But I believe the basic vehicles underneath all the glitz
> > are reasonably
> > good off-road performers out of the box. Some are bigger than others,
>and
> > that can pose some limitations on some roads. But I believe the
> > vehicles on
> > this list are all capable of traversing the sort of off-pavement
> > roads that
> > are typical. Certainly not Moab, Rubicon Trail, etc., but probably 90
> > percent of the "off-road" roads most of us drive are well within the
> > capabilities of
> > these vehicles.
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jul 04 2001 - 17:58:32 EDT