|
Now that I think about it, a later year TJ Wrangler (like an '03 to '06) would be perfect, still can find them with low miles and they run forever. I see right hand drive TJs for sale now and then, shouldn't be too difficult to find one.
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
Applebees Appetizer posted:Now that I think about it, a later year TJ Wrangler (like an '03 to '06) would be perfect, still can find them with low miles and they run forever. I see right hand drive TJs for sale now and then, shouldn't be too difficult to find one. Does it have enough cargo space? I thought room for a lot of stuff was also a requirement?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
I spoke with 4 different RR carriers out here in Methville, and every single one (over 10 years of service, each) has only owned Jeeps, due to the terrain, parts availability (expense), and necessities of carrying large packages fairly often over washboarded dirt roads. I'd love to see someone do that in a Prius. I'd poo poo talk that, but my aunt managed to run a Prius in rural Az for 300,000 miles on washboard dirt roads. It wasn't stop-n-go, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
This is the obvious answer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
Sooooo....a Jeep Cherokee.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
beep-beep car is go posted:Does it have enough cargo space? I thought room for a lot of stuff was also a requirement? There's a halfway decent amount of cargo room if you yank out the rear seats. More if you ditch the passenger's seat too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
beep-beep car is go posted:Does it have enough cargo space? I thought room for a lot of stuff was also a requirement? He was talking earlier about other carriers using the JK but having mechanical issues, so the next logical choice would be a later model TJ, if he needed more space over a standard Wrangler he could always go with an Unlimited. I would imagine that even if he got a left hand drive Jeep, converting it to right hand drive shouldn't be all that difficult.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Sooooo....a Jeep Cherokee. Yeah, but pretty much worse in every way other than nostalgia factor. Reading Car & Driver's "any weather" build really underscroes how far we've come. 70-0 in only 195 feet?! Really the best part of the Bring a Trailer link is that someone tried so hard to keep one looking so good. $22k good ... not so much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
Applebees Appetizer posted:He was talking earlier about other carriers using the JK but having mechanical issues, so the next logical choice would be a later model TJ, if he needed more space over a standard Wrangler he could always go with an Unlimited. Only issue there is that TJUs are relatively rare (and expensive), while 4-door JKs are more common than 2-door.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
I think at this point given the terrain, storage and reliability requirements, its safe to say your vehicle is a Toyota 4x4. Up to you to determine whether Tacoma, 4runner, landcruiser, whatever. Tacoma is probably most utilitarian, followed by 4runner. Land cruisers are great but will get worse mpg with the tradeoff being offroadability. But any Toyota 4x4 will be able to eat your route up with ease.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Only issue there is that TJUs are relatively rare (and expensive), while 4-door JKs are more common than 2-door. They also carry a $5-10k premium over 2-dr JKs. Things to avoid in a JK: 2008s. They have oil consumption problems. Otherwise, 07-11 have the old 3.8L V6 which isn't particularly good or bad. Not as bulletproof as the old 4.0, but not unreliable either; slightly better fuel economy, similar aftermarket support, etc. 12+ has the 3.6L V6. Stick to 2014+, it seems like they've worked out the kinks. 2012-13 had issues with either casting sand or (more likely) poo poo chemistry on whatever they added to the coolant in the factory which causes PROBLEMS. Early 2012s had cylinder head issues which were resolved by the end of the year; there was no recall so potentially defective vehicles are on the road, but Chrysler extended the warranty for that issue to 10 year/150k miles. Basically you get a new bank 2 cylinder head; it's an odd problem that doesn't really impact driveability much, you just get a CEL and lose a couple MPG at worst. Now that I've finished replacing the entire coolant system in my '12 and can drive it, I love it again.  I've got plenty of space in the back with the seat removed - a 1-person, 2 minute task.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
If that's the case he's probably just better off going with a later model standard TJ.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
How'd you manage to blow up the transmission in a 95 Cherokee? Is it a 4.0L or a 2.5L, and auto or manual? If it is a 4.0L they usually last at least 200, if not 300 or 400k without problems, I know a guy with 500k on his. The transmissions behind the 2.5Ls are known for being a pile of poo poo though. I mean, I came into this thread literally planning on suggesting exactly that vehicle - a 4.0L Cherokee. If you are anywhere near the new england area I can probably get you a great condition transmission for a 4.0L one for under 100 bucks on any given week, they're super common, bulletproof enough that they sell dirt cheap because no one needs them, and I wouldn't ever bother rebuilding one unless I was doing it myself. e: BTW, if you do go for a Cherokee, avoid the 00-01 years and if you are in the rustbelt, avoid 96 too. Any 91-95 and any 97-99 is a pretty good choice. 90-down are... harder to find parts for the engine management system, and significantly more obnoxious to work on. 95 and 99 are generally considered the cream of the crop. kastein fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Oct 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
I think his RHD requirement is going to stick him to the Jeeps unless his budget is fairly large.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
Do like I did and get two of them. Work on one and drive the other  
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
My local rural mail carrier has a 4 door RHD JK Wrangler. Never seen it skip a beat regardless of the weather. Also Dave of Poly Performance has a 2 door RHD Wrangler he bought for 50% of its value since Carmax gave up on trying to sell a RHD Jeep.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Honestly you just need another Cherokee. I know it's hard after you have something always in the shop but unless you go Tacoma there really isn't anything else to be said for your requirements.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
Having owned both of those vehicles, Tacoma is so much better from the viewpoint of reliability and lack of headaches/parts randomly failing. I mean for banging around off road a Cherokee is what you want but for a mail delivery vehicle that gets driven on dirt - Tacoma all day long. Just fluid film the poo poo outta the frame each fall.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
Some sort of Subaru wagon? Outback/Forester?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
wilfredmerriweathr posted:Having owned both of those vehicles, Tacoma is so much better from the viewpoint of reliability and lack of headaches/parts randomly failing. I mean for banging around off road a Cherokee is what you want but for a mail delivery vehicle that gets driven on dirt - Tacoma all day long. I agree if you want just one vehicle for overall use, get a Tacoma. If you go Cherokee get two of them, or maybe a Wrangler for delivery and something else for a DD. Tons of rust free Cherokees down south, you could easily pick up a pair in good to excellent condition down here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Cached Money posted:Some sort of Subaru wagon? Outback/Forester? If you enjoy head gasket and rod bearing problems
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
Also flannel and Sheryl Crow anthology.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Kastein what's your opinion on the 4 cyl Jeep motors of those years? Was curious because I started looking just to see whats around with a manual and found a '99 2wd with 100k for 2 grand. I'm assuming it's probably gutless but if it's just as dependable as the 4.0 and more fuel efficient it might be worth a look.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Applebees Appetizer posted:Kastein what's your opinion on the 4 cyl Jeep motors of those years? Was curious because I started looking just to see whats around with a manual and found a '99 2wd with 100k for 2 grand. I'm assuming it's probably gutless but if it's just as dependable as the 4.0 and more fuel efficient it might be worth a look. You asked kastein but - the 4 cyls get the same gas mileage and gutless is being generous.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Applebees Appetizer posted:Kastein what's your opinion on the 4 cyl Jeep motors of those years? Was curious because I started looking just to see whats around with a manual and found a '99 2wd with 100k for 2 grand. I'm assuming it's probably gutless but if it's just as dependable as the 4.0 and more fuel efficient it might be worth a look. I had a 1993 Wrangler with the 4 cylinder (so lighter than a Cherokee) and I averaged 13mpg. And yeah, gutless. Fairly reliable, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
It basically has the downsides of the 4.0 with none of the benefits.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
rally posted:You asked kastein but - the 4 cyls get the same gas mileage and gutless is being generous. What this guy said. By the time you wring its neck enough to move, it will get roughly the same mileage. They are anvils like the 4.0 but that's all I can really say for them. They have a noise pedal, not an accelerator pedal. E: oh yeah the mantrans behind the 2.5 is hot wet garbage and the auto is not far behind. It's a 3spd chryco shitbox auto or an AX5 5spd manual that is known for stripping out second or third gear (usually third) with the thundering raging power of the 2.5L inline 4, stock. kastein fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Oct 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
slidebite posted:It basically has the downsides of the 4.0 with none of the benefits. Nailed it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
I've driven a Dakota with the 2.5/manual combo and it was approaching 70s/80s Mercedes diesel slowness. I can't imagine how badly it would do in a heavier vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
Well so much for that then Good thing I asked because I'll be looking at Wranglers soon too, although it's going to really narrow the search as it seems more than half of them around here are 4 bangers 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
I'll be the odd one out, and suggest the 97-00 Chevy Tahoe on the list of compatible cars. The GM 4.3L is as bulletproof as the Jeep 4.0*, as long as you stay on top of the maintenance; the 4L60 is pretty tough and cheap as poo poo to replace if it does grenade; parts are everywhere and inexpensive. * I mean, I've seen them ticking over just fine at 400k+ miles, with regular oil changes and a replacement timing chain. Apparently the Jeep 4.0L, you can replace the oil with sand and still successfully put another 50k on the engine, so no, the 4.3 isn't quite up to that standard. rndmnmbr fucked around with this message at 08:36 on Oct 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 08:33
|
|
|
Yu-Gi-Ho! posted:I've driven a Dakota with the 2.5/manual combo and it was approaching 70s/80s Mercedes diesel slowness. I can't imagine how badly it would do in a heavier vehicle. Unlike the jeeps with that same 2.5 (you're talking the one in 96-up Dakotas, right? The 2.2/2.5 in 95-down Dakotas was the K-car engine, not the AMC/jeep engine. Complicated automotive incest) the Dakota with a 2.5 got the AX15 instead of the AX5, and it actually stays together as a result. In fact 96-up 4cyl Dakota mantrans are a common swap when 4cyl jeep owners get fed up with replacing their trans regularly, because it's reasonably simple, just bolt it onto the engine, change trans crossmember (maybe), driveshafts, and transfer case input gear. 4.3s are solid as hell like rndmnmbr said, but are the vehicles he recommended available RHD? I have no idea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
kastein posted:4.3s are solid as hell like rndmnmbr said, but are the vehicles he recommended available RHD? I have no idea. It's on the list. And doing this is a lot more sane than trying to import a RHD vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 01:14
|
|