Let's talk about Wranglers

Everskyward said:
Glad to see the little white Jeep is being put to more use than holding down my garage floor...
Click to expand...

:D I just wish it was me having fun in it instead of my son commuting! Time to get my jeep back! :)
 
gkainz said:
since this is a Wrangler thread, this isn't a hijack ....

I have to put new tires on the '98 TJ ... currently have 32x12.5x15 Goodyear Wrangler MTs ... thinking about 33x10.5x15 ATs as a replacement

so other than the obvious math results of "1 inch" ... what's the real overall difference in height and width? I'm intentionally going a little narrower (I think) with the 10.5 vs 12.5 ... and is the overall height really, physically 1 inch between the 32 and 33?
Click to expand...

Sure, tire height is 1", but ride height should only be less by 0.5" or so.
 
gkainz said:
since this is a Wrangler thread, this isn't a hijack ....

I have to put new tires on the '98 TJ ... currently have 32x12.5x15 Goodyear Wrangler MTs ... thinking about 33x10.5x15 ATs as a replacement

so other than the obvious math results of "1 inch" ... what's the real overall difference in height and width? I'm intentionally going a little narrower (I think) with the 10.5 vs 12.5 ... and is the overall height really, physically 1 inch between the 32 and 33?
Click to expand...

33's? Is your jeep lifited? I don't think 33's will fit on a stock TJ. You may want to ask on the other site we are both on. :D
 
gkainz said:
since this is a Wrangler thread, this isn't a hijack ....

I have to put new tires on the '98 TJ ... currently have 32x12.5x15 Goodyear Wrangler MTs ... thinking about 33x10.5x15 ATs as a replacement

so other than the obvious math results of "1 inch" ... what's the real overall difference in height and width? I'm intentionally going a little narrower (I think) with the 10.5 vs 12.5 ... and is the overall height really, physically 1 inch between the 32 and 33?
Click to expand...

I wouldnt run 33s without a 3" lift
 
Henning said:
That you have one with a manual transmission makes the mileage understandable. Most people lose a few miles to the gallon with a standard.
Click to expand...

huh? CTS-V does not have cylinder deactivation. Auto or Manual.

Some people will lose a few miles in manual if they drive accordingly.

EPA(Sedan) - City/Highway/Combined
Auto: 12/18/14
Manual: 14/19/16

My manual average is about 16 in normal mixed driving. Auto(torque converter) will always be worse if you drive manual properly
 
genna said:
huh? CTS-V does not have cylinder deactivation. Auto or Manual.

Some people will lose a few miles in manual if they drive accordingly.

EPA(Sedan) - City/Highway/Combined
Auto: 12/18/14
Manual: 14/19/16

My manual average is about 16 in normal mixed driving. Auto(torque converter) will always be worse if you drive manual properly
Click to expand...

Where did I say anything about cylinder deactivation?:dunno: Most people get worse mileage with a stick because they don't know how to use them correctly, and pretend they are driving a race car all the time. With modern automatics that have computer controlled shift points and lock up torque converters, most drivers cannot duplicate the mileage with a manual even though they they have the advantage of no hydraulic pump eating power full time.
 
Anthony said:
33's? Is your jeep lifited? I don't think 33's will fit on a stock TJ. You may want to ask on the other site we are both on. :D
Click to expand...

2" lift ... and posted "over there" at the same time as here.

the 32"s only rubbed up front in sharp turns ... so thinking the 10.5 width vs the 12.5 width will help with that.
 
Henning said:
Where did I say anything about cylinder deactivation?:dunno: Most people get worse mileage with a stick because they don't know how to use them correctly, and pretend they are driving a race car all the time. With modern automatics that have computer controlled shift points and lock up torque converters, most drivers cannot duplicate the mileage with a manual even though they they have the advantage of no hydraulic pump eating power full time.
Click to expand...

I can get good gas mileage with my manual, but that's not why I have it. I drive the **** out of it
 
ktup-flyer said:
I can get good gas mileage with my manual, but that's not why I have it. I drive the **** out of it
Click to expand...

Which is why you get crap mileage. I know for a fact you can get 21-23 mpg in the Caddie with an automatic around town because I'm not deluded into thinking that I'm in a race with everyone else on the road. When I want to race, I go on the track with a car that costs less than 10% of what the Caddie or Vette costs, go faster, and compete against real drivers who know how to really race. Driving around fast on the streets is for losers with low self esteem or other ego issues. When they step out of the car, the car is often taller than them.:rofl::rofl::rofl:
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Which is why you get crap mileage. I know for a fact you can get 21-23 mpg in the Caddie with an automatic around town.
Click to expand...

My Camaro gets 28 or so on the highway. Most people with performance cars don't buy them for fuel economy....
 
Henning said:
Which is why you get crap mileage. I know for a fact you can get 21-23 mpg in the Caddie with an automatic around town because I'm not deluded into thinking that I'm in a race with everyone else on the road. When I want to race, I go on the track with a car that costs less than 10% of what the Caddie or Vette costs, go faster, and compete against real drivers who know how to really race. Driving around fast on the streets is for losers with low self esteem or other ego issues. When they step out of the car, the car is often taller than them.:rofl::rofl::rofl:
Click to expand...

CTS-V Gen 2? around town 21? You are dreaming my friend. And don't bring
Vette into it, Vette gets a lot better mileage because it's a lot lighter. And less powerful(unless it's Z06+)

21 is what you see on highway at about 60mph
 
Henning said:
Where did I say anything about cylinder deactivation?:dunno: Most people get worse mileage with a stick because they don't know how to use them correctly, and pretend they are driving a race car all the time. With modern automatics that have computer controlled shift points and lock up torque converters, most drivers cannot duplicate the mileage with a manual even though they they have the advantage of no hydraulic pump eating power full time.
Click to expand...

I think I tried to reply to something else at the same time.... Maybe I thought someone things auto is more eco because it has cyl deactivation...

in any case, if you wanted to drive eco, manual is better. definitely in this car. Lock-up is not helping until top gears. Highway mileage would be very similar, but city... I don't think so... if you choose to drive to save gas..

If you don't you can get 7mpg in manual or auto... doesn't matter.

You really need to go into 8-9 gears to beat manual on economy. even with modern torque converters and computers. 15% loss is 15% loss.. it has to be accounted for something
 
I'm averaging ~14.6 and have 130hp less and only 300lbs less than a V. Like I said, who gives a crap about fuel economy?
 
My Wrangler is the little V-6, Auto, averaging about 13, if you believe the computer.

If you bought a jeep for gas milage, you bought it for the wrong reason.
 
Tom-D said:
My Wrangler is the little V-6, Auto, averaging about 13, if you believe the computer.

If you bought a jeep for gas milage, you bought it for the wrong reason.
Click to expand...

All of them have the pentastar 3.6L v6 or the pig 3.8L v6. I got about the same mpg.
 
ktup-flyer said:
All of them have the pentastar 3.6L v6 or the pig 3.8L v6. I got about the same mpg.
Click to expand...

we put 35" tires and a 3" lift on my son's jeep. It has the pentastar v6. It felt fairly peppy with stock tires, but the new rubber definitely bogs down the acceleration. We're getting around 15-16 mpg in the city. Given its aerodynamics, it probably wouldn't change much on the interstate.
 
rbridges said:
we put 35" tires and a 3" lift on my son's jeep. It has the pentastar v6. It felt fairly peppy with stock tires, but the new rubber definitely bogs down the acceleration. We're getting around 15-16 mpg in the city. Given its aerodynamics, it probably wouldn't change much on the interstate.
Click to expand...

The 4.10 gears from the Rubi are pretty easy to swap in, and help out a LOT.
 
rbridges said:
we put 35" tires and a 3" lift on my son's jeep. It has the pentastar v6. It felt fairly peppy with stock tires, but the new rubber definitely bogs down the acceleration. We're getting around 15-16 mpg in the city. Given its aerodynamics, it probably wouldn't change much on the interstate.
Click to expand...
I'd not take mine to the drag strip, but it gets off the line well, and pulls the trailer as well as can be expected. for 36" tires and 6" lift kit. What it really hates is a rutted road. where the big trucks have made a hollowed out rut in the lane. it will dive from one side of the rut to the other really quick.
 
Tom-D said:
I'd not take mine to the drag strip, but it gets off the line well, and pulls the trailer as well as can be expected. for 36" tires and 6" lift kit. What it really hates is a rutted road. where the big trucks have made a hollowed out rut in the lane. it will dive from one side of the rut to the other really quick.
Click to expand...

my son complained about the wider tires following grooves. I told him we could go back to the stock ones, but at age 16, it's all about looks. :lol:
 
rbridges said:
my son complained about the wider tires following grooves. I told him we could go back to the stock ones, but at age 16, it's all about looks. :lol:
Click to expand...
Hey! at 75 it's all about looks :)
 
rbridges said:
how do they do on the highway? He'll probably end up taking this to college, and I thought that may be too much gear.
Click to expand...

AS long as I keep it below 65 I'm good. 70 it is screaming.
 
rbridges said:
my son complained about the wider tires following grooves. I told him we could go back to the stock ones, but at age 16, it's all about looks. :lol:
Click to expand...

The only tires I ever liked on a Jeep for the street were the BFG All Terrain Radials.
 
rbridges said:
I'm not sure, but going to the taller tires, the 4.10 may not be too much gear. I'm going to check on the wrangler forums.
Click to expand...

the rubis come with 4.10s and 32s with the same trans. With 35s it will have lower RPMs than the stock rubi.
 
ktup-flyer said:
I would love to DD a Z06. TVS2300 is in the future for my SS.
Click to expand...
You say that until you do it for a couple years. You literally think about everywhere you go, and how difficult it is to get into that parking lot... and how many speed bumps between you and your destination. It's a huge PITA.

genna said:
huh? CTS-V does not have cylinder deactivation. Auto or Manual.

Some people will lose a few miles in manual if they drive accordingly.

EPA(Sedan) - City/Highway/Combined
Auto: 12/18/14
Manual: 14/19/16

My manual average is about 16 in normal mixed driving. Auto(torque converter) will always be worse if you drive manual properly
Click to expand...

My bad, I thought it did have cylinder deactivation. Most vehicles that come in auto and manual get better mileage in the auto, but I suppose that is because up until a few years ago autos usually had fewer gears than manuals. Like the GTO only had 4 gears in the auto vs 6 in the manual.
 
Z06_Mir said:
You say that until you do it for a couple years. You literally think about everywhere you go, and how difficult it is to get into that parking lot... and how many speed bumps between you and your destination. It's a huge PITA.
Click to expand...

C6? The new C7 Z06/Z07 is a monster :drool:
 
ktup-flyer said:
C6? The new C7 Z06/Z07 is a monster :drool:
Click to expand...

The C7 ZO6/ZO7 is a nice car with ugly tail lights, it does ok for a production car, it is a kitty cat to boost people's egos.

This is a Monster:image.jpg

You haven't handled a monster until you've handled one on nitromethane. Monster doesn't begin until you have a 1:1 power to weight ratio and a set of tires that will put it all to the ground.
 
Henning said:
The C7 ZO6/ZO7 is a nice car with ugly tail lights, it does ok for a production car, it is a kitty cat to boost people's egos.

This is a Monster:View attachment 40022

You haven't handled a monster until you've handled one on nitromethane. Monster doesn't begin until you have a 1:1 power to weight ratio and a set of tires that will put it all to the ground.
Click to expand...

I like turns. Its easy to go fast in a straight line. The z06 makes porsches look silly.
 
I've got an '89 Cherokee with 33s on it that has so far powered through everything I've gone over, around, or through, and I paid $3000 to boot. I also get 17mpg.

That's what you need.
 
ktup-flyer said:
I like turns. Its easy to go fast in a straight line. The z06 makes porsches look silly.
Click to expand...

Well, going fast in any direction isn't particularly easy. Otherwise drag racing wouldn't be much of a sport. It's incredibly difficult to shave off tenths of seconds.

That being said, the Corvette is still hands-down the best bang for the buck you can buy. a $60-70K sports car that will run with $200K+ super cars. the Z06 makes some Porsches look silly. However, a Mustang GT can make a Boxter look silly, but a 911 GT3 will give a Z06 all it can handle. I'd still take the Z06 though, they look flat-out sinister, lol. I like fast in a straight line, but not at the expense of making the hairpin at the end of the road.
 
ktup-flyer said:
I like turns. Its easy to go fast in a straight line. The z06 makes porsches look silly.
Click to expand...

Like turns? Then these are monsters:image.jpg

BTW, if you think it's easy to make 4000+hp go straight for a quarter mile in under 5 seconds, you have never driven a car with even 1000hp.

If all you have ever driven has been production vehicles, you don't know what performance really is, and if you've never taken it to the track, you don't know what it can do or how to make it do it. Driving hard on the street is just an ego boost for losers.
 
Last edited:
SoonerAviator said:
Well, going fast in any direction isn't particularly easy. Otherwise drag racing wouldn't be much of a sport. It's incredibly difficult to shave off tenths of seconds.
Click to expand...

It's interesting. Anything can be made into a sport because at the limit everything is hard.

Australian Top Gear(yeah.. smh) did a segment at one time(Series 4, Episode 3) about how difficult it is to drag race. Steve Pizzeti(their circuit racer with no experience and no love for drag racing) spent a day learning to drive and getting a race license in a modified dragster.

You can see it on youtube. It took him just a few runs(no experience at all) to get a race license. First 1/4mi run after that...9.28. Apparently that's respectable.

I'm pretty sure that nobody would be able to do the same in a circuit race car.
 
Z06_Mir said:
My bad, I thought it did have cylinder deactivation. Most vehicles that come in auto and manual get better mileage in the auto, but I suppose that is because up until a few years ago autos usually had fewer gears than manuals. Like the GTO only had 4 gears in the auto vs 6 in the manual.
Click to expand...

Manuals are more fun and in the good ol' days it was a no brainer to get because they were also more efficient and higher performance compared to the slushboxes of old. Today, though, you lose performance AND efficiency going to manuals. So it's just for fun now. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top