Ever race anyone in your jeep? Whats the reaction you get when you win?

[MonLee]

I got my jeep last week, ill be selling my type r this week. The type r is faster but only if your really trying your hardest, and who wants to drive around "trying their hardest" on public roads, the older i get the more i see the truth in the statement "its more fun to drive a slow car fast than it is to drive a fast car slow". Btw its possible to get a stock wrx to do a 4.6 sec 0-60 if you drive perfectly and bounce 2nd gear off the rev limiter.

Sponsored

 

[beaups]

"The Jeep also offers another engine. It is an Inline 4 . This powertrain is available with the Unlimited Willys 4dr SUV 4WD (2.0L 4cyl 8A) and helps the car to reach from 0-60 MPH in 6.4 seconds. The Jeep Wrangler covers the quarter-mile run in just 15.35 seconds." The Willy's does 6.4, the sport on smaller/ lighter tires should be a few 10ths quicker...

There are different numbers all over the place (not sure who your source is and if they actually did an instrumented test) but even the times you posted are slower than a stock RX8. You can find several reputable sites that know how to test cars that have the slow RX8 sub 6 seconds 0-60, in fact car and driver has it at 5.9 and 14.6 in the 1/4 mile in their long term test.

But also this is a dumb argument. If the RX8 got gapped it wasn't trying or was broken. If a Mustang GT got gapped there's a trend.

 

[Deleted member 59098]

I think my JLR manual is one of the slowest stock vehicles of all time In a race where no brakes or gas is used.

 

[One_off]

I just raced a turtle with my MT 3.6.
Turtle got my pink slip

 

[Zandcwhite]

There are different numbers all over the place (not sure who your source is and if they actually did an instrumented test) but even the times you posted are slower than a stock RX8. You can find several reputable sites that know how to test cars that have the slow RX8 sub 6 seconds 0-60, in fact car and driver has it at 5.9 and 14.6 in the 1/4 mile in their long term test.

But also this is a dumb argument. If the RX8 got gapped it wasn't trying or was broken. If a Mustang GT got gapped there's a trend.

"By comparison, the RX-8, which is 200 pounds lighter, gives away 49-horsepower. This results in a slower 0 to 60 run of 6.6 seconds, and a quarter mile of 15.2 seconds at 93 miles-per-hour." That's from motortrend, but I'm sure they are wrong...

 

[BuffaloBill]

Luckily I am a very conservative driver when it comes to speed. Were I not, I might enjoy surprising showoffs with what a diesel box can do from a stand still. But maturity keeps me from this small bit of pleasure...

Right about the diesel being good out of the hole.

I was less mature last fall when at a stoplight, a somewhat ratty looking but modified Camaro with really good sounding loud exhaust pulled up aside of my wife and I. Two young guys in the Camaro. This was in town. We were headed to the grocery store which required we turn left in one block.

When the light turned, neither of us was on it that hard initially, but I rolled in on the throttle so as not to break traction. At that point we were pulling on them. The driver didn’t want that to be happening so nailed it. But he broke traction violently, and (probably because it was so loud), let off, then hit it again. But by the time he caught up and would have passed us, I was braking hard to make that left turn. My wife was not too impressed. But it was fun! I am 60 yrs old…..

 

[Aonar]

Right about the diesel being good out of the hole.

I was less mature last fall when at a stoplight, a somewhat ratty looking but modified Camaro with really good sounding loud exhaust pulled up aside of my wife and I. Two young guys in the Camaro. This was in town. We were headed to the grocery store which required we turn left in one block.

When the light turned, neither of us was on it that hard initially, but I rolled in on the throttle so as not to break traction. At that point we were pulling on them. The driver didn’t want that to be happening so nailed it. But he broke traction violently, and (probably because it was so loud), let off, then hit it again. But by the time he caught up and would have passed us, I was braking hard to make that left turn. My wife was not too impressed. But it was fun! I am 60 yrs old…..

My maturity level waxes and wanes fairly regularly

 

[MudHunter]

Forget about the car or the race, I want details on the $800 a piece tires? The geolander x-mt's on the jeep were $400 each, and being a Jeep there's 5 of them. Do you really have$4,000 in tires alone on a camaro?

If you're running light to light on those MT tires, you're a moron. You don't seem like a moron, so I bet you're not. The average price per tire on Wranglers in general, when looking at what most people run on this forum, is indeed about half of what I would pay for a typical high performance tire. If you're going argue an extreme just to make a point, can I compare your MT tires to the cost of a set of drag slicks or high performance runflats?

Regardless of that silliness, here's how the tire pricing breaks down.

You have 5 tires, I have 4. You can rotate all 5 tires, as opposed to the 4 in normal cars, increasing your tire longevity and therefore decreasing the overall cost for the life of the tires.

I have 4 tires that CANNOT be rotated (two different sizes between front and rear, directional, no spare). You'll get 4 to 5 times the mileage on your set of 5 than I will on my set of 4.. Even with the silly comparison you're trying here, by the time (in miles) you've gone and spent $4000 for two sets of (5) tires, I've spent about $7,200 on 4.

Pick one: Pirelli P-Zero, Micehlin Pilot Sport, Conti Extremecontact Sport. I'm usually looking at about $1,800 for a set of 4 that will last a summer. That's just my normal, high performance, summer tire. That's not a set of slicks or anything crazy. They're fairly common high performance tires. If I want to run with Eagle runflats, the cost goes up to about $2,200 a set.

 

[MudHunter]

Not sure where you got it from that I said Im smoking anyone, other than a riced out rx8. I already said the jeep is only fast for a jeep. Of course now if we are racing to 170km/h down 50km/h streets then im getting my ass whooped. If i only go up to 80 or 100 then im gonna stay behind them for longer. I think you took it a little more seriously than intended to be. Anyway, enjoy the Camaro man. Thats gotta be a wicked fun car to have.

I wasn't talking about you specifically. I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that I was. I'm trading the Camaro in on a Rubicon, actually. Jeeps are more fun in more ways. As long as there's no roof on either, I'm happy.

Cheers.

 

[MudHunter]

A stock wrx 0-60 is 6.0s, a stock wrangler is 6.1. The wrx is slow af for a sports car. That .1 seconds can easily be made up by a better launch. Believe what you want, but numbers don't lie. The 4xe does 0-60 in 5.5s and the 392 gets there in 4.5s. If the wrx is your fast car, I'd hate to see the slow one.

That's only true if you cherry pick pretty much the slowest WRXs ever made. My '04 WRX STi was mid 4's on the 0-60 run from the showroom floor IIRC.

 

[MudHunter]

This is exactly what my point is. However, when it comes to winning in a straight line I find that brings out the ego in many people. Most guys expect to blow a jeep away but these days jeeps are much quicker than they once were, so it has a surprise factor. Most people cant believe the pull my jeep has for being on 35s and only having a 4cyl. Its not that theyre blown away by how "fast" it is. Because its not. But once again, the ego in many people on this thread wont see that. Theyre too busy thinking "my <generic car> is faster than you and your jeep" Its not even entertaining, but sad.

This, I can 100% agree with. The JL, with the new transmission, is light years ahead of what people expect based on the JK. I am impressed with how quick the JL is, even though it's the slowest vehicle I have had (or will have since I'm waiting on mine still), other than my JK, in probably 15 years.

 

[LiveToWork]

There are different numbers all over the place (not sure who your source is and if they actually did an instrumented test) but even the times you posted are slower than a stock RX8. You can find several reputable sites that know how to test cars that have the slow RX8 sub 6 seconds 0-60, in fact car and driver has it at 5.9 and 14.6 in the 1/4 mile in their long term test.

But also this is a dumb argument. If the RX8 got gapped it wasn't trying or was broken. If a Mustang GT got gapped there's a trend.

The rx8 was definitely trying. We went over double the speed limit. His front bumper was maybe a foot past my rear but it was close. He even got a tiny head start off the light too.

But it stank a bit. I dont get why every 20 year old Japanese car owner has a stinky car. What are these guys all doing to their cars to make their supras, silvias, rx7/rx8, toyotas, etc smell like shit. And every one of their cars sets off my athsma worse than stinky 2000s ford diesels in the winter time

I tried joining them when I was younger but quickly got turned off by their childish attitudes toward non jdm cars, and every one of them are broke with only the cheapest ebay parts on their shitty cars. As you can tell, I dont like my local ricer group and I will continue to disappoint every one of them that my jeep possibly can.

 

[Zandcwhite]

That's only true if you cherry pick pretty much the slowest WRXs ever made. My '04 WRX STi was mid 4's on the 0-60 run from the showroom floor IIRC.

I would call going with the current wrx cherry picking, but yes there are faster generations. If we were cherry picking in jeeps favor we could use the 392 0-60, or even better swap the Wrangler out for a track hawk...

 

[MudHunter]

I would call going with the current wrx cherry picking, but yes there are faster generations. If we were cherry picking in jeeps favor we could use the 392 0-60, or even better swap the Wrangler out for a track hawk...

No, going with the current WRX instead of the current WRX STi when calling it a "sports car" is cherry picking. The standard WRX is no more a performance car than that BMW 430i is (the M4 is the sports car variant of the 4-series platform). The 2021 WRX STi goes 0-60 in 5.3 seconds as tested. The current WRX overall has been a downgrade for the enthusiast, which is why Subaru is responding by promising to push the performance and technological boundaries of the WRX in the next iteration.

 

[Zandcwhite]

No, going with the current WRX instead of the current WRX STi when calling it a "sports car" is cherry picking. The standard WRX is no more a performance car than that BMW 430i is (the M4 is the sports car variant of the 4-series platform). The 2021 WRX STi goes 0-60 in 5.3 seconds as tested. The current WRX overall has been a downgrade for the enthusiast, which is why Subaru is responding by promising to push the performance and technological boundaries of the WRX in the next iteration.

Even the sti, which is not what the op described beating, is slow compared to the 392 Rubicon. So much for sports car...

Sponsored