Most capable Rubicon?

[JeepViking13]

Just curious to see what most people view as the best Rubicon Off-road platform.

The 2 door with the Shorter wheel base.

The 4 door with the longer wheel base.

The 392 4 door with the longer wheel base and v8 engine.

Just curious to hear people's opinions.

Sponsored

 

[FloridaLarry]

'Best Rubi' means different things to everyone. I'll choose the traditional one; ease of conquering the Rubicon or similar trails:

The extra power of the 392 doesn't help in a 4-low, 5 mph situation. The extra front weight and longer wheelbase don't help either. The room of the extra 2 doors is offset by the limited range.

IMHO, the 2 door Rubi (3.6 auto) is the most capable Rubi. Very interested in reading other opinions.

 

[Bulletbill]

All of the above.

 

[mwilk012]

It depends entirely on the obstacle.

 

[Vrrooom]

To me it’s the 4 door 3.6; why? It can carry more stuff, longer wheelbase is much more stable in off-road and on road situations, the ride is much better, and , it can tackle almost anything a 2 door can with all the added advantages. Get the XR and may be more capable out of the box?

The 392 is no different in capability, except the added weight hurts and the added power doesn’t help in practical capability- trails or on road driving. And gets worse mpg.

So I believe the 3.6 4 door is the sweet spot in the range.

 

[Zandcwhite]

For tight, technical trails the 2 door has an advantage. For every other use the longer wheel base does. Steep, off camber hills are down right dangerous in a 2 door. Ledge type obstacles are much easier to climb in a 4 door. Thick mud, deep snow, and hills so steep you can’t crawl up them all benefit from having extra horsepower. Add in the fact that I can spend more time wheeling if I get there quicker, the 392 would be much more fun on the road, the added towing capacity of the 4 door, and the ability to bring more than a 6 pack and a sandwich in the cargo area and my vote is obviously 4 door. The weight penalty can be made up for by running aluminum bumpers and skids and a light tire and wheel package like a km3 or mtr. As a practical person I’d go 4xe, as the low rpm torque is even better than the 392, I could get an HOV sticker on my Jeep that would make Prius and Tesla owners cry, and the massive tax incentives right now. Being that’s not in the poll, I vote 392. There’s no such thing as too much power, it’s only a lack of traction.

 

[JeepViking13]

All good answers so far. Remember there's no wrong answer here. Everyone has a different opinion and a different use for there rig. Some people are more into pure wheeling some are into more Overlanding.

 

[BadgerJL]

The diesel engine should really be part of the conversation here. IMO, the 4-door diesel Rubi is the most capable version of the Wrangler. Lots of low-end torque make it great for low-speed crawling over obstacles and allow it to handle increased tire size without regearing (37s on stock 3.73 gearing!) The increased fuel efficiency also makes it desirable for overlanding use. I recently had mine on the trails at Rausch Creek in PA and paired with the 4:1 tcase and 8hp75 auto transmission, it practically walked itself over some seriously rocky trails. That's my vote.

 

[JeepViking13]

For tight, technical trails the 2 door has an advantage. For every other use the longer wheel base does. Steep, off camber hills are down right dangerous in a 2 door. Ledge type obstacles are much easier to climb in a 4 door. Thick mud, deep snow, and hills so steep you can’t crawl up them all benefit from having extra horsepower. Add in the fact that I can spend more time wheeling if I get there quicker, the 392 would be much more fun on the road, the added towing capacity of the 4 door, and the ability to bring more than a 6 pack and a sandwich in the cargo area and my vote is obviously 4 door. The weight penalty can be made up for by running aluminum bumpers and skids and a light tire and wheel package like a km3 or mtr. As a practical person I’d go 4xe, as the low rpm torque is even better than the 392, I could get an HOV sticker on my Jeep that would make Prius and Tesla owners cry, and the massive tax incentives right now. Being that’s not in the poll, I vote 392. There’s no such thing as too much power, it’s only a lack of traction.

I definitely think it depends on your intended use. It also depends on where you live. Anything east of the Mississippi you're definitely going want a 2 door if you're just pure wheeling in the tight dense forests. Out West 4 door might be better in the open country and steep Rock ledges. Although on some of those high elevation trails like Black Bear pass I've seen 4 doors having to do the 3 point turn dance on sharp turns near steep ledges. That would be a pain and nerve wracking.

 

[At Risk Ute]

Well that would be hard to say, sir. They're each outstanding in their own way.

- Greg Marmalard

 

[Windshieldfarmer]

For hard core off-roading the 2 door wins…hands down. Shorter wheelbase makes for tighter turning radius, higher break over angle, and better maneuverability. For over landing a 4 door is better because of hauling capacity or the ability to sleep inside the cab.

 

[Zandcwhite]

For hard core off-roading the 2 door wins…hands down. Shorter wheelbase makes for tighter turning radius, higher break over angle, and better maneuverability. For over landing a 4 door is better because of hauling capacity or the ability to sleep inside the cab.

The opinion of every 2 door fan from the Midwest east. Not true in my own personal experience running "hard-core" trails out west for 20+ years. The short wheelbase is too unstable on big obstacles. There's a reason why the LJ was so popular. Out on Fordyce, Pritchett canyon, cliffhanger, or Johnson Valley you'll see 4 doors, LJ's, and stretched wheelbase 2 doors probably 20-1 vs a stock wheelbase 2 door. Not only is the 4 door much more stable on steep obstacles, the ride is much nicer too. 8 hours on the Rubicon in a 2 door tj felt like I'd been in a washing machine on spin cycle. A JLU or even my old xj was much smoother and less taxing. I've seen dozens of obstacles that were just too steep for 2 door guys to make it up, I don't think I've seen 1 that 2 door guys can make and 4 door guys can't even if it takes them an extra 3 point turn and some belly dragging. Following a 2 door down black bear pass, he needed 3 point turns just as often as I did, the extra maneuverability is over played in my experience. Handy on a few obstacles and in parking lots at the mall, but irrelevant on most trails. Just my opinion and experience, but I'd say it's far from "hands down" a win for the 2 door on the trails I've run.

 

[ToolMan514]

The one with the better driver behind the wheel!

 

[Stormin’ Moorman]

I gotta agree with @Zandcwhite on most of his points. I will add though, that these tight trails in the east are usually easier with a 2-door. My YJ is a blast on woods trails that aren't technical, you can turn around anywhere. However, the YJ is a lot smaller than the JL so maybe it's not such a big difference compared to the JLU. And that's trails, not wheeling.

 

[calemasters]

My JK 2 door Rubicon was great on the switchbacks on Black Bear Pass. On some of the switchbacks I did not have to back up. The guy in the F-150, did not do so well . My Unlimited Rubicon rides better and is more stable than the 2 door but it is more likely to high center when compared to the 2 door.

On the trail in 4 low, all Rubiclons are traction limited, never torque limited, regardless of the engine choice. When in 4 low with a 4:1 transfer case gear reduction and about a 70:1 crawl ratio, and front and rear lockers, you can still spin all 4 wheels. So torque is not an issue, but traction can be.

Yesterday, I rented a JL Unlimited Sport with the 2.0 L turbo. First time driving the 2.0 L. I never thought the 4 cylinder belonged in a Wrangler. Boy was I wrong. It was very impressive. I can see why folks like the 2.0 L turbo. Much quicker than my diesel. But I do love the torque of the 3.0 L diesel.

Sponsored