Most capable Rubicon?

[Headbarcode]

I view them all as being on a generally even playing field of capability. But each one has its own unique advantage/disadvantage...

The 2 door will more easily straddle an abbreviated rise without dragging belly, but it's shorter length will be less stable on steep inclines and drop-offs. It's also more nimble when bobbing and weaving trees and other obstacles.

The 4 door will rely more on its skids to straddle the same obstacle, but will handle steep areas with more stability.

The 392 adds more weight that can work against a jeep in certain situations, like a steep enough incline. When gravitational forces wanting to pull a vehicle down hill start to overwhelm the same forces that the tires need for traction, a lighter vehicle will have the advantage. But the added low end torque can come in handy. It can launch harder in a short distance to get momentum up that same incline. Also, being able to do a rear dig in 2hi to pivot around a sharp turn up a steep incline.

Sponsored

 

[aldo98229]

I didn’t know you could order a 2-door with a shorter wheelbase, or a 4-door with a longer wheelbase! Are those new additions for 2022?!? ?

Kidding aside, normally the 2-door is better on the trail: it is more maneuverable in tight spots and harder to high center. There are situations, though, like climbing over an obstacle, when a longer wheelbase helps.

Apparently, a longer wheelbase also helps in desert running, which Wranglers are not particularly well suited for. A Gladiator Mojave would be better for that.

Your biggest enemy on the trail is weight, though. The 392 adds a ton of weight with little appreciable benefit in most trail situations.

 

[aldo98229]

According to the Google: a Rubicon 392 4-door is 1,000 lbs heavier than a Rubicon 2-door!

5,100 vs 4,100 lbs.

 

[vegasblue]

I don't know that there is a good answer for this one. All depends on the trails you frequent. Here in the west, So Cal, Utah, Nevada, the four door has served me very well. I have been on the same trail with a two door and where I had "trouble" they did not and vise versa. I take my two kiddos and two puppers with me. I also take a fridge with me so I appreciate the extra space each and every time I go out. I think the Rubi with a 2.5-3.5 lift, 35" or 37" tires is great for most scenarios weekend adventurers experience. I prefer the four door, but love me a two door. I'd like to have 4:88 gears would be about it from me. At the end of the day, my Rubi can do things that I myself am not willing to do. I have to get to work on Monday.

 

[IdahoJOAT]

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 shorter wheelbase.

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.

I keep trying to tell people! Say it louder! lol

 

[AcesandEights]

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.

Until the mid-2000 there was no "long" wheelbase Jeep, and even then the LJ is only 5" longer (wheelbase) than the current two-door (it is the same overall length). The LJ has a 15" shorter wheelbase than the current four-door. The LJ is not a long wheelbase Jeep. It is an ever-so-slightly longer wheelbase Jeep.

Until the mid-2000 all of those trials were run, weekly, by short wheelbase Jeeps.

It's no wonder you see so many more four-door Jeeps on those trails. Jeep sells many more four-door Jeeps than they do two-door. Because you see more of what Jeep sells isn't necessarily indicative of what vehicle works best, but what people have been buying to run down the highway.

 

[entropy]

Hands down the 2 door. Specially if we are talking at stock form. 4 doors are heavier and tend to get stuck easier, their bellies drag a lot too. I've been wheeling with 2 doors and 4 doors and the 2 doors have an easier time 95% of the time.

However, 4 doors always get through when running bigger tires. Takes a bit more work, but they always get through.

Then if you are planning to really push the limits of the JL and start thinking about bigger tires like 37s the 2 doors can get quite sketchy on steep hills, even on 35s the 2 doors are sketchy. While the 4 doors tend to dominate in this scenario.

If you are doing some sketchy really steep hill with built Jeeps the longer wheelbase does win and the 2 doors sometimes need a rope for added safety. Rocky stuff doesnt bother me, but those steep hills over 35 degrees freak the sh!t out of me. But in all honesty, I would be freaked out with a 4 door anyway lol. You really have to push it to be somewhere where the 2 door is actually not safe, but it does happen.

Things only get truly sketchy with the 2 doors if you lift and add bigger tires. The wheelbase is a bit too short at that point. A built 4 door will get you anywhere, but stock form they are really handicapped compared to a 2 door.

So it all depends on what you wanna do to your Jeep. A low COG 2 door is an absolute beast, and really not unstable. A built 4 door is extremely capable and opens some options, lines that you wouldn't try with a 2 door. But if you want to keep it close to stock, 2 doors.

The 392 is too heavy. A piece of jewelry I would say. Overbuilt heavy 4 doors I always see them spinning tires when they're trying to climb technical terrain, specially when the rear tires need to get over a rock or something. so I would assume the 392 is gonna have similar issue. Lack of traction is usually what gets you stuck, not torque.

 

[entropy]

It's no wonder you see so many more four-door Jeeps on those trails. Jeep sells many more four-door Jeeps than they do two-door. Because you see more of what Jeep sells isn't necessarily indicative of what vehicle works best, but what people have been buying to run down the highway.

On youtube I see a lot of 4 doors. but when I go out on the trails I see a loooot of 2 doors. But yeah the 4 doors are becoming more popular.

 

[entropy]

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.

We have a lot of tight trails out west. It isnt just trees what makes trails tight. Very short roads, with sharp turns, and lots of rocks can create very technical situations. Much of the stuff I've done here in California have some really technical tight spots where the 2 doors shine.

 

[Zandcwhite]

Until the mid-2000 there was no "long" wheelbase Jeep, and even then the LJ is only 5" longer (wheelbase) than the current two-door (it is the same overall length). The LJ has a 15" shorter wheelbase than the current four-door. The LJ is not a long wheelbase Jeep. It is an ever-so-slightly longer wheelbase Jeep.

Until the mid-2000 all of those trials were run, weekly, by short wheelbase Jeeps.

It's no wonder you see so many more four-door Jeeps on those trails. Jeep sells many more four-door Jeeps than they do two-door. Because you see more of what Jeep sells isn't necessarily indicative of what vehicle works best, but what people have been buying to run down the highway.

5" makes a huge difference on steep climbs. Before the LJ, stretched wheel base 2 doors were the norm. Comp cut kits, gas tanks with clearance to move the axle back, offset perches etc were all very popular on the hard-core trails. I agree that the 4 door is almost too long, but I'd rather drag the skids than backflip coming out of micky's hot tub. Look at the majority of purpose built rock buggies/ rock bouncers that can literally build to any wheelbase they want. You'll find very few under 100" for a reason. I agree the JL is a big improvement over the tj, thanks to the 3" of extra wheelbase. In my experience, 105" to 115" is the optimal balance, but if I have to pick between 96 and 118, I'm going longer with a skid plate upgrade and bigger tires every time. It is funny when people argue the fact that you see more 4 doors on tough trails with the argument that they sell more 4 doors. You do realize that most JL/JLU owners don't wheel tough trails. The ones that do likely chose jl vs jlu for the trails.

 

[Fargo]

Until the mid-2000 there was no "long" wheelbase Jeep, and even then the LJ is only 5" longer (wheelbase) than the current two-door (it is the same overall length). The LJ has a 15" shorter wheelbase than the current four-door. The LJ is not a long wheelbase Jeep. It is an ever-so-slightly longer wheelbase Jeep.

Actually the LJ wheelbase is closer to 7" longer than the short JL (103.4-96.8= 6.6") It may not sound like much, but it is definitely noticable. I think most of the 'hardcore' wheelers out west say the ideal wheelbase is around 103"-110" So the 2 door comes up a little short and the 4 door is a little long. That is why the LJ is often referred to as the holy grail of Jeeps.

However, as the owner of a LJ I will say that driving trails with my buddy in his JLUR or previous JKUR, the longer 4 door certainly rides better and exhibits less side to side rocking than my LJ. Only in tighter and more rocky trails does the shorter length have the advantage in allowing me to choose better lines. I would love to see a 110" 2 door added to the JL lineup.

EDIT: I didn't see Zandcwhite post above when I wrote this. But his comments pretty much mirror what I was thinking.

 

[AcesandEights]

... It is funny when people argue the fact that you see more 4 doors on tough trails with the argument that they sell more 4 doors. You do realize that most JL/JLU owners don't wheel tough trails. The ones that do likely chose jl vs jlu for the trails.

As someone that has spent time on the Hammer trails, John Bull and most of the So Calif trails, I bought a JLR, not a JLUR. I haven't been in So Cal in a long time, but I never saw a stretched TJ, LJ or four-door out there, even when people were building them. I'm sure it's different now, but I'm not sure how much.

 

[John VonJeep]

I must give kudos to Ford for making the 2-door Bronco about 6 inches longer than a 2-door Jeep (wheelbase is about 3.5 inches longer).

That strikes me as a nearly perfect size for off-roading. I’ve owned a 2-door JK, and it can feel too short in some circumstances. If we’re strictly talking Jeeps, I prefer a 4-door.

 

[Zandcwhite]

As someone that has spent time on the Hammer trails, John Bull and most of the So Calif trails, I bought a JLR, not a JLUR. I haven't been in So Cal in a long time, but I never saw a stretched TJ, LJ or four-door out there, even when people were building them. I'm sure it's different now, but I'm not sure how much.

Both are great off road, I’m not saying the 2 door is incapable. It comes down to personal preference more than capability. The wheelbase and size of our wj was just about perfect in my opinion (109” if I recall). After lifting, clearancing fenders, relocating the gas tank, and 1 ton swap with coilovers in the rear the thing was a beast. Smooth, stable, comfy, plenty of room for camping gear even with the kid and the dog in the back seat. The JLUR on 37’s has gone anywhere I have pointed it, including the same obstacle that our tj on 35’s flopped on (Wj and xj walked the same line once we righted the tj and got it out of the way). Any JL in stock form will be more capable and handle better than a stock you, tj, or jk, there is definitely no bad choice here.

 

[OffroadCalling77]

@JeepViking13 I think it’s time for you to just place an order. If you’re waiting for 2022s that’s fine, but I better see a post from you the first day order banks open with a POC

Sponsored