One more reason auto is vastly superior to stick in crawling

[MrMischief]

Oh lordy... Please take this photo down before the enviro-wackos get a hold of it and it's used to close more trails.

https://treadlightly.org/learn/recreation-tips/4x4/

In soft terrain, go easy on the gas to avoid wheel spin, which can cause rutting.

Sponsored

 

[MrMischief]

I asked ChatGPT. You'd really think AI would prefer automation, but I guess AI prefers control.

A manual transmission is generally considered to be better for off-roading in a Jeep because it provides more control and flexibility in navigating rough terrain. With a manual transmission, the driver can select the appropriate gear for a given situation, such as a low gear for climbing steep hills or a high gear for descending. Additionally, manual transmissions often have a "crawling" gear that allows for extremely slow movement, which can be useful when navigating rocky or uneven terrain. Finally, manual transmissions tend to be more durable than automatics, which is an important consideration when off-roading.

 

[mgroeger]

Oh lordy... Please take this photo down before the enviro-wackos get a hold of it and it's used to close more trails.

https://treadlightly.org/learn/recreation-tips/4x4/

Then he will start a thread asking which transmission causes more trail closures.

 

[J0E]

I asked ChatGPT. You'd really think AI would prefer automation, but I guess AI prefers control.

Damn, you beat me too it. ChatGPT was full when I tried. That sounds like the right answer. The JL clutch is known for it's durability. And I forgot a high gear for descending.

The media is right about ChatGPT:

* It can replace humans.
* That answer is indistinguishable from an expert human. It's Turing complete.
* I'll start asking question to it, it's certainly more civil.

Are you saying that you're running 38s on stock gearing? Yep... this guy's Jeep is going to burn down.

What about the @Headbarcode running 40's on stock gears?

40x13.5's. Still rocking the stock 4.10's.

I've personally found the 2.0/8-speed to be an overall great combo. The low and mid range torque of this relatively lightweight engine makes the Jeep feel lighter than it really is. My JLUR is sitting 5.5" above stock height in the front and 6" in the rear, with 40x13.5's. Still rocking the stock 4.10's.

A few months back, I was at Windrock Park in Tennessee. I hit a couple of trails that included 7 and 8 rated obstacles and it walked right over everything with ease, and I was purposely aiming for the harder lines. Even though it had just rained hard the day before, I didn't need to bump it at all.

The biggest thing that makes me hesitant to swap to shorter gears, other than putting more money into these axles than I already have, is ending up with too little of gear mesh due to the smaller diameter pinion gear. I'll wait till I upgrade to a set of 60's, which will have larger ring gears to better support 5.13's or 5.38's.

4" lift and 38x13.5's...

5.5"/6" lift and 40x13.5's...

Or @TJEli with 3.6, 38s and 4.10s hits D8 ?

 

[Kreepin1]

Have you looked at the "Better Gear Calculator" and more importantly the "Tire Drop vs PSI" website he created? You are gonna need a whole lot more gifs...

I have to say I enjoyed puzzling over it in a "Damn, look at this train wreck" kinda way.

Oh, wait... was that another ad hominem attack?

 

[Rogues Gambit]

Oh I can; my wife can't drive a manual.

so glad Im single

 

[grimmjeeper]

Have you looked at the "Better Gear Calculator" and more importantly the "Tire Drop vs PSI" website he created? You are gonna need a whole lot more gifs...

I have to say I enjoyed puzzling over it in a "Damn, look at this train wreck" kinda way.

Ok. He made a website.

So what?

 

[Kreepin1]

Ok. He made a website.

So what?

As the person who built what I consider to be the pre-eminent gear calculator on the interweb, I thought you might get a chuckle. Like where he predicts a 37" tire will have over 3 square feet of contact patch at 3 psi. Coincidentally, a 43" tire will have the same contact patch.

 

[grimmjeeper]

As the person who built what I consider to be the pre-eminent gear calculator on the interweb, I thought you might get a chuckle. Like where he predicts a 37" tire will have over 3 square feet of contact patch at 3 psi. Coincidentally, a 43" tire will have the same contact patch.

Regardless of whether you're a fan or not doesn't change the fact that he's giving out bad advice and basically shouting at people until they just walk away and he claims "victory".

Bad advice is bad advice.

I have probably the most popular gear ratio calculator on the internet. But that doesn't mean anything. It doesn't have the slightest impact on whether my advice is good or not.

 

[Kreepin1]

Regardless of whether you're a fan or not doesn't change the fact that he's giving out bad advice and basically shouting at people until they just walk away and he claims "victory".

Bad advice is bad advice.

Seems like you misunderstood me. You have a great web resource. His is a joke.

I have probably the most popular gear ratio calculator on the internet. But that doesn't mean anything. It doesn't have the slightest impact on whether my advice is good or not.

On this I disagree. When Billa Vista talks about Dana 60's, I listen. When you talk about gearing, I listen. It pays to listen to experts who most always provide good advice. The issue is not popularity, but the expertise you put into your site.

 

[grimmjeeper]

Seems like you misunderstood me. You have a great web resource. His is a joke.


On this I disagree. When Billa Vista talks about Dana 60's, I listen. When you talk about gearing, I listen. It pays to listen to experts who most always provide good advice. The issue is not popularity, but the expertise you put into your site.

I see where I misunderstood you.

For the record, no one should listen to me because I wrote a java craplet that does arithmetic for you and has a bunch of data conveniently stored.

In this case, my opinion is backed up by solid engineering. That's what you should believe in. Not me.

In other cases I'm likely to be talking out my ass or just goofing around.

 

[J0E]

As the person who built what I consider to be the pre-eminent gear calculator on the interweb, I thought you might get a chuckle. Like where he predicts a 37" tire will have over 3 square feet of contact patch at 3 psi. Coincidentally, a 43" tire will have the same contact patch.

Take a high school physics class and you'll understand, maybe. Patch size is invariant to tire size with a very small spring factor error of the sidewalls. You need to define patch size to include the bridged and cantilevered tread, but that's what must people know.

I'll update that some day to use piecewise splines so it will be 97% accurate and account for the small sidewall factor.

Seems like you misunderstood me. You have a great web resource. His is a joke.

I agree grimmjeeper.com/gears.html is a great site. Why is mine a joke? You can get Rubicon, Sport, AT, MT numbers with very little to need input needed. It makes it easy to compare different values like I did with sport vs Ruby.

Maybe because I have cert it's a joke?
View attachment 707286

Most ppl don't know they have no data at risk on his site, so a cert is not required.

I've looked at his code and can tell you his was significantly more work to write than mine.

 

[Kreepin1]

Take a high school physics class and you'll understand, maybe. Patch size is invariant to tire size with a very small spring factor error of the sidewalls. You need to define patch size to include the bridged and cantilevered tread, but that's what must people know.

I'll update that some day to use piecewise splines so it will be 97% accurate and account for the small sidewall factor.

Sigh. One of the first things they teach engineers is to not blindly trust your calculator (or your computer). It is critical to look at the numbers and see if they make sense.

The 37x12.5R17 Toyo Open Country you attempt to model has an aspect ratio of 12.5". The tread width will be less than that, but let's be generous and say that tire is 12" wide. To lay down 463 square inches of contact patch that patch would have to be over 38" long. Maybe I slept through the part of my physics class that explained how that was possible with a 37" diameter tire...

The fact is that taller tires lay down longer contact patches all else being equal.

The fact is that off road tires have heavy duty sidewalls and tread that have a significant contribution to load bearing capacity at low pressures. I run 5-7 psi when I take my big dog on the trail and I assure you the contact patch is significantly smaller than your joke of a website suggests.

 

[grimmjeeper]

I'm just too lazy to set up a cert on mine. It's on my to do list.

But yeah, there's nothing on the server side collecting any data. The save button saves data in your browser. I don't even have any cookies.

 

[mgroeger]

I'm just too lazy to set up a cert on mine. It's on my to do list.

But yeah, there's nothing on the server side collecting any data. The save button saves data in your browser. I don't even have any cookies.

Here you go...

Sponsored