Sahara vs Rubicon JL Technicals

[Jeepsterfreak]

The selec-trac also has booted CVs instead of U joints. So that is something to consider.

Sponsored

 

[ThirtyOne]

Moving up in models and options has a financial cost. People have been posting builds anywhere from the low 30's to 50's. More than a few pennies difference.

Which is why buyers should remain open minded and do their research. If a Jeep begins to move beyond an expected price/performance level, then people should be honest with themselves and consider other options. Of course, there are some who commit to certain decisions regardless of circumstances/facts, but they tend to make other poor life choices as well.

The JL Rubicon is a great car - a once-in-a-generation platform that will set the standard for years to come. But it is what it is, not what one may try to force as a substitute for other, more logical choices if it doesn't actually meet a set of needs.

People can buy what they want. If we went by logic only there would be like 5 cars on the market.

We definitely shouldn't judge people's vehicle choices and make assumptions about their life choices.

 

[Jeepsterfreak]

People can buy what they want. If we went by logic only there would be like 5 cars on the market.

Yes, and my 2017 Honda Accord sedan would be one of the five. Too much logic and not enough fun factor.

 

[JayV]

Here's what my Sahara/Rubicon decision boiled down to...

I really like the idea of Selec-Trac for on road driving in bad weather. But I know myself well enough to know that 35's are probably going to find their way into this vehicle at some point if not immediately. I've talked with more than 1 JK owner lamenting the 3.73 gears with their 35" tires. So how is the Sahara going to handle 35's with 3.45 gears? Maybe Jeep is subtly telling us "Hey that's not what we designed the Sahara for." Or maybe they have a trick up their sleeve that makes 35's play nicely with 3.45's. I don't know.

Also I knda figured I'd never regret the Rubicon. So that's what I went with.

 

[JayV]

Another thing I'm just thinking of...is there any reason to think that Selec-Trac won't play well with 35" or bigger tires? I have no clue. Figure somebody who knows more about this than me will have an informed answer.

 

[marwanjeeper]

Rubicon sucks in the desert always 4L and rear D-lock.
sahara in 2w and 4Hi and never let me down. My sahara is equipped with Eaton Lockers
for desert u need switch to disconnect ESB/ABS/Cruse control.

 

[PavementWarrior]

Here's what my Sahara/Rubicon decision boiled down to...

I really like the idea of Selec-Trac for on road driving in bad weather. But I know myself well enough to know that 35's are probably going to find their way into this vehicle at some point if not immediately. I've talked with more than 1 JK owner lamenting the 3.73 gears with their 35" tires. So how is the Sahara going to handle 35's with 3.45 gears? Maybe Jeep is subtly telling us "Hey that's not what we designed the Sahara for." Or maybe they have a trick up their sleeve that makes 35's play nicely with 3.45's. I don't know.

Also I knda figured I'd never regret the Rubicon. So that's what I went with.

I know the rubicon has high fenders so you can get 35's on stock suspension, does the Sahara have the high flairs? I am guessing it might need a lift and flairs for 35s and maybe buy some lower gears

 

[AZCrawl]

I know the rubicon has high fenders so you can get 35's on stock suspension, does the Sahara have the high flairs? I am guessing it might need a lift and flairs for 35s and maybe buys some lower gears

Only the Rubi has the highline fenders from the factory.

 

[JDaPP]

Another thing I'm just thinking of...is there any reason to think that Selec-Trac won't play well with 35" or bigger tires? I have no clue. Figure somebody who knows more about this than me will have an informed answer.

For the original selec-trac tire size was not a issue. With this new one not sure until it comes out. The other jeep iteration that had a similar selectrac (liberty kk) was only limited by the front independent suspension (can only lift so high so you can't put much bigger tires) not the transfer case. I doubt it will be a problem putting bigger tires on.

 

[wanderer]

Of course, that's comparing off the showroom floor. If you live in a rare area where you switch rapidly between dry high-traction surfaces and very loose/slippery surfaces then the 4-Auto in the Sahara could be nice. Add some Rubicon take-off tires and call it good. You'll get slightly better gas mileage too, with the 3.45 gears vs the 4.10 gears the Rubicon comes with. But, if you like going out into the desert or mountains solo or in small groups regularly and can afford it, then a Rubicon is unbeatable. If you always go in a group, then you don't even need lockers unless you're doing hard stuff all the time. I run solo on my 3-week backcountry trips and need every advantage I can get, so I have a Rubicon with a lift, 35" tires AND a winch... the lockers have saved me a few times

I agree whole heartedly I was just building a pretend sahara on line I realized that while thefulltime selct trac is nice It has only345 so to put 35 on it it would need a lift, 1500-2000 to add a winch steel bumpers and 1200 minium and then you are stillleft with 345 un less you regear 2k ( plus warranty ISSUES) and new tires of cousrse ( 5x 250 =1250) and spacers or wheels,say a 1000
it adds up for what you save. What would be the crawl ratio of a sahara

 

[Schmeegz]

Well I’m glad you are so very humble and aren’t judgmental in the least.

What I see a lot of is the Sahara being only (roughly) $2k less than a Rubi.... so if you are willing to spend 45 why not spend 47 and get all that the Rubicon offers.

But to each their own. Hope you enjoy your Sahara.

 

[Lurvis33]

Well I’m glad you are so very humble and aren’t judgmental in the least.

What I see a lot of is the Sahara being only (roughly) $2k less than a Rubi.... so if you are willing to spend 45 why not spend 47 and get all that the Rubicon offers.

But to each their own. Hope you enjoy your Sahara.

Personally I’m going with the Sahara because with the same features on the Rubicon (w/ painted body fenders) it’s $3,545 more. I know I won’t be rock crawling so I don’t need all the added upgrades the rubicon has. For that kind of money I could be putting that into new accessories, almost half the savings for a new ATV, or even a new camera.

 

[zogby]

What I see a lot of is the Sahara being only (roughly) $2k less than a Rubi.... so if you are willing to spend 45 why not spend 47 and get all that the Rubicon offers.

Because the Rubicon does not have features (SelecTrac and LSD) that I value. This has been stated many times in this and other threads.

Whenever I say "I am trying to figure out if the Sahara or Rubicon is the better car for me", some people seem to hear "I really want a Rubicon, but I might settle for a Sahara." Which is not at all the same thing.

 

[KaDeTime]

^^^This is the problem with most of the society, just because it’s the most expensive doesn’t mean is the best or the best deal. If you ever try to explain this you will be simply called “to poor to understand”. I saw this when I owned a Corvette, Cadillac, and defiantly the JEEP. (Just like apple X or 10 is "the best phone ever")

I’m waiting for a Blue Rubi JLU and will have to go with the light interior not to get the RED dash.

Happy Trails.

 

[bilash31]

^^^This is the problem with most of the society, just because it’s the most expensive doesn’t mean is the best or the best deal. If you ever try to explain this you will be simply called “to poor to understand”.
Happy Trails.

Agreed. This forum is currently pushing the boundary of worthfulness. Too many newbs with their keeping up with the joneses mentality flooding good threads with insults and opinionated facts. I've personally been stepping back and just cherry picking my info. Can't help those that don't want to be helped.

Sponsored