buckshot500

I love my 1990 YJ. That POS 4.2L has tons of torque. Of course I put an MC2100 on it.

Mine isn't really stock, except for the entire drivetrain.

Eventually I will put some D-60's & a D-300 in it.

ncfoothills

I got a 04 ram wit da hemi. Flowmasters of course. sounds totally awesome! just love winding it out getting on the superslab! truck good as new though...

N20jeep

yes the 3.8 makes more power than the 4.0. but the the massive weight of the JK, it still feels underpowered.

i build and drive these things daily. and my biggest complaint along with the complaint of just about every JK owner we have as a customer is the lack of power.

one of the main reasons the 4.0 was not used is because of the crash test ratings. the 3.8 allows more of a crumple zone during a head on collision, so the chance of the engine being pushed through the firewall is greatly reduced compared to the long block of the 4.0.

Morat

You're lucky that there are so many stock Wranglers around, in ten years time there will be thousands of them to buy up cheap and turn into trail monsters.

headrian

All the wranglers ive ever owned have been tough and lasted a long time. its the only kind of jeans I wear; but i prefer the XJs.

Rock Toy

Yes, a V8 should have been offered, but the 4.0 liter V6 used in the Caliber has more horse power and torque at lower rpms than the Chrysler 3.8 V6

Gee oh Dee

I'm not familiar with the Caliber at all. I just know that the Wranglers would be so much...better(?) with a V8 option.

XxXJ99xX

I can agree there totaly underpowered. I test drove a 2007 with the 3.8 and a 6-speed. Dropped a gear and sure it had alittle pull to it but it just didnt feel the same and besides it sounded way to tamed for me. Even from the factory 4.0's were screamers...it just didnt feel like it had much to it. Test drove a 2003 TJ 5-speed and that felt so much more like a jeep...honestly I think there slowly turning into mall crawlers...the new interiors on the 2010 jk's sort of prove my point.

Tural

my friend, 31x10.50 doesn't determine trail ready. i've seen plenty 235s that were trail ready. and i'm not really arguing about the quality of the jeep. i'm arguing about the quality of wrangler "*****". people don't buy an XJ because it's a symbol of offroading. they buy it because it has potential and it's practical. TJ has the same potential. but a lot of people buy a TJ as a convertible CAR that will boost up their macho ego. i love seeing wranglers off-roading, stock or not.
but you can't just pull one out of the box and hit moab to feel like a big man. that's not the way off-roading works.

Tural

as a mopar guy i completely agree with you. i'd rather stick a mopar engine under my hood. and chrysler buying the jeep name was an icing on the cake.
when i think of mopar, i actually think of a cuda, challenger, ram, jeep, hemi, cummins and even a neon (i hate neons)
there's nothing with being brand specific or supporting you favorite company.

Gee oh Dee

Correct, just cuz you can stuff 31s under a vehicle doesn't deem it the best, most trail ready vehicle. What I was getting at was that, out of the box, you can indeed take a factory Wrangler places a factory XJ can't go. And that is taking driver's skill completely out of the equasion.

Lets put it this way, if you took "The Stig" and had him run both a factory XJ and a factory Wrangler, given they both have the 4.0 and the same style trans (auto vs manual), you'd find the Wrangler more capable.

Again, I own both, so in the end of MY day, it really doesn't matter to me. I'm just telling it like I see it.

I assume you meant there is nothing wrong with being brand specific, and I completely agree with you. But on the other hand, I feel people sell themselves short when they stick to only one brand. I agree that mopar had and has good cars, but so do others. And thats all I was saying.

Tural

well, i kinda agree with that and i kinda don't. if i drove a honda, i would have no problem putting a nissan motor in it. provided the nissan motor is better. but i take too much pride in my jeep and my mopar. i know a 350 will fit way easier than a 5.7 (fake) hemi under the hood of an XJ, but in order to stick to my brand, i will walk the extra mile to make the hemi fit. and besides, you would probably disagree, but i think a 5.7 hemi is way better than LT1. maybe not for a 5 second car, but definitely for my XJ. and on the top of all of that, a lot of states require for the motor to be brand specific and from a newer year vehicle.
as for the stock tj vs stock xj. tj might go more places, but it does cost quite a bit more. having said that, my wife has been gnawing at the back of my neck about trading my dakota for a tj, and i think i might do that just for her.

Gee oh Dee

My fiance bought our TJ before we were officially together. [known each other since 2nd grade]

Aaaanyway....

..thats my point. Stock for stock. You may pay more, but cost was never the point. The point was the Wrangler is indeed more capable "out of the box." Just because something costs more doesn't mean its less capable, or "trail ready."

Crawler

cause wranglers don't rust out easy and aren't a pain in the ***** to work on

Gee oh Dee

I've never found an XJ to be difficult.

They do share the same 4.0...