Nice repleating the marketing of Toyota.....that is far from the ultimate rock crawler. that is to funny. That's like saying the prius is better for the environment, meanwhile where they mine for the stuff for the batteries in Ontario, NASA uses to test vehicles because the earth is so destroyed there.
More proof that Jeep is the leader in 4x4 overland vehicles
- Thread starter marktutone
- Start date
Isn't that what overlanding really is? Taking a vehicle with gear to sustain yourself for multiple days down unmaintained dirt roads and trails?
:Wow1:
I would agree with another poster that the way most of us in North America we aren't really building for overland. We are doing things that increase the vehicles off-road ability at the expense of decreasing the durability and the load rating of the vehicle. I know that my JKU with armor, 37s winch, etc... definitely isn't as reliable as it was in stock form, and other than being able to take harder trails it really hasn't increased the expedition worthyness of my Jeep.
They were up untill end of 2010. The new generation starting in 2011 was a clone of the Nissan Patrol Y62 (basically Patrol with active hydraulic suspension).
Omar Brannstrom
Adventurer
Howdy
Not so many Wranglers here at different overland expos, anyway nice video
Not so many Wranglers here at different overland expos, anyway nice video
Best thread for a long time
I dont really grasp why the Jeep Wrangler unlimited Rubicon have so low payload as 892 lb (405kg) in US. My Rubicon unlimited 2013 has little more 1200 lb (545kg) and it is probably because I have bigger brakes that al export Wranglers have outside US. But it is still low for Dana 44 axles I think.
I wonder if Payload has something to due with toppspeed of the vehicle, hmm
I do understand that a Landrover Defender 110 ordinary or heavy duty have more in payload because it has similar axles as Dana 60 and then probably bigger stiffer coils and springs. With heavy duty payload is 3042 lbs (1380kg) and that is about three times more than the Rubicon, does that mean that Defenders axles are three times as big and sturdy, three times as big and sturdy coils and chocks. A axle three times a Dana 44 would be extremly hugh and much bigger than a Dana 60. It do not seem right with the payload.
So lets look at Jankel Jeep J8, look at the specs at the end (page 23), it has front Dana 44 (as Rubicon) and rear Dana 60 and it has a payload between 2.556lb (1164kg) to 3667 lbs (1664kg) we say about roughly 3 times the payload a Rubicon has. Is Dana 60 3 times as big and sturdy as Dana 44, I dont think so.
http://www.jankel.com/media/images/J8Brochurev4.4email_444.pdf
On page 3 they write.
"Heavy-duty air cooling, brakes, suspension and a sturdy Dana 60 rear axle" There are bigger brakes on Rubicon export models
"Significant reinforcement of chassis for outstanding payload and towing capability"
I think also Defender have sturdier chassi compared to the Rubicon and is probably a important factor to increased payload.
I am still think that a Rubicon is regarded as a car and the defender and J8 is regarded as a truck and have different payloads ratings because you offen drives a car different and faster than a truck. I wonder if J8 and Defender would have thoose Payloads if they were for sales in US classifieds as personal vehicles.
Havent Rubicon a rather strong chassi and axles if it is made to be bashed on rocks on Rubicon, I mean Rubicon has the same payload as many cars made for the city.
Topspeeds
Jeep J8: 140 kph (87 mph)
Defender 110: 145 kph
Rubicon unlimited: 180kph
That payload a Defender can have means that it has good brakes? A test made here say that it stopped at 54 meters in 100km/h and that is not so good. This test is from 2007, so now it is maybe better. Google translated
https://translate.google.se/transla...rbel-bei-den-haendlern-731019.html&edit-text=
The JKU has a lighter duty frame, lighter duty suspension, lighter duty transmission/transfer case, and lighter duty brakes. The axels are defiantly capable of more weight because if you look at GVWR the Defender and LC 70's are much heavier vehicles as well. Those two are built more like a full-size truck here in north america which are capable of similar payloads. It seems to be a lot of all those things that when combined together make a difference in the rating. It could be an impact to the differences in safety standards between trucks and SUV's. It could be Jeep not wanting to rate it higher so that almost anybody modifying, loading and using it can never sue them because they can always come back with the "well you were operating it above the GVWR, an operating condition not certified, studied, or authorised..."
I never understood how Jeep couldn't rate the Rubicon version here in the States with a higher payload capacity. But again the main things upgraded are the axles, suspension (and maybe brakes?). Leaving the other parts as the limiting step maybe. So in North America a Rubicon version will come with a lower payload capacity than a non Rubicon version due to the added weight of the modifications... I know confusing but again not everything related to payload capacity was upgraded...
I am not sure where you are located but if the safety thing is a big concern for you I think you will be pleasantly surprised by the safety, payload, and capability of the Toyota 4 Runner for overland travel. If I remember right it is about 680kg payload. Gets better fuel economy than any of those listed above allowing you to drive the same distance with less fuel weight (another plus to perceived payload capacity). Easily upgrades front and rear bumpers and locking differentials. Remember the payload spec on the JKU is for the base. Add on the hard top (vs soft top) and things go down. Now if you strip it down you could easily take off 100kg (lighter seats, no rear seats, soft top, full soft doors, etc. and your payload goes up allowing you to add on some critical stuff and keep payload good (remember larger tires kill payload very very fast).
I think a big thing being overlooked is how people are defining overland vs off road. Remember in a lot of popular overland regions around the world conditions are very different to modern countries. But this post was about the whole world not just the US, Canada, Mexico, Europe, etc.
I have to admit if it came down to me needing to buy a new vehicle in north america it would be between the JKU and 4 Runner with the 4 Runner probably winning. If I had the choice of any vehicle made it would be a Defender 110 HC or Landcruiser HDJ79.
I made a compromise and went with an old 1981 Jeep with 550kg payload capacity. Made a number of modifications and stripped some weight off bringing it in at 500kg payload empty and within the GVWR when loaded with enough water, food, camping equipment, fuel, and my heavy photography equipment for a fully supported 2 week trip solo. 1.2 weeks with a partner between restock. But like I say it a compromise to what is available internationally. Easy to maintain with a lot of the complicated bits removed for weight savings and improved reliability. It is easier to strip more weight off an older vehicle than a new vehicle though.
Edit:
Very well said. I think a lot of these forums here on this website have transitioned to more off-road performance and modifications that make it look more expedition than really the barebones needed. The more off road worthy you make it the more you take away from the ability for extended travel. It is about finding where the scale balances between the two. Example a rock crawler won't cross Africa without a whole lot of discomfort and support, while similarly a high payload capacity rear wheel drive F150 will have to stay on improved gravel roads and paved roads...
Maybe that is what has turned me off from the JKU more is what I see people doing with it and calling it overland. That and all these new vehicles being argued have so many add on accessories than the bare bones reliable features of classic vehicles. (I am not even a fan of the newer fancy Defender models...)
Last edited:
I would like to apologize for being the first one to responding to this thread. It should have stayed unanswered.
I have own a Nissan, Toyota, and now a Jeep and don't care for topics like this one. Most people can only see how their vehicle is so great with no flaws but can only see the flaws in other brands.
Unsubscribe to topic.
I have own a Nissan, Toyota, and now a Jeep and don't care for topics like this one. Most people can only see how their vehicle is so great with no flaws but can only see the flaws in other brands.
Unsubscribe to topic.
cruiseroutfit
Well-known member
Imagine just how boring the world would be if we all drove the same vehicle 
If people need to explain why their Jeep is so great then there must be something wrong. People in the US suffer from identity issues linked to their cars, and this could be one of those issues. So what is this thread really about? I just don't understand why so many Jeepers need to convince everyone else that their off-roader is so awesome. There are even "Jeep Only" clubs. ******?!? Just another way to make yourself feel more special than someone else. The cure to any of this is to travel the world and see it from outside the US and gain some perspective.
locrwln
Expedition Leader
Ummm, you do know that there are Toyota only clubs, Nissan only clubs, etc., etc., Right??
I happen to be part of a Toyota only club when I had my Toyota's.
First, only and last time I will probably ever be part of club, not my thing (nothing wrong with the people in the club, still good friends with them). I prefer to just go wheeling.
Jack
jlandon
Get Dirty.
Imagine just how boring the world would be if we all drove the same vehicle
Thankfully we don't!
Lets stir the pot.
What if we compared a Discovery, Cherokee, and FJC? All have atleast IFS and lots of traction control doodads.
And then a 70 series, Defender, and Rubicon? All have diff locks and solid axles.
Or are those not fair comparisons? I think they are on the global market. Two each from the big three in overlanding.
marktutone
Adventurer
Howdy
Maybe the new 2015 4runner TRD Pro is something.
4Runner TRD Pro
The ultimate rock crawler.
Take the low road, the high road and every road in between with the new 2015 4Runner TRD Pro. One of the last body-on-frame vehicles of its kind, this rock-crawling, mud-splattering beast is the ultimate off-road machine, equipped with Bilstein® remote-reservoir shocks, a new skid plate and unique 17-in. black alloy wheels
Just priced one. $47800.00. No thank you.
Here in newfoundland, the base 4 runner trail edition is 44,900. the base model rubicon unlimited is 42,100. The big difference is financing rates. The jeep comes in at about 245 bi weekly and the 4 runner is 430 for the same duration. OUCH. Mark another win on Jeeps tick box.
Not sure in other parts of the continent, but the Japanese always have out to lunch interest rates for financing and leasing.
Not sure in other parts of the continent, but the Japanese always have out to lunch interest rates for financing and leasing.
Just noticed something with the 4 runner, mounting a winch or armor on it is going to be a major PITA, and I am not sure how companies like ARB are going to make anything for the front end when the bumper wraps the whole front end. Mall crawler design there. The skid place looks like a flimsy piece of aluminum as well. almost like the early 90s IFS skids, a fly landing on it the right way would dent it. and make sure you rust check the frame, they are into the replacement of the chasis phase of the first run tundras here now. Chasis is swiss cheese in many of them around here. Great engineering there.