Recent Topics
Vortec 8.1L Oil Pressure/Filter question
by Burbman
15 minutes 14 seconds ago
1991 Miata Coolant for it?
by tezzzas
27 minutes 56 seconds ago
new obd2 readers
by WhyMe
Today at 11:02 AM
Costco Fell out with Amex
by DBMaster
Today at 10:59 AM
Gasoline vs Diesel Direct Injection
by SVTCobra
Today at 10:30 AM
Picking a different brand of gear oil.
by BrianF
Today at 10:19 AM
Bibi
by salesrep
Today at 10:09 AM
koenigsegg regara, 15000 hp, no gearbox!!!!
by Jeffy_D
Today at 09:55 AM
Clean and/or soak piston rings. Inline honda 4cyl?
by t1snwrbrdr12
Today at 08:46 AM
Observation with DI engine
by Swift101
Today at 08:43 AM
Any a.m. coffee drinkers ever quit ... not easy.
by LoneRanger
Today at 08:28 AM
Friction Modifier needed if track lock defective?
by OlDirty
Today at 07:17 AM
Newest Members
Burbman, Mrmead, JoeStang, mabon, ZPA6
53016 Registered Users
Who's Online
111 registered (29662, Al, Andrei, 1 FMF, AandPDan, Anduril, 4 invisible), 1725 Guests and 280 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
53016 Members
66 Forums
227466 Topics
3628623 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#3282204 - 02/14/14 04:57 PM Impractical vehicles
otis24 Offline


Registered: 10/30/05
Posts: 1152
Loc: South Dakota
I used to always want to own a Jeep. I know a few people who own them as their primary vehicle. IMHO, they have to be the most impractical vehicle out there. If someone could afford to just own a "fun" vehicle, this might be it. But, a Jeep can not haul many people, let alone do so as comfortably as a sedan.

A Jeep can haul little, if any, cargo. Not near as much as a small 4x4 pickup. An extended cab or crew cab pickup can haul small amounts of cargo and passengers as well.

Perhaps for a single person with no family or kids, a Jeep may make sense. Guessing an AWD/4WD SUV would be better. But for the most part, a Jeep seems to have little "practical" usefulness. Maybe thats the point of a Jeep?
_________________________
2005 Dodge Gr. Caravan (184k, 3.8)
2009 Chrysler T&C (85k, 3.8)

Top
#3282209 - 02/14/14 05:03 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
Shannow Offline


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 28038
Loc: a prisoner island
Yeah, I was taken by the Wragnlers when they started selling them again downunder.

Until I drove one, and tried to work out what to do with prams, baby seats, etc. etc.

Top
#3282210 - 02/14/14 05:04 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
supton Offline


Registered: 11/09/08
Posts: 5748
Loc: NH
I thought it was for "go anywhere". Small wheelbase, narrow, 4WD. For that purpose it's pretty practical. It does manage asphalt, and it manages fire roads, and it manages where the road becomes more of a hint.
_________________________
2004 VW Jetta Wagon, TDI, 5spd manual, 308kmile, his
2011 Toyota Camry, base, 6spd manual, 89k, hers
2010 Toyota Tundra double cab, 4.6L, auto, 92k

Top
#3282225 - 02/14/14 05:17 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
Shannow Offline


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 28038
Loc: a prisoner island
Yeah, but my BJ42 'Cruiser could carry more gear with the people to those places.

Top
#3282275 - 02/14/14 06:00 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
artificialist Offline


Registered: 09/23/07
Posts: 7220
Loc: Florida
Some people just have to have a car that looks a certain way.

Just look at how many people since 1998 have bought VW Beetles, even though those beetles have a small trunk and back seats that are awkward to access. You could buy a Jetta at a similar price and not have all that frustration.
_________________________
2010 Lancer Ralliart Sportback

Top
#3282285 - 02/14/14 06:12 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
datech Offline


Registered: 01/14/14
Posts: 639
Loc: us
The jeep was invented for a particular duty, carrying just a few people, not much cargo except their personal firearms, over rugged terrain, often off-road.

It's still good for that but it's not going to compete with a modern highway vehicle.

Top
#3282287 - 02/14/14 06:13 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
MinamiKotaro Offline


Registered: 08/01/12
Posts: 736
Loc: TN
I wanted a Wrangler, too, until I test-drove one (circa 1998). Uncomfortable, rode poorly, handled poorly, slow, lousy mileage, low tow rating, no cargo room, no passenger room, and, as they come stock, useless for any real off-roading.

Frankly, I couldn't think of a single positive thing to say about it. Newer ones would have to be better. I hope.
_________________________
1967 VW Beetle: Mag1 5-40 Fleet/NAPA 41516
2004 Saturn Ion: GT1 5-30 blend/Wix 57082-XP
2014 Polaris Ranger 570: Mobil1 5-50/Wix 51356

Top
#3282300 - 02/14/14 06:25 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
MCompact Offline


Registered: 07/21/02
Posts: 2061
Loc: KY
In 2002 I bought a 1999 Wrangler Sahara in order to nullify a potential line of attack from a political opponent. Before I bought it I fully intended to sell it after the election. As it turned out, my wife, son, and I all became quite fond of it and I ended up selling my 1993 Pathfinder SE instead. Over the subsequent 15 years I've added Bilstein HDs, Hella E-Code headlamps, OSRAM Night Breaker Plus bulbs, a Banks Torque Tube exhaust manifold, and MB Quart speakers. We all still love it and I often drive it on longer trips for both work and pleasure. That said, to each his own...
_________________________
Mine:
1995 318ti Club Sport
1975 2002A
2007 Mazdaspeed3
1999 Wrangler Sahara
1996 Speed Triple

Hers:
2009 328i

Son's
2004 X3 2.5i

Top
#3282311 - 02/14/14 06:36 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
fdcg27 Offline


Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 10045
Loc: OH
For the way most of us use cars, this Jeep would be as practical as anything else.
They are fun to drive and they do have a unique look.
If you want one, then why not?
If you don't you should maybe buy a Fit.
If you want the best of both worlds, then see your Subaru dealer.
My point is that there are a lot of choices out there.
Pick one that suits you and your use.
Many different choices for many different users for that daily commute.
_________________________
12 Accord LX 30K TGMO 0W-20
09 Forester 67K PU 5W-30
02 Accord 134K GOil 5W-30
01 Focus ZX3 101K Meijer Syn 5W-20
95 BMW 318iC 150K Defy 10W-40

Top
#3282330 - 02/14/14 06:58 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
jeepman3071 Online   content


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 1971
Loc: Storrs, Connecticut
I chose a Cherokee over a Wrangler simply because I can haul more people and cargo. I can also tow more, and the purchase price was cheaper. I somehow get better mpg than a Wrangler as well, I think it is due to the even worse aerodynamics of the Wrangler.

That said, I know many people who have them and love them. If you've ever driven to the beach on a hot sunny day with no doors or top you will want one.

I know a guy who has one as a daily driver. He pulls a jet-ski trailer with it in the summer, and uses it to plow his driveway in the winter.

I wouldn't own one as a daily driver but I can see why people would. shrug
_________________________
2000 Jeep Cherokee Sport 4.0L (149k) - 5 qts PYB 5w30 + 1 qt PP 5w30, Napa Gold 1085, Magnefine trans filter

Top
#3282337 - 02/14/14 07:07 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: MCompact]
Ramblejam Offline


Registered: 11/05/13
Posts: 1025
Loc: Kentucky
Originally Posted By: MCompact
In 2002 I bought a 1999 Wrangler Sahara in order to nullify a potential line of attack from a political opponent.


You need to elaborate on this...

Top
#3282355 - 02/14/14 07:35 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: Ramblejam]
MCompact Offline


Registered: 07/21/02
Posts: 2061
Loc: KY
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: MCompact
In 2002 I bought a 1999 Wrangler Sahara in order to nullify a potential line of attack from a political opponent.


You need to elaborate on this...


I anticipated that my opponent would bring up the fact that I didn't drive an American-made vehicle; the Wrangler stopped that tactic in its tracks.
_________________________
Mine:
1995 318ti Club Sport
1975 2002A
2007 Mazdaspeed3
1999 Wrangler Sahara
1996 Speed Triple

Hers:
2009 328i

Son's
2004 X3 2.5i

Top
#3282381 - 02/14/14 08:23 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
Chris142 Offline


Registered: 06/05/03
Posts: 12123
Loc: apple valley, ca
I daily drove mine for 10 yrs. It gives me an excuse to not get parts,deliver parts with it or more than 1 customer lol
_________________________
02 Wrangler qsgb 5w30
87 F250 Diesel Mag1 5w40
04 Tahoe super-s 5w30
Z400 Lucas 10w30
KLR250 Maxima 10w40
Polaris Trailblazer delo 5w40

Top
#3282386 - 02/14/14 08:27 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
dlundblad Offline


Registered: 09/30/13
Posts: 3414
Loc: Indiana
Wranglers are not very practical at all.. about like an Audi TT, Mazda Miata, VW Bug or any small 2 door. You buy them because they are fun. Even with a new JK, our family of 4 is cramped in there like clowns. Heaven forbid you go to the store and buy things with the expectation of taking it all home.. Made the mistake of getting a shop vac 30 miles from home once.

Doorless/ topless is awesome though.
_________________________
popcorn




Top
#3282397 - 02/14/14 08:41 PM Re: Impractical vehicles [Re: otis24]
otis24 Offline


Registered: 10/30/05
Posts: 1152
Loc: South Dakota
Yep, a topless option is nice, not just in Jeeps either!
_________________________
2005 Dodge Gr. Caravan (184k, 3.8)
2009 Chrysler T&C (85k, 3.8)

Top
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >