Recent Topics
ATP AT-205 good engine cleaner ?
by kr_bitog
05/25/16 06:16 AM
List of VOA's from Russian Oil Club
by spiderbypass
05/25/16 01:43 AM
Quicksilver Prem Plus
by jmw116
05/25/16 01:39 AM
Creating white letter tires
by turtlevette
05/25/16 12:22 AM
Hypothetical Question On Incorrect Filters
by Triton_330
05/25/16 12:18 AM
Pennzoil $2.99/qt at tractor supply!
by Chris142
05/24/16 10:25 PM
Brother passed away this morning
by oilboy123
05/24/16 10:21 PM
Changed oil tonight - what a fine evening
by pacem
05/24/16 10:10 PM
Interesting observation on Ultra
by RusskiBoSS
05/24/16 08:48 PM
2009 Honda Civic Cooling fan running continuously
by Doog
05/24/16 08:31 PM
adhesive for pea gravel?
by xfactor9
05/24/16 08:19 PM
Micro guard Gl14609 150 hours
by robo339
05/24/16 08:02 PM
Newest Members
Hokie_Dave, ant3a, afterburnerbg, SupraSaiyan, Bighorn2500
57973 Registered Users
Who's Online
61 registered (97f150, asisensei, Asterix, ABerns, 7 invisible), 1223 Guests and 112 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
57973 Members
66 Forums
249375 Topics
4081761 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: 1393
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?
_________________________
1991 Chevrolet K1500 (4.3, 4x4, 86k miles)
2009 Chrysler T&C (85k, 3.8)

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


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 32771
Loc: Oz
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 Online   content


Registered: 11/09/08
Posts: 8252
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.
_________________________
2011 Toyota Camry, base, 6spd manual, 113k, hers
2010 Toyota Tundra double cab, 4.6L, auto, 122k, his

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


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 32771
Loc: Oz
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: 8048
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: 689
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: 1086
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 5w40 All Fleet/Motorcraft FL400S
2004 Saturn Ion: Delo 5w40/Wix 57082XP
2014 Polaris Ranger 570: Delo 5-40/Wix 51356

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


Registered: 07/21/02
Posts: 2844
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:
2014 M235i
1999 Wrangler Sahara
1995 318ti Club Sport
1996 Speed Triple

Wife's:
2004 X3 2.5i

Son's
2009 328i

Buy what makes you smile...

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


Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 11832
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 45K TGMO 0W-20
09 Forester 67K PU 5W-30
02 Accord 144K GOil 5W-30
01 Focus ZX3 112K M1 5W-20
95 BMW 318iC 155K Defy 10W-40

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


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 2270
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 (163k) - Pennzoil HM 10w30, Napa Gold 1516, Magnefine trans filter

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


Registered: 11/05/13
Posts: 2210
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: 2844
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:
2014 M235i
1999 Wrangler Sahara
1995 318ti Club Sport
1996 Speed Triple

Wife's:
2004 X3 2.5i

Son's
2009 328i

Buy what makes you smile...

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


Registered: 06/05/03
Posts: 13793
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 super-s 10w30
87 F250 delo 15w40
04 Tahoe super-s 5w30
Z400 Lucas 10w30
KLR250 Maxima 10w40
Can am maveric delo 5w40

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


Registered: 09/30/13
Posts: 6564
Loc: Midwest
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.
_________________________
2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee / 4.0 / 180k
PYB 10w40 w/ 16% 5w20 / Fram TG16
---
2002 Volvo S60/ 2.4t / 150k
Mobil 1 0w40 / Mahle OX 149 D

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


Registered: 10/30/05
Posts: 1393
Loc: South Dakota
Yep, a topless option is nice, not just in Jeeps either!
_________________________
1991 Chevrolet K1500 (4.3, 4x4, 86k miles)
2009 Chrysler T&C (85k, 3.8)

Top
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >