JK Clearance Seems Deceptive - Page 3 - Jeep Wrangler Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK General Discussion Forum

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on WranglerForum.com
Old 12-05-2011, 10:38 PM   #61
MTH
Fun Killing Ninja
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbwwolf

Coming from a lawyer?
Maybe . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by kjeeper10
Jk wins
Your old TJ, I presume?

Holy hell that thing is ugly. I'll never understand that look. It's like taking a Vette, lifting it 10", and adding MTs.

__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-05-2011, 10:45 PM   #62
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
kbwwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 12,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post
Maybe . . .
Bad phrasing. Wasn't a question...

__________________


"What we see depends mainly on what we look for."
—John Lubbock
kbwwolf is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-05-2011, 10:45 PM   #63
Ex Navy man
 
rics1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Bristol, Tn
Posts: 4,767
Unfortunately it is too hard to answer the question. You can look at the axle numbers that are published to see that. And the JK's axles do sit higher but that is the only numbers given. The only way you can get real numbers is to have a X/sport in both the JK/TJ with the smallest wheels each offers with the lowest coil ratio then have two Rubi's with the largest wheel each offers stock with the largest coil springs each offer and then you might come close.

But the problem is; it is nearly impossible to find stock Jeeps like that to get their measurements. It all depends on the tires and the coil springs and they vary dramatically. You can have two stock JK's sitting beside each other and won't get the same numbers let alone a JK and TJ. I have stiff 19/60 coils on mine and a stock Rubi pulled up to me and looked small to mine.

We already determined that they have monkeys go back to get the coils at the factory to put on a Wrangler with no rhyme or reason. This is nearly impossible to get the real numbers but I bet they aren't that far off if you could get two with similar tire size and coils stiffness.
__________________
2010 Dark Charcoal Pearl Jeep Wrangler Sport S Automatic
4.88 Yukon w/Trac-Lok rear and Eaton ELocker Front - Synergy Gussets - B&M 70264 Trans Cooler
BDS 3" lift - BDS Fox 2.0 Racing Shocks
XHD front Bumper - Trektop NX - Goodyear MT/R w/Kevlar 35X12.5X15 on MB Chaos 5 Wheels - Thrush Turbo Muffler

Become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
rics1997 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-05-2011, 10:48 PM   #64
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 33,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH

Maybe . . .

Your old TJ, I presume?

Holy hell that thing is ugly. I'll never understand that look. It's like taking a Vette, lifting it 10", and adding MTs.
First lowered Tj I've seen.

Jk is another story
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS/Artec front armor w/ Currie upper bushings=Frankinjeep from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quick Reply
Old 12-05-2011, 11:01 PM   #65
Jeeper
 
RedRubi2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Puget Sound, Wa
Posts: 568
Whats more amusing than anything to me is the fact that I'm getting treated as though I am committing some sort of espionage or conspiring against the JK wrangler....truthfully its becoming quite comical how I can come to a forum whose purpose is to disseminate information related to the intended topic and literally get bashed for asking a simple question that had some importance to me.

@ daggo - You first bash me because "one measurement by one person with zero control is hardly the basis for a factual statement" and then when I suggest that more people get involved in the discussion to provide more data you come up with another negative response "You make a claim and then expect other people to do all the work to back your claim." I don't know what your deal is but I am reasonably certain at this point that your personality type is such that you only listen to what you want to hear. Regardless of how much factual information could be provided to you here, you would find a way to allow your narrowminded thought process to continue.

"You are completely wrong about the JK. While it does have the most creature comforts of any Wrangler to date, it is also by far the most capable off road Wrangler ever made." - Once again you misunderstand my post and go off on a completely irrelevant tangent. Please find for me in my post where I said that it was not the most capable Wrangler ever made? Because sir I agree with you in that regard...what I said was "JK Wrangler was designed for the masses and to appeal to a wider range of people that are more concerned with onroading than offroading" and that fact stands...it might be more capable offroad but don't even for one second try to tell me that the intent behind the JK was not to appeal to a wider customer base and provide increased onroad handling characteristics. It just so happened that they were able to increase the offroad capability as well....all of this is a positive thing, I'm not trying to say that it isnt good that this happened, but rather that it simply happened. Why can't you just accept this?

@kjeeper - What you did was provide data that was not easily obtained until now. You probably saved many other future and past jeepers from the hours of online research to find this out that it took me. So kudo's to you!

The request for other TJ'rs and JK'rs with stock vehicles to provide us numbers still stands. Lets see if we can get a sample of 5 different TJ's and JK's to compare to give a little more firm handle on the measurement error.

Thanks,
Shawn
RedRubi2012 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-05-2011, 11:03 PM   #66
Ex Navy man
 
rics1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Bristol, Tn
Posts: 4,767
.
__________________
2010 Dark Charcoal Pearl Jeep Wrangler Sport S Automatic
4.88 Yukon w/Trac-Lok rear and Eaton ELocker Front - Synergy Gussets - B&M 70264 Trans Cooler
BDS 3" lift - BDS Fox 2.0 Racing Shocks
XHD front Bumper - Trektop NX - Goodyear MT/R w/Kevlar 35X12.5X15 on MB Chaos 5 Wheels - Thrush Turbo Muffler

Become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
rics1997 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-05-2011, 11:09 PM   #67
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
kbwwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 12,128
^^^ Can't find fault with this method. Just me.

EDIT: Although it seems to have been deleted. Looked good when it was there...
__________________


"What we see depends mainly on what we look for."
—John Lubbock
kbwwolf is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-05-2011, 11:27 PM   #68
Ex Navy man
 
rics1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Bristol, Tn
Posts: 4,767
lol it was alright way but coil stiffness still came into play. Still would have to have matching weak/stiff coil/spring for the number to be good. Didn't think about that when I posted so deleted it
__________________
2010 Dark Charcoal Pearl Jeep Wrangler Sport S Automatic
4.88 Yukon w/Trac-Lok rear and Eaton ELocker Front - Synergy Gussets - B&M 70264 Trans Cooler
BDS 3" lift - BDS Fox 2.0 Racing Shocks
XHD front Bumper - Trektop NX - Goodyear MT/R w/Kevlar 35X12.5X15 on MB Chaos 5 Wheels - Thrush Turbo Muffler

Become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
rics1997 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-05-2011, 11:58 PM   #69
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
kbwwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 12,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by rics1997 View Post
lol it was alright way but coil stiffness still came into play. Still would have to have matching weak/stiff coil/spring for the number to be good. Didn't think about that when I posted so deleted it
When it comes to mechanical Q's, I trust you.
__________________


"What we see depends mainly on what we look for."
—John Lubbock
kbwwolf is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 12:33 AM   #70
Jeeper
 
cekowalski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 193
Oh good, another "older is better than new" or "new is no improvement" thread!



No offense to the OP or anyone else... I just can't help but point out the irony and make light of it, maybe if for no other reason to try to lighten things up a bit here. It isn't an obvious statement like those two above, or the threads titled "new engine stinks."

In fact it is something I would probably ask if I noticed it (the appearance of the TJ vs JK). Sounds to me like this one is a close race! Not sure I care that much given my mall crawling ways (I offroad for fun, not religious reasons), but interesting. But I personally don't see Jeep lowering the JK by a small margin and then lying about it, nor do I see them getting away with it for so many years. I think they have brilliantly played to their base enthusiasts while growing the market (and even aging with the guys who bought a CJ when it was new). And that is good for us, it keeps the product street legal and accessible, and affordable.

Anyway, this forum makes me laugh a lot because there are so many situations where people are arguing about something new, supposedly improved, and there are those who say (paraphrasing a bit) "I don't want a faster Jeep" or "I don't want a more comfortable Jeep" or (my favorite) "I don't want a Jeep that doesn't leak."

Clearance is for sissies anyway... Real, skilled off-roaders don't need it! I don't want a Jeep with more clearance! :-)
__________________
2012 Crush JKU Sahara: Ordered 8/30, "C" status until 10/10, "D" until 10/15, built 10/27, unloaded 11/02, and delivered on 11/05!
cekowalski is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 12:43 AM   #71
Jeeper
 
RedRubi2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Puget Sound, Wa
Posts: 568
@ Rics1997 - I like that you are actually thinking about this and appreciate your input. You are correct that the tires will have an effect because of the fact that while on the Jeep they are not perfectly circular but rather have a flatspot at point where they interface with the ground so the rubber type and inflation pressures will also come into play....even though both Jeeps have different weights its probably safe to assume that the out of roundness is pretty similar from TJ to JK so comparing radius to radius is most likely fairly accurate. Springs are another issue and while the spring constant will probably vary from model to model X, Sport, Sahara, Rubicon I ensure you that if anything the Rubicon will have the longest springs. As I mentioned before, our original test was skewed to be favorable to the JK because we compared a JK Rubicon with the longest possible factory springs to a TJ Sport which presumably had average to shorter springs than the TJ Rubicon. The expected outcome based on this should have shown the JK to have greater frame clearance when taking the tires out of the equation but it was the opposite whereas the TJ was .45" higher for its transfer case skid. I totally agree that this is just one measurement and to make a conclusive finding we would need more data...which is where other forum members could come in.

If you really are that concerned about the deformation of the tires and of the comparison between models and their respective spring rates then a better way to take the measurement would be to get a string that is the length of the wheelbase and have a person at each end to position that end to rest on the top of the front and rear axle housing respectively and to pull it taut. A third person could then carefully measure from the string to the frame rail. After that a caliper could be used to measure the diameter of each axle tube, and the radius could be calculated and added to the previously obtained axle to frame measurement to obtain the true frame height difference.

Thanks,
Shawn
RedRubi2012 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 07:27 AM   #72
The Bad Guy

WF Supporting Member
 
daggo66's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NJ exile living in Baltimore
Posts: 22,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012 View Post
Whats more amusing than anything to me is the fact that I'm getting treated as though I am committing some sort of espionage or conspiring against the JK wrangler....truthfully its becoming quite comical how I can come to a forum whose purpose is to disseminate information related to the intended topic and literally get bashed for asking a simple question that had some importance to me.
You seem to think that the purpose of this forum is for everyone else to provide you with the information. You came up with the hypothesis, you should provide the data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012 View Post
@ daggo - You first bash me because "one measurement by one person with zero control is hardly the basis for a factual statement" and then when I suggest that more people get involved in the discussion to provide more data you come up with another negative response "You make a claim and then expect other people to do all the work to back your claim." I don't know what your deal is but I am reasonably certain at this point that your personality type is such that you only listen to what you want to hear. Regardless of how much factual information could be provided to you here, you would find a way to allow your narrowminded thought process to continue.
I am not "bashing" you personally. I am attacking your hypothesis. It's just a friendly argument and we happen to be on opposing sides. My thought process is far from being "narrowminded".

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012 View Post
"You are completely wrong about the JK. While it does have the most creature comforts of any Wrangler to date, it is also by far the most capable off road Wrangler ever made." - Once again you misunderstand my post and go off on a completely irrelevant tangent. Please find for me in my post where I said that it was not the most capable Wrangler ever made? Because sir I agree with you in that regard...what I said was "JK Wrangler was designed for the masses and to appeal to a wider range of people that are more concerned with onroading than offroading" and that fact stands...it might be more capable offroad but don't even for one second try to tell me that the intent behind the JK was not to appeal to a wider customer base and provide increased onroad handling characteristics. It just so happened that they were able to increase the offroad capability as well....all of this is a positive thing, I'm not trying to say that it isnt good that this happened, but rather that it simply happened. Why can't you just accept this?
its no secret that the JK Wrangler was designed for the masses and to appeal to a wider range of people that are more concerned with onroading than offroading. I hate this fact just as much as the next enthusiast

Maybe you didn't say the exact words, but you certainly implied it by the above statement.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012 View Post
@kjeeper - What you did was provide data that was not easily obtained until now. You probably saved many other future and past jeepers from the hours of online research to find this out that it took me. So kudo's to you!

The request for other TJ'rs and JK'rs with stock vehicles to provide us numbers still stands. Lets see if we can get a sample of 5 different TJ's and JK's to compare to give a little more firm handle on the measurement error.
I still don't understand what prevents you from doing this yourself.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012 View Post
Springs are another issue and while the spring constant will probably vary from model to model X, Sport, Sahara, Rubicon I ensure you that if anything the Rubicon will have the longest springs.
This statement is completely inaccurate.
__________________
Tom

"I've got two things in this world, my balls and my word and I don't break them for no one."
daggo66 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 07:35 AM   #73
The Bad Guy

WF Supporting Member
 
daggo66's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NJ exile living in Baltimore
Posts: 22,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012 View Post
and you can actually see this by looking at a JK hood vs a TJ hood. The TJ hood is much thicker....so assuming that the distance between the ground and top of the hood has increased then you can see that in order to use the thinner JK hood which makes the distance between the hood and fender smaller that the fenderwell would have indeed gotten taller also and able to accept those bigger 32" meats.

You can compare the sizes of the fenderwell openings yourself if you are so inclined, and I certainly wouldn't question it. In fact this is now starting to make me wonder what these numbers actually measure out to.

Thanks,
Shawn
This one actually made me . The JK hood is thinner for one reason. reduced weight. If you "wonder what thes numbers actually measure out to" why don't you provide the data?
__________________
Tom

"I've got two things in this world, my balls and my word and I don't break them for no one."
daggo66 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 11:58 AM   #74
Really liking the Jeep...

WF Supporting Member
 
strider_mt2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Southern New Jersey
Posts: 1,956
I'm just curious to see how many more times he takes you guys around the mulberry bush before you get tired of playing the game.

__________________
2012 Unlimited Rubicon - Natural Green
Every Day Driver
strider_mt2k is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 04:04 PM   #75
Jeeper
 
RedRubi2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Puget Sound, Wa
Posts: 568
@daggo - I'm just going to have to respectfully agree to disagree at this point. I didn't post to try to convince anyone of anything, but rather just point out observations and collect data. I didn't intend for this to morph into a meaningless argument and I'm satified with the information I have obtained from the thread. Carrying on any further with the "mulberry bush" antics would be purely for the entertainment purposes of the other WF members with the popcorn.

@strider - sorry to disappoint.
RedRubi2012 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 04:40 PM   #76
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 33,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012
@daggo - I'm just going to have to respectfully agree to disagree at this point. I didn't post to try to convince anyone of anything, but rather just point out observations and collect data. I didn't intend for this to morph into a meaningless argument and I'm satified with the information I have obtained from the thread. Carrying on any further with the "mulberry bush" antics would be purely for the entertainment purposes of the other WF members with the popcorn.

@strider - sorry to disappoint.


It was interesting to read.
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS/Artec front armor w/ Currie upper bushings=Frankinjeep from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 07:04 PM   #77
Jeeper
 
RedRubi2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Puget Sound, Wa
Posts: 568
@daggo - I need to at least address the unresolved misconceptions here before I throw my hands up with this thread.

I said - "Springs are another issue and while the spring constant will probably vary from model to model X, Sport, Sahara, Rubicon I ensure you that if anything the Rubicon will have the longest springs."

You replied - "This statement is completely inaccurate"

What the statement means is that of the different factory coil springs available, the Rubicon model has the longest and stiffest spring rate. The other models COULD have shorter or softer springs, but thats not a requirement of my statement. Basically what I said is completely valid if the Rubicon and all of the other models have the same length and rate springs OR if the all of the other models have a shorter and softer spring than the Rubicon. This entire thread has focused on the traditional 2 door Wrangler so don't even try to go outside of the scope of discussion and throw in spring rates or lengths on Unlimiteds.

To simplify what I just explained above in one easy to understand statement...On 2 door JK Wranglers there is not a factory available suspension spring that is longer or stiffer than what is found on the Rubicon.

In regards to obtaining information, it makes no sense that I should need to provide my own data. The whole premise behind the scientific method and the gathering of data to make a statistical sample is to eliminate bias and try to get a sample that can best represent the entire population. The fact of the matter is that one person collecting all of the data is subject to error and personal bias. How could you be sure that if I went out and measured 10 Jeeps that I wouldn't skew the numbers to best fit whatever agenda you think I have? It would be in everyones best interest to have multiple people collect data on vehicles in different areas of the country to have any conclusive results.
RedRubi2012 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 07:31 PM   #78
Jeeper
 
RedRubi2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Puget Sound, Wa
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by daggo66 View Post
This one actually made me . The JK hood is thinner for one reason. reduced weight. If you "wonder what thes numbers actually measure out to" why don't you provide the data?
That fact that this made you laugh also made me laugh because you misunderstood what I said again.

It comes down to the definition of thick vs. thin as applied to the context of what I was trying to explain. I totally agree with you that weight savings was one criteria considered when the designers decided to reduce the gage thickness of the hood sheetmetal, but remember that the thickness of the material used to make all of the body panels was reduced to make the retooling effort worthwhile.

Perhaps "thick" and "thin" were not the best choice of words to describe the fact that the height of the hood on the JK is less than the height of the hood on the TJ. This can be readily seen by looking at a photo of either vehicle and I assure this you was done for the purpose of extending the height of front quarter panels further up the engine bay to accomodate larger and taller wheelwells.

As an aside, it might be linguistic semantics but hood thickness = hood height. What you are referring to is material thickness of the hood.

Now I am done with this thread....anyone care to start a discussion addressing the angle of the windshield frame with respect to the chassis on the JK vs. the TJ?

Thanks,
Shawn
RedRubi2012 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 07:33 PM   #79
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 33,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH
Good lord folks. The OP thought his TJ frame looked higher than his JK frame. He requested some help from somebody with access to both to check. Kjeeper obliged, and it turned out they're closer than I thought they'd be but favoring the JK, and likewise closer than the OP thought they'd be albeit in the other direction. Why is there even an argument here? For that matter, what is the argument?
MTH said it perfect.

The 2 jeeps were close. Tire size more so helped the Jk regardless of "error" or the other factors - if any.
I give you for standing your ground

Done....
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS/Artec front armor w/ Currie upper bushings=Frankinjeep from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 07:35 PM   #80
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 33,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012

That fact that this made you laugh also made me laugh because you misunderstood what I said again.

It comes down to the definition of thick vs. thin as applied to the context of what I was trying to explain. I totally agree with you that weight savings was one criteria considered when the designers decided to reduce the gage thickness of the hood sheetmetal, but remember that the thickness of the material used to make all of the body panels was reduced to make the retooling effort worthwhile.

Perhaps "thick" and "thin" were not the best choice of words to describe the fact that the height of the hood on the JK is less than the height of the hood on the TJ. This can be readily seen by looking at a photo of either vehicle and I assure this you was done for the purpose of extending the height of front quarter panels further up the engine bay to accomodate larger and taller wheelwells.

As an aside, it might be linguistic semantics but hood thickness = hood height. What you are referring to is material thickness of the hood.

Now I am done with this thread....anyone care to start a discussion addressing the angle of the windshield on the JK vs. the TJ?

Thanks,
Shawn
Friend at work has a Tj. I could measure at break
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS/Artec front armor w/ Currie upper bushings=Frankinjeep from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 07:48 PM   #81
Jeeper
 
RedRubi2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Puget Sound, Wa
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjeeper10 View Post
Friend at work has a Tj. I could measure at break
Uh oh...I think I have heard this before...but if you insist
RedRubi2012 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 08:01 PM   #82
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 33,814
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS/Artec front armor w/ Currie upper bushings=Frankinjeep from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 08:09 PM   #83
Jeeper
 
Chasin Tail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Great NW
Posts: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012 View Post
@daggo - I need to at least address the unresolved misconceptions here before I throw my hands up with this thread.

I said - "Springs are another issue and while the spring constant will probably vary from model to model X, Sport, Sahara, Rubicon I ensure you that if anything the Rubicon will have the longest springs."

You replied - "This statement is completely inaccurate"

.
But, the Rubicons dont always have the tallest/stiffest springs. There is several threads on several BB's discussing this. In some cases people with Sports have factory springs that are stiffer/taller than a factory Rubicon. No one that I've seen can actually explain it, other than at Jeep they Randomly put springs on the jeeps... So you could have 2 stock sports with the same wheels/tires, where one may be taller due to the stiffer springs that one may have on it for no apparent reason...

Hence the problem with accurately answering your question..

Chasin Tail is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 08:20 PM   #84
Jeeper
 
joe002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012 View Post
...On 2 door JK Wranglers there is not a factory available suspension spring that is longer or stiffer than what is found on the Rubicon...
You don't know what you are talking about. My 2 door Rubicon came with 52126313AB and 52126314AB springs - definitely NOT the longest/stiffest springs out there.
__________________
2008 Rubicon, 2 Door, Flame Red, Auto, MyGIG, Power Group, Deep Tint
AEV Pintlers, BFG KM2s 35x12.50x17, Bulldog Fab Rear Stubby Bump, Currie F/R Adj Trac Bars, Daystar Upper Dash, FireStik FireFly Antenna, Kilby Rear Shock Skids, LoD Sig Stubby Front Bump, Midland 75-822 CB, Mopar Filler Door & Locking Gas Cap, Rancho LCA Skid, Rancho Oil Pan Armor, Riddler Diff Covers, TeraFlex 2.5" Spring Lift, Warn PowerPlant HD, Woods Evap Can Relo, Woods SS Relo, Yukon 5.38s
joe002 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 08:21 PM   #85
Jeeper
 
RedRubi2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Puget Sound, Wa
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chasin Tail View Post
But, the Rubicons dont always have the tallest/stiffest springs. There is several threads on several BB's discussing this. In some cases people with Sports have factory springs that are stiffer/taller than a factory Rubicon. No one that I've seen can actually explain it, other than at Jeep they Randomly put springs on the jeeps... So you could have 2 stock sports with the same wheels/tires, where one may be taller due to the stiffer springs that one may have on it for no apparent reason...

Hence the problem with accurately answering your question..

Here we go again...the fact that SOME vehicles may be delivered with incorrect springs is besides the point. What you are referring to is a PRODUCTION problem, and I assure you that the JK Rubicon per DESIGN should have the stiffest and tallest springs available on a 2 door Wrangler. This thread is attempting to probe the intricacies behind the DESIGN of the JK vs. the TJ. I agree with you that this fact may throw off the numbers if our sample set of data only includes a couple vehicles, but this is why I am calling for measuring many different vehicles in different areas of the country so we can get an average number that takes all of these variances in account.
RedRubi2012 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 08:36 PM   #86
Jeeper
 
joe002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012 View Post
Here we go again...the fact that SOME vehicles may be delivered with incorrect springs is besides the point. What you are referring to is a production problem, and I assure you that the JK Rubicon per design should have the stiffest and tallest springs available on a 2 door Wrangler...
Just so you know, the springs in my Jeep were the correct (by design) springs for my 2 door Rubicon. If I ordered a hard top and/or towing package they would have put in different springs, but for my 2 door Rubicon I didn't (by design) get the stiffest/longest.
__________________
2008 Rubicon, 2 Door, Flame Red, Auto, MyGIG, Power Group, Deep Tint
AEV Pintlers, BFG KM2s 35x12.50x17, Bulldog Fab Rear Stubby Bump, Currie F/R Adj Trac Bars, Daystar Upper Dash, FireStik FireFly Antenna, Kilby Rear Shock Skids, LoD Sig Stubby Front Bump, Midland 75-822 CB, Mopar Filler Door & Locking Gas Cap, Rancho LCA Skid, Rancho Oil Pan Armor, Riddler Diff Covers, TeraFlex 2.5" Spring Lift, Warn PowerPlant HD, Woods Evap Can Relo, Woods SS Relo, Yukon 5.38s
joe002 is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 08:38 PM   #87
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 33,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRubi2012

Here we go again...the fact that SOME vehicles may be delivered with incorrect springs is besides the point. What you are referring to is a production problem, and I assure you that the JK Rubicon per design should have the stiffest and tallest springs available on a 2 door Wrangler. My whole purpose behind this thread is to probe the intricacies behind the DESIGN of the JK vs. the TJ. I agree with you that this fact may throw off the numbers if our sample set of data only includes a couple vehicles, but this is why I am calling for measuring many different vehicles in different areas of the country so we can get an average number that takes all of these variances in account.
My rubi has 18/19 and 59

His sport as 150,000 on his stock springs.

So put his springs on my rubi and what do you get?

Numbers that are even more closer and confirms that's the Jk is similar in ground clearance

Again..... The Jk can except a 32-33" tire and the Tj can not. Nothing to do with clearance to the ground. The JK's body is up higher then the frame. With bigger tires gives the Jk the clearance benefits over the Tj. And that is what is seen on paper. That's all that matters right?
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS/Artec front armor w/ Currie upper bushings=Frankinjeep from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 08:39 PM   #88
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,456
Dear lord.
i82much is offline   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 08:41 PM   #89
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 33,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by i82much
Dear lord.
Hey... I'm still trying to justify my 10 min lost at work
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS/Artec front armor w/ Currie upper bushings=Frankinjeep from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quick Reply
Old 12-06-2011, 08:43 PM   #90
Jeeper
 
RedRubi2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Puget Sound, Wa
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe002 View Post
Just so you know, the springs in my Jeep were the correct (by design) springs for my 2 door Rubicon. If I ordered a hard top and/or towing package they would have put in different springs, but for my 2 door Rubicon I didn't (by design) get the stiffest/longest.
Again semantics...I dont care if your soft top Rubicon has different springs by design than mine with a hard top. You are completely missing the point. My statement still stands as correct...JK Rubicon per design should have the stiffest and tallest springs available on a 2 door Wrangler. I didn't say JK rubicon in X or Y configuration has the stiffest and tallest springs....just that JK Rubicon has them. You are trying to argue against the configuration of the Rubicon and the corresponding spring type, but the fact is that if I order a Rubicon in the "correct" configuration I will be getting the tallest and stiffest available factory springs for 2 door Wranglers.

RedRubi2012 is offline   Quick Reply
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Front Bump stop Clearance kik YJ General Discussion Forum 0 04-19-2011 04:39 PM
Looking for more clearance... catITguy TJ General Discussion Forum 10 06-04-2010 11:02 AM
Up Armor(TM) High Clearance Skid Plates - IN STOCK! dave@rokmen Classifieds Archive 2 07-01-2009 12:19 AM
Up Armor(TM) High Clearance Skid Plates - Now In Stock! dave@rokmen Classifieds Archive 0 10-14-2008 11:28 AM
Rokmen High Clearance TT - Pre-order Sale! dave@rokmen Classifieds Archive 25 07-29-2008 08:59 PM


logo carid shop wrangler parts carid fender flares custom wheels store avs deflectors at carid
» Rates
Get low rates on auto insurance in Canada!

» Network Links
»Jeep Parts
» Featured Product

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:15 PM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC