Originally Posted by nighowl2000
One thing i dont like is the coolant lines for the tranny are totally exposed under the jeep.
Yeah, the JK is much better than the TJ - bone stock - in many regards. Then you see STUPID engineering like this and shake your head. It is more capable but not as rugged? Seriously? Hello, Jeep!
My JK can out drive my TJ in side-by-side runs when both are bone stock, but not by much can it do this. Both are seemingly infinitely upgradable. The TJ - FOR ME - is the better vehicle because of the simplicity of the 4.0L to do real work on, as well as several things that make the TJ either more rugged or that are so cheap that you do not really care if you mess them up.
The JK has all sorts of little issues like the tranny lines being exposed, having to cut out the front "crash bar" (a sort of frame crossmember on the front edge) to fit certain bumpers, etc., that make it feel less rugged than the more spartan TJ, and that very spartan feel is a plus, too, if you tend to trash your jeep in the mud or whatever. The JK scares me because it cost me well over $30K! I am actually afraid to wheel it when I have my beater TJ sitting next to it in the driveway.
Because of this the fun factor for the TJ is still higher, too.
But that 3.6L Pentastar engine - woo-hoo, baby! I prefer working on the 4.0L, but that 3.6L can be fun to drive!