so where is the hp?
11-03-2016, 11:04 AM
#42
Super Moderator
Is it time for me to post this again?
Look, on a more serious note apples and bananas are being compared. Even more accurate is that you're doing a Tortoise vs. the Hare race comparison. You're pointing out similar HP and axle gear ratios but that's only part of the total equation in regards to torque and power distribution. There is also transmission gearing, transfer case distribution, axle power distribution, as well as all of the electronic tuning in regards to shift points over the entire spectrum of RPMs and total power distribution.
The Jeep (The Tortoise) has not focused the forte of it's design for on road get up and go that you're looking for out of the JK. The other 4WD vehicles (the Hares) you mention have been. The Jeep has been designed to win the slow off-road race. Too much torque at the wheels at slow speeds causes tires spin on the off-road terrains. Too much wheel spin off-road means less traction between the ground and the tires where it matters, which means getting stuck, or sliding sideways out of control on those off-road terrains and going nowhere or sliding off the edge of a cliff. You're only comparing the on-road performance in regards to the power distribution you're observing. The Silverado does more with the same HP and Gear ratio.....Really?? No real surprise there.
You've done your pavement test where the hare out performs the tortoise. Now go take a JK and go climb up a 30 deg. Grade hill on low traction dirt under the tires, then go take that 4WD Silverado up that same hill and come tell us which one now has more seat up the pants movement in the forward direction.
Obviously, the image I posted is pertinent to this discussion. You've proven you're not a Jeep person that understands where the Wrangler excels over these other 4WD vehicles you're comparing it to and vise versa. There are trade-offs for that off-road performance and that seat of your pants on-road feel you're looking for is one of them.
Look, on a more serious note apples and bananas are being compared. Even more accurate is that you're doing a Tortoise vs. the Hare race comparison. You're pointing out similar HP and axle gear ratios but that's only part of the total equation in regards to torque and power distribution. There is also transmission gearing, transfer case distribution, axle power distribution, as well as all of the electronic tuning in regards to shift points over the entire spectrum of RPMs and total power distribution.
The Jeep (The Tortoise) has not focused the forte of it's design for on road get up and go that you're looking for out of the JK. The other 4WD vehicles (the Hares) you mention have been. The Jeep has been designed to win the slow off-road race. Too much torque at the wheels at slow speeds causes tires spin on the off-road terrains. Too much wheel spin off-road means less traction between the ground and the tires where it matters, which means getting stuck, or sliding sideways out of control on those off-road terrains and going nowhere or sliding off the edge of a cliff. You're only comparing the on-road performance in regards to the power distribution you're observing. The Silverado does more with the same HP and Gear ratio.....Really?? No real surprise there.
You've done your pavement test where the hare out performs the tortoise. Now go take a JK and go climb up a 30 deg. Grade hill on low traction dirt under the tires, then go take that 4WD Silverado up that same hill and come tell us which one now has more seat up the pants movement in the forward direction.
Obviously, the image I posted is pertinent to this discussion. You've proven you're not a Jeep person that understands where the Wrangler excels over these other 4WD vehicles you're comparing it to and vise versa. There are trade-offs for that off-road performance and that seat of your pants on-road feel you're looking for is one of them.
Last edited by Rednroll; 11-03-2016 at 11:07 AM.
11-03-2016, 11:33 AM
#44
JK Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Michigan
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
whos the "WE"? I think its mostly you. Like I said youd think I criticized your family. Its a fricking jeep! Sorry too but a dyno chart that comes from Chrysler is not any kind of proof. Anyone can fabricate a chart like that. Show me a third person dyno session that shows it. Then I will admit my seat of the pants opinion is wrong. Look back in the muscle car era (where I grew up) and youll see many fabricated HP ratings put out just to sell vehicles. Remember too that jeep slapped some numbers on the 3.8 telling us all how it was superior to the 4.0. I think most here know better. Ill let you get the last word though. You see like someone that that is important to. Never thought in a million years anyone would take something like this personal. Every fourm has its "internet experts"
Ah, the "it must be personal since we don't agree" cop-out. I disagree with your comparisons, your butt dyno, and your supposition. That doesn't make it affect me personally.
You are claiming a falsified number. Here is the proof from Jeep: 2012 Jeep Wrangler JK 3.6 Pentastar V6 - Four Wheeler Magazine
So, where's yours? If you need help with this concept, I can work with you!
You are claiming a falsified number. Here is the proof from Jeep: 2012 Jeep Wrangler JK 3.6 Pentastar V6 - Four Wheeler Magazine
So, where's yours? If you need help with this concept, I can work with you!
11-03-2016, 11:40 AM
#45
JK Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Hillsborough, NC
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
whos the "WE"? I think its mostly you. Like I said youd think I criticized your family. Its a fricking jeep! Sorry too but a dyno chart that comes from Chrysler is not any kind of proof. Anyone can fabricate a chart like that. Show me a third person dyno session that shows it. Then I will admit my seat of the pants opinion is wrong. Look back in the muscle car era (where I grew up) and youll see many fabricated HP ratings put out just to sell vehicles. Remember too that jeep slapped some numbers on the 3.8 telling us all how it was superior to the 4.0. I think most here know better. Ill let you get the last word though. You see like someone that that is important to. Never thought in a million years anyone would take something like this personal. Every fourm has its "internet experts"
Just add a K&N. I hear those are 15whp EASY. Since you're a "muscle car guy", surely this is a no brainer.
11-03-2016, 11:41 AM
#46
JK Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Michigan
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok now low end torque is a bad thing off road?????? Don't tell all the guys dropping ls and hemis into these things that. Youll make them spit out there morning coffee!! I'm beginning wonder if some of you have even drove down a dirt road. As to understanding jeeps ive had jeeps for 28 years. How old are you???
Is it time for me to post this again?
Look, on a more serious note apples and bananas are being compared. Even more accurate is that you're doing a Tortoise vs. the Hare race comparison. You're pointing out similar HP and axle gear ratios but that's only part of the total equation in regards to torque and power distribution. There is also transmission gearing, transfer case distribution, axle power distribution, as well as all of the electronic tuning in regards to shift points over the entire spectrum of RPMs and total power distribution.
The Jeep (The Tortoise) has not focused the forte of it's design for on road get up and go that you're looking for out of the JK. The other 4WD vehicles (the Hares) you mention have been. The Jeep has been designed to win the slow off-road race. Too much torque at the wheels at slow speeds causes tires spin on the off-road terrains. Too much wheel spin off-road means less traction between the ground and the tires where it matters, which means getting stuck, or sliding sideways out of control on those off-road terrains and going nowhere or sliding off the edge of a cliff. You're only comparing the on-road performance in regards to the power distribution you're observing. The Silverado does more with the same HP and Gear ratio.....Really?? No real surprise there.
You've done your pavement test where the hare out performs the tortoise. Now go take a JK and go climb up a 30 deg. Grade hill on low traction dirt under the tires, then go take that 4WD Silverado up that same hill and come tell us which one now has more seat up the pants movement in the forward direction.
Obviously, the image I posted is pertinent to this discussion. You've proven you're not a Jeep person that understands where the Wrangler excels over these other 4WD vehicles you're comparing it to and vise versa. There are trade-offs for that off-road performance and that seat of your pants on-road feel you're looking for is one of them.
Look, on a more serious note apples and bananas are being compared. Even more accurate is that you're doing a Tortoise vs. the Hare race comparison. You're pointing out similar HP and axle gear ratios but that's only part of the total equation in regards to torque and power distribution. There is also transmission gearing, transfer case distribution, axle power distribution, as well as all of the electronic tuning in regards to shift points over the entire spectrum of RPMs and total power distribution.
The Jeep (The Tortoise) has not focused the forte of it's design for on road get up and go that you're looking for out of the JK. The other 4WD vehicles (the Hares) you mention have been. The Jeep has been designed to win the slow off-road race. Too much torque at the wheels at slow speeds causes tires spin on the off-road terrains. Too much wheel spin off-road means less traction between the ground and the tires where it matters, which means getting stuck, or sliding sideways out of control on those off-road terrains and going nowhere or sliding off the edge of a cliff. You're only comparing the on-road performance in regards to the power distribution you're observing. The Silverado does more with the same HP and Gear ratio.....Really?? No real surprise there.
You've done your pavement test where the hare out performs the tortoise. Now go take a JK and go climb up a 30 deg. Grade hill on low traction dirt under the tires, then go take that 4WD Silverado up that same hill and come tell us which one now has more seat up the pants movement in the forward direction.
Obviously, the image I posted is pertinent to this discussion. You've proven you're not a Jeep person that understands where the Wrangler excels over these other 4WD vehicles you're comparing it to and vise versa. There are trade-offs for that off-road performance and that seat of your pants on-road feel you're looking for is one of them.
11-03-2016, 11:45 AM
#47
JK Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Michigan
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
or maybe put 35s on 20 inch rims with 373 gears to impress the crowd at the mall?? I'm out of here.
Since reading isn't your strong suit...or discussion...or presenting facts...or judging HP by licking your finger and sticking it in the air...or...wait, I forgot where this was going.
Just add a K&N. I hear those are 15whp EASY. Since you're a "muscle car guy", surely this is a no brainer.
Just add a K&N. I hear those are 15whp EASY. Since you're a "muscle car guy", surely this is a no brainer.
11-03-2016, 12:26 PM
#48
JK Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Hillsborough, NC
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-03-2016, 12:28 PM
#49
JK Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Michigan
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-03-2016, 12:53 PM
#50
JK Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Hillsborough, NC
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts