Roof Rack + Snorkel = Overland?

[wayoflife]

Thats what makes Overland in the US a trend or vehicle fashion statement rather than a vehicle fit for function! If we were in africa there may be some arguement, but even then its a weak one! Wheel width, turning radius, etc in one argument against a Jeep in one scenario will later be the advantage in another scenario. There is never a perfect build for every scenario, if so there would only be one offroad vehicle in production. :twocents:

i'd have to agree, "overland" as a term is starting to sound more and more like a trendy way to refer to vehicle fashion statement. even if i were in africa, i would want a vehicle that would have the best chance of getting me to where i want to be WITHOUT having to concern myself with how easy it'll be to fix my rig when it breaks. i mean really, can you really find a JK specific rzeppa factory drive shaft somewhere between Niamey, Niger and Kempala, Uganda? i seriously doubt it.

all i can say is that our JK's have been built over time and have become what they are today through experience. i'm not trying to make a rig that is only good for taking on easy lines and camping or can only take on big rocks or only be nice to drive around town. i want it all and try very hard to get what i want. people can try and downplay my jeep and believe all they want that it just wouldn't as good as an "overland" built jeep in some situations but, i would challenge them to prove it.

thanks for the great conversation all. :clap2:

 

[Indefatigable]

if there was a tire i had to run in a place where replacements might be difficult to find, it would be one of my fat rock-cralwing toyo's. but that's just me.
.

ROTFLMAO

I live in the 3rd biggest city in Canada and big fat rock crawling tires are special order. So are most tires for that matter, unless you drive a Honda Civic.

My Tercel's stock tires are special order to replace....

 

[wayoflife]

ROTFLMAO

I live in the 3rd biggest city in Canada and big fat rock crawling tires are special order. So are most tires for that matter, unless you drive a Honda Civic.

My Tercel's stock tires are special order to replace....

my point exactly. that being the case, i would prefer to run what i have than what some may "think" they can find a replacement for with ease. experience has shown me that my toyo's have near bullet proof sidewalls and will endure just about anything i can throw at them.

 

[mmccurdy]

My biggest issue is with this idea that there is supposedly a way to specifically make an "overland" JK and that it is somehow better than a well built up JK.

Out of curiosity, where are you hearing this? I don't think anyone with real-world experience would argue this point. I don't really see it in this thread or even that flamew... er... debate on FB, cost considerations notwithstanding.

BTW, Rover forums and other "communities" comprised of 99% web wheelers (or should I say "online overlanders"?) are notorious for making claims based on aesthetics, brand loyalty, gossip, hearsay, personal hangups, etc. If you can believe it, I'd say even more so than a lot of the Jeep forums we know and love. Hence most of the claims and accusations are not credible and should be taken with a giant grain of salt IMO

I try to look for the guys with extensive real-world experience. I know for a fact that some of the most high profile folks over on that other popular Expedition board are very anti roof rack and RTT, for all the reasons mentioned here. Frankly, snorkels don't really come up that much among that set of folks. Likewise, many of them have been won over completely from Defenders and Range Rovers by the capability of the long wheelbase JK platform. If you look at the types of mods those guys do, they're 100% down the same lines as "well built up JK," whether the intended purpose is "overland" or otherwise.

Lifestyle-wise, I've also been very impressed with some of their vehicle system solutions to some truly epic international adventures. Let's just say a built up JK is not always the right answer there, but of course that's off topic for this thread (and possibly this board?) so I'll leave those as an exercise for the reader.

 

[GCM 2]

I've been trying to describe what an overland rig is, not trying to say it's better or worse in any way. The original question of this entire discussion was "Roof Rack + Snorkel + Overland?

Completely understood, not fighting you on this :thumb: And I think that all I'm trying to do as well as the OP, Wayolife, is point out that the "overland" guys might be getting it wrong in certain aspects of building a vehicle for long distance adventuring.....which both Wayolife, I and many others have done successfully in our rigs. Easiest example to state is the JK Experience, I drove just under 1000 miles to the starting point, 900 plus miles during the event, and returned home for another almost 1000 miles logged all in one week. Some participants drove much further from N.C. to Colorado, drove the event, then returned to N.C. In fact, ironically there was not one "overland" style built rig in the line up of 22 vehicles. Hell there was even a full size GMC truck support vehicle that ran the Entire event.

......To be quite honest, even going for the fat rock-crawling tires of WayofLife's three rigs is overkill since replacements even for that size tire may be impossible in some places that overland rigs may travel outside the United States.

As Wayoflife stated, I too have yet to need my spare 40" as a replacement in 28,000 miles. However, while doing "overland" travel in foreign lands, I can't count the number of skinny little Land Rover 100-110 series, Toyota FJ75 series tires, some are still split rim tube tires. Bottom line is, I've yet to stumble into a village and not be able to get a tire hot patched from the inside.

One more aspect of skinny tires and there failure, load carrying. The weight of most "overlanding" rigs is just incredible. So why would you upgrade your tent, you cooking capabilities, showering potential, fuel capacity, potable water carrying capacity, etc...... yet do the minimum of tire and suspension upgrades? Sounds counterproductive :thinking:

... all of a sudden the JK stands to take over that role in international overland exploration

.

I think you are definitely on to something here :thumb: I have a friend that is one of the founders and Editors of Overland Journal magazine, he would definitely agree with you also, but more so here in the US. The Land Rover solid axle platforms have just recently stopped being produced and the Toyota solid axle trucks are still in production, so it's to early for the JK to dominate worldwide and that may not happen if it should ever go independent suspension.

.......As I said, most modified Jeeps in the US are probably far more rig than such groups would want because they would see all those modifications as wasted money.

As Wayoflife stated, this always seems to be the case until someone is educated on why the modification is purchased and then they actually drive the vehicle with the questionable mod. My rig's build is a culmination of the best attributes of almost every aspect of all facets of the types of offroading out there. There is bleed over technology from even Formula 1 on our rigs (e.g. EVO lever suspension)

?.....Sure, your Land Rover may take the bypasses, but overland exploration is looking for the easiest available route, not the most difficult. if a horse and cart can go over the trail, the Land Rover (Defender?) can take that same trail and the base Unlimited X, Sport and even Sahara can do just as well if not better.

....that's not the intent or purpose of an overland rig. Get through however you can, the easiest trail you can find, and you've succeeded. Less is more in that case.

Absolutely, you are correct. Route selection is the first thing in exploration, the gear you bring along is tailored for the routes/terrain/environment you must traverse. Having a vehicle that is built to handle the occasional "extreme" trail can be the reason between taking a 20 foot bypass or a 60 mile detour.

Besides, you guys tried that crusading thing back in 1812. Did not have the intended result...

You are correct, cant argue with you there! Our country is great at war fighting, but we absolutely suck at nation building :doh:


Closing Comment: this is an awesome thread! As much as I love the JK Forum, I think this discussion would have devolved into some Internet shouting match. Thanks for keeping it adult like fellas :rock:

 

[Vulpine]

I'm looking at available history...

... I'm looking at the type of person who uses those vehicles and quite honestly I'm looking at the non-vehicle specialists who use them strictly as basic transportation rather than a highly re-designed toy. Scientists on average want a vehicle straight off the showroom floor for their tasks unless the conditions warrant a specialized rig--then they tend to overspend.

GCM pointed out that people use what is available out of necessity and they tend to be far harder on their vehicles in everyday life than the average American (not saying any of us are Average when it comes to our rigs.) The two Jeeps that went up that volcano's slopes in South America were not highly modified; if I remember, they had very little modification other than to increase the load-carrying ability with roof racks over the factory hard tops. Why, when as you can say even slight modifications would have improved those Jeeps' ability to traverse the country? Could it be because factory tires were more readily available and less expensive? It's the mind-set of the user, not a "My Rig Is Better Than Yours" mind-set. Honestly, that second mind-set is almost always more liable to cause arguments and challenges (just look at this thread, for instance.)

I'm not trying to argue, I'm trying to honestly answer the question as originally conceived (Ok, so you were playing with words) from a scientist's point of view. Yes, I'm fully aware of the deep-rutted trails criss-crossing from east to west. I'm aware that sometimes even the easiest trails ended up with almost impossible challenges for the pioneers. Obviously, they didn't let that stop them. Had they been driving Jeeps with winches, they probably would have just as readily hauled those rigs bodily up those ledges as they did their wagons. When you're trying to beat mountain winters in the Rockies or the Sierra Nevadas, you don't want to waste time searching for a pass that may take you hundreds of miles and weeks off your course. Remember, they were lucky if they could manage 20 miles per day. We do that in an hour or two on some of those same trails.

An overland rig then, is one able to make the trek with the least modification than can ensure the success of the mission--barring unforeseen circumstances. The old Willys Jeep, from which the Land Rover was spawned, couldn't do half--nay, even a quarter of what the modern JK does and even less when you consider the mods most of you put on your Jeeps. Oddly, as I stated earlier, my un-modified '08 Wrangler handled mildly to moderately technical trails just as well as the moderately modified TJs and YJs handled them. At the time, I chose not to try more technical trails until I could put a small lift even on my otherwise perfectly satisfactory factory rig-out.

 

[wayoflife]

Out of curiosity, where are you hearing this? I don't think anyone with real-world experience would argue this point. I don't really see it in this thread or even that flamew... er... debate on FB, cost considerations notwithstanding.

while this topic is hot now, this thread is actually kind of old and got started after i had a interesting conversation with an aev fanboy. but really, it isn't the first time i've heard the arguments as to why "overland" builds are somehow better and i guess i just thought the topic would be a fun discussion to have here

 

[Vulpine]

Completely understood, not fighting you on this :thumb: And I think that all I'm trying to do as well as the OP, Wayolife, is point out that the "overland" guys might be getting it wrong in certain aspects of building a vehicle for long distance adventuring.....which both Wayolife, I and many others have done successfully in our rigs. Easiest example to state is the JK Experience, I drove just under 1000 miles to the starting point, 900 plus miles during the event, and returned home for another almost 1000 miles logged all in one week. Some participants drove much further from N.C. to Colorado, drove the event, then returned to N.C. In fact, ironically there was not one "overland" style built rig in the line up of 22 vehicles. Hell there was even a full size GMC truck support vehicle that ran the Entire event.

As Wayoflife stated, I too have yet to need my spare 40" as a replacement in 28,000 miles. However, while doing "overland" travel in foreign lands, I can't count the number of skinny little Land Rover 100-110 series, Toyota FJ75 series tires, some are still split rim tube tires. Bottom line is, I've yet to stumble into a village and not be able to get a tire hot patched from the inside.

One more aspect of skinny tires and there failure, load carrying. The weight of most "overlanding" rigs is just incredible. So why would you upgrade your tent, you cooking capabilities, showering potential, fuel capacity, potable water carrying capacity, etc...... yet do the minimum of tire and suspension upgrades? Sounds counterproductive :thinking: .

Here you are quite correct, as what I stated above shows how little many of these explorers understand the vehicle they're using. They are notorious for overloading their rigs and still expecting them to be up to the task. The Land Rovers and Toyotas were surprisingly able, even if they weren't necessarily the best rig-out for the job.

Counterproductive, yes. Then again, what does a geologist or safari hunter or naturalist really know about the vehicles they use? If a brand has a reputation for getting them there and back, then that's the brand they'll use, street stock out of the showroom. Only with the JK (and perhaps the old Wagoneer?) has Jeep had anything in the same ballpark. That first British farmer who took an old Willys and put a covered body on it to create the first Land Rover saw the possibility of the Jeep as something more than a simple scout car. Jeep itself didn't see the purpose of anything bigger for more than a decade and even then they were more Jeep-styled road cars more than rough-road haulers. The Wagoneer and the old Gladiator were among Jeep's first attempts to create a proper utility vehicle. (Love the FC by the way, but I have to say driving one of those looks scary by the videos I've seen out at Moab.)

I think you are definitely on to something here :thumb: I have a friend that is one of the founders and Editors of Overland Journal magazine, he would definitely agree with you also, but more so here in the US. The Land Rover solid axle platforms have just recently stopped being produced and the Toyota solid axle trucks are still in production, so it's to early for the JK to dominate worldwide and that may not happen if it should ever go independent suspension.

Not sure even independent suspension will kill it as an overland rig, but it probably would make it harder to maintain on the trail.

As Wayoflife stated, this always seems to be the case until someone is educated on why the modification is purchased and then they actually drive the vehicle with the questionable mod. My rig's build is a culmination of the best attributes of almost every aspect of all facets of the types of offroading out there. There is bleed over technology from even Formula 1 on our rigs (e.g. EVO lever suspension)

And guess what education those scientists don't get? I've never said the mods don't make the rig more capable, but the people who choose the rig rarely understand that. And as you pointed out yourself earlier, if that suspension is loaded to or over max GVWR how much advantage do you retain?

A challenge for WayofLife and the rest of you: Try one of your more moderate trails with a weighted down rig. I'd like to know how it changes the way they perform.

Absolutely, you are correct. Route selection is the first thing in exploration, the gear you bring along is tailored for the routes/terrain/environment you must traverse. Having a vehicle that is built to handle the occasional "extreme" trail can be the reason between taking a 20 foot bypass or a 60 mile detour.

Thank you. I'm glad you agree.

 

[Serg5000]

while this topic is hot now, this thread is actually kind of old and got started after i had a interesting conversation with an aev fanboy. but really, it isn't the first time i've heard the arguments as to why "overland" builds are somehow better and i guess i just thought the topic would be a fun discussion to have here

Well, seems you picked a good topic.

 

[wayoflife]

... I'm looking at the type of person who uses those vehicles and quite honestly I'm looking at the non-vehicle specialists who use them strictly as basic transportation rather than a highly re-designed toy. Scientists on average want a vehicle straight off the showroom floor for their tasks unless the conditions warrant a specialized rig--then they tend to overspend.

well, i'm no scientist but, i still have been using my jeep the same as when it was stock over 5 years ago to what it has become today, strictly as basic transportation that can also take me out to the middle of nowhere.

GCM pointed out that people use what is available out of necessity and they tend to be far harder on their vehicles in everyday life than the average American (not saying any of us are Average when it comes to our rigs.) The two Jeeps that went up that volcano's slopes in South America were not highly modified; if I remember, they had very little modification other than to increase the load-carrying ability with roof racks over the factory hard tops. Why, when as you can say even slight modifications would have improved those Jeeps' ability to traverse the country? Could it be because factory tires were more readily available and less expensive? It's the mind-set of the user, not a "My Rig Is Better Than Yours" mind-set. Honestly, that second mind-set is almost always more liable to cause arguments and challenges (just look at this thread, for instance.)

are you referring to the JK's that went out to set a world record for driving a vehicle to the highest point on the planet? if so, that was back in early 2007 and there was nothing available for the JK back then. if there were, i can assure you that those high profile JK's would of had a lot more sponsors and would have been way more built up than they were.

An overland rig then, is one able to make the trek with the least modification than can ensure the success of the mission--barring unforeseen circumstances.

i guess that's where i get a little confused - do you make the least amount of modifications out of cost concerns? or, what exactly determines the need for minimalism? there are a ton of circumstances that CAN be foreseen and can be mitigated through well thought out modifications. i realize that you choose to see jeeps like my white one as some kind of "toy" but, i can assure you that it didn't always look the way it does now - EVERY change it's seen had come at the sacrifice of a factory component and as a means to help prevent it from happening again.

 

[GCM 2]

...A challenge for WayofLife and the rest of you: Try one of your more moderate trails with a weighted down rig. I'd like to know how it changes the way they perform.

That's a good point, but again I would refer to the JK Experience and any parts (1-3) of the series of video "Keep it tight" by Wayalife films, here on the forum. With exception of "Carnage Canyon" in part 2, all the vehicles are completely loaded with everything they needed for the entire trip. The Adventure of the JKX is that it is point to point, there is no out on the trail and back home at the end of the day. You carry all spare parts for repairs, fluids, all clothing, food, water, everything needed to sustain for the duration. :thumb:

This is where having a capable vehicle and the skills to wheel really become the means to not destroying the rig. Truth is, the drivers are usually not as capable as their rig they have built.

 

[Vulpine]

A note on my own rig-which isn't modded.

Unlike many of you, I didn't buy my Jeep with the intention of serious trail running, though as an amateur photographer and serious rail fan I wanted a rig capable of taking me places your Soccer Mom SUVs would have difficulty reaching--at best. No, my main reason for a Jeep is the ability to travel in severe weather conditions such as the typical Nor'easter that passes through my region usually a couple times each winter. You may remember that the NEC got hit only two weeks apart back in the spring of '11 and my previous vehicle simply would not have been able to go anywhere after the storms due to plows building 4-foot-high walls of snow and ice across driveways when they finally do get around to going down your street. So not only did I need a Jeep to get me around before the roads were cleared, but also to get me through that ice dam blocking me from the road. Yes, I know I can shovel it; but quite honestly I appreciate the ability to only knock the top off and not have to shovel that heavy, ice-hard layer down at the bottom that the Jeep can just motor over.

I'm not a modder because I feel I don't need to mod to go where I want to go. It's been clearly proven that a stock JK can handle trails even as technical as some of the worst Moab has to offer. Yes, modding will make handling those trails easier, but if I don't intend to do that on a regular basis, then such a mod is a waste of time and money. That said, I do still intend to do a 1" body lift and a 2" suspension lift just to make those off-road excursions I do take a little easier--as long as they don't degrade road and highway handling

 

[wayoflife]

A challenge for WayofLife and the rest of you: Try one of your more moderate trails with a weighted down rig. I'd like to know how it changes the way they perform.

how much weight are we talking about here and, is the challenge to be done in a stock JK, mildly built or extremely built? over the last 5 years, i'm pretty sure i've done it.

 

[wayoflife]

That's a good point, but again I would refer to the JK Experience and any parts (1-3) of the series of video "Keep it tight" by Wayalife films, here on the forum. With exception of "Carnage Canyon" in part 2, all the vehicles are completed loaded with everything they needed for the entire trip. The Adventure of the JKX is that it is point to point, there is no out on the trail and back home at the end of the day. You carry all spare parts for repairs, fluids, all clothing, food, water, everything needed to sustain for the duration. :thumb:

This is where having a capable vehicle and the skills to wheel really become the means to not destroying the rig. Truth is, the drivers are usually not as capable as their rig they have built.

couldn't agree with you more. and, as you mentioned, most of us drove our JK's to the starting point in colorado, wheeled it hard for a week and then, drove it back home. i don't know what more you could do to prove the worthyness of our jeeps and how they are built.

Unlike many of you, I didn't buy my Jeep with the intention of serious trail running, though as an amateur photographer and serious rail fan I wanted a rig capable of taking me places your Soccer Mom SUVs would have difficulty reaching--at best. No, my main reason for a Jeep is the ability to travel in severe weather conditions such as the typical Nor'easter that passes through my region usually a couple times each winter. You may remember that the NEC got hit only two weeks apart back in the spring of '11 and my previous vehicle simply would not have been able to go anywhere after the storms due to plows building 4-foot-high walls of snow and ice across driveways when they finally do get around to going down your street. So not only did I need a Jeep to get me around before the roads were cleared, but also to get me through that ice dam blocking me from the road. Yes, I know I can shovel it; but quite honestly I appreciate the ability to only knock the top off and not have to shovel that heavy, ice-hard layer down at the bottom that the Jeep can just motor over.

I'm not a modder because I feel I don't need to mod to go where I want to go. It's been clearly proven that a stock JK can handle trails even as technical as some of the worst Moab has to offer. Yes, modding will make handling those trails easier, but if I don't intend to do that on a regular basis, then such a mod is a waste of time and money. That said, I do still intend to do a 1" body lift and a 2" suspension lift just to make those off-road excursions I do take a little easier--as long as they don't degrade road and highway handling

and, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. nobody should feel they "need" to mod their jeep above and beyond what they actually need. for the purposes of this discussion, the question was in regards to people who DO feel the need to mod their jeep and do so with the specific purpose of making what they call, an "overland" build. these people spend good money on trendy brands and from what i have seen, truly believe that they've made intellectually informed decisions regarding the modifications they've made. for my purposes, i just wanted to get a better understanding of their logic and hear about their personal experiences that helped to shape it.

 

[Vulpine]

That's a good point, but again I would refer to the JK Experience and any parts (1-3) of the series of video "Keep it tight" by Wayalife films, here on the forum. With exception of "Carnage Canyon" in part 2, all the vehicles are completed loaded with everything they needed for the entire trip. The Adventure of the JKX is that it is point to point, there is no out on the trail and back home at the end of the day. You carry all spare parts for repairs, fluids, all clothing, food, water, everything needed to sustain for the duration. :thumb:

This is where having a capable vehicle and the skills to wheel really become the means to not destroying the rig. Truth is, the drivers are usually not as capable as their rig they have built.

To be quite honest, I would love to join you on such an excursion--though if there were an easier bypass over some of your technical parts I would probably choose to take it. It's not necessarily that I'm afraid (Ok, maybe I am; I don't consider myself a risk-taker) but rather that my purpose would the the enjoyment of the scenery for photography and shooting things other than the Jeeps making their way up seemingly impossible rocks and grades. It's not that I'm any less impressed by the vehicles themselves so much as, for me, seeing things that most others will never see--appreciating nature in all its glory--is WHY I would go, not just the pleasure and challenge of the drive itself. For me the Jeep is a means to an end, not the end in itself. Sure, I'd probably do the same as you to prevent a recurrence of anything that broke my Jeep--but first it'd have to break my Jeep.

I envy you guys out in the dryer climes because you have the kind of beauty around you that almost explodes with color in a sunrise or sunset. Me, soft, wet hills (I don't really call them mountains after having lived in Colorado for several years) have a completely different kind of driving challenge and beauty. I don't have the kind of group you all have to go out and explore wilderness areas where even getting off the road can be a challenge around here due to all the regulations. I'd like to find a group that enjoys new scenery and the joy of the drive to those places, but most that I've discovered so far (not all) are the abusive "My Jeep Is Best" type who almost willingly risk their rigs to perform spectacular stunts when there's a simpler bypass. Yes, I did take my Sahara through some of those more challenging areas rather than bypass, but it was more to learn how to handle something I may be unable to avoid rather than doing it just for the challenge of it. On the other hand, if I had the opportunity (and the money) to grab an older rig just as a hobby, then maybe I would look at going more extreme.

 

[Vulpine]

and, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. nobody should feel they "need" to mod their jeep above and beyond what they actually need. for the purposes of this discussion, the question was in regards to people who DO feel the need to mod their jeep and do so with the specific purpose of making what they call, an "overland" build. these people spend good money on trendy brands and from what i have seen, truly believe that they've made intellectually informed decisions regarding the modifications they've made. for my purposes, i just wanted to get a better understanding of their logic and hear about their personal experiences that helped to shape it.

And I was trying to offer that point of view from an outsider's stance because only a non-Jeeper (or should I say non-off-roader) does that kind of thing. Obviously the snorkel and roof rack serve a specific purpose but these people mostly assume the stock vehicle can handle the rest. Considering the types of terrain I've watch on old documentaries about reaching and photographing remote areas, their biggest concern was not flooding the engine and keeping their supplies dry rather than muscling over rocks and bridging chasms. To them the snorkel and rack are the only critical mods; the rest is handled as it happens--often by winching (yes, many of those Land Rovers carried winches) up a too-steep slope or dragging an obstacle out of the way rather than trying to go over it.

 

[Vulpine]

how much weight are we talking about here and, is the challenge to be done in a stock JK, mildly built or extremely built? over the last 5 years, i'm pretty sure i've done it.

Considering that one response earlier said the Land Rovers were grossly overloaded, then let's look at about double the normal cargo capacity of a modestly-modded Jeep. I know the towing capacity of the JK Unlimited is 3500 pounds which means the hitch weight for a trailer would typically be 350 pounds. I believe (but I'm not certain at the moment) that the Unlimited is rated just over 500# plus two passengers so why not try a conservative trial at about 1000# on board.

Oh, one early commenter suggested simply using a hitch-mounted rack and in dry conditions that might more than meet the need, but fording rivers and streams means anything in that rack WILL get wet and the rack itself will affect how you approach and depart an incline. The roof rack obviously keeps the overall length of the vehicle where it belongs even if it can (and will) change the center of gravity if loaded to... say 500# or more. Get hung on branches? The safari driver would either just push through or cut the branch out of the way. Modern regulations at least in the States frown on that.

 

[GCM 2]

how much weight are we talking about here and, is the challenge to be done in a stock JK, mildly built or extremely built? over the last 5 years, i'm pretty sure i've done it.

Two photos of being very heavy;

The first-
I don't know how much this Toyota Tacoma weighed, but me and a fellow teammate drove it "overland" from Jacobabad, Pakistan to Jalalabad Afghanistan in two days non stop. Back in February 2002, you could get away with stuff like this since it was actually a lot safer then. In fact the only threat was people trying to grab stuff out of the back in the slower congested sections of markets while cutting thru larger towns. Hopefully you can see the photo clear enough, not much ambient light available.

The second-
Our "overland" convoy of military and non-standard tactical vehicles getting ready to split our convoy in half to reduce signature and drive into Iraq a few weeks before the big kick off back in March of 2003. Once we launched from the allied country, we did not use one road once we crossed over the border until we hit Baghdad. The HMMWV's started at approx. 8000 lbs dry, fully loaded about 13,300lbs. The Toyota Hi-lux's were about 3700lbs dry, and fully loaded about 6000lbs.

Two scenarios of extreme weight in an "overland" vehicle, not fun, but it can be done without much incident.

 

[Vulpine]

Two photos of being very heavy;

The first-
I don't know how much this Toyota Tacoma weighed, but me and a fellow teammate drove it "overland" from Jacobabad, Pakistan to Jalalabad Afghanistan in two days non stop. Back in February 2002, you could get away with stuff like this since it was actually a lot safer then. In fact the only threat was people trying to grab stuff out of the back in the slower congested sections of markets while cutting thru larger towns. Hopefully you can see the photo clear enough, not much ambient light available.

The second-
Our "overland" convoy of military and non-standard tactical vehicles getting ready to split our convoy in half to reduce signature and drive into Iraq a few weeks before the big kick off back in March of 2003. Once we launched from the allied country, we did not use one road once we crossed over the border until we hit Baghdad. The HMMWV's started at approx. 8000 lbs dry, fully loaded about 13,300lbs. The Toyota Hi-lux's were about 3700lbs dry, and fully loaded about 6000lbs.

Two scenarios of extreme weight in an "overland" vehicle, not fun, but it can be done without much incident.

Ok, obviously you were using pickups and HMMVs for those "overland" runs and in your case they were through desert terrain which does make it a little easier. You do also verify my point that those pickups weren't very heavily modified--if at all. Now, if you want to push the modified Jeeps, then the challenge I offer is to ask them to do say 500 miles at about 2000# over their GVWR. I suggested 1000# over earlier simply because I want to know how it changes the way they're driven as compared to the typical load for most of these Jeeps. I want to know if the mods do make "Overlanding" easier or if those mods are stressed by the heavier loads and force the driver to change his driving style. What changes, if any, would be suggested after making this run to still keep it safe and reliable? If you wanted to make it a competition, then take a stock JK Unlimited "X" (sport or whatever base model is available), a modest upgrade with say 3" to 4" of lift and 35" rubber rather than stock 32" and then maybe a more extreme rig like one of WayofLife's "play" Jeeps as compared to his everyday driver all loaded with the same amount of cargo--again at least 1000 pounds over rated GVWR.

 

[wayoflife]

ummmm, i don't own any "play" rigs. ALL my jeeps are daily drivers. as far as weight goes, a stock JK comes in at just under 5,000 lbs. my white JK weighs in at about 6,500 lbs. unloaded. with gear, it's more like 7,000 lbs. or more.