i dunno, my JK does everything i need to do and, as much as i love the gladiator, i think my 4-door is still a better all around machine.
Roof Rack + Snorkel = Overland?
- Thread starter wayoflife
- Start date
i dunno, my JK does everything i need to do and, as much as i love the gladiator, i think my 4-door is still a better all around machine.
I agree whole-heartedly, the JK 4-door did more than replace my previous Saturn Vue--though at a 30% loss in gas mileage. I love it for everything it does, but I have a need for something it can't do: carry 4x8' sheets of plywood, 8' planks of wood and even 20, 8-foot plastic utility tables to set up a yard sale. For that I need a pickup truck and quite honestly I want one with the ability to crawl itself out of trouble and to other Jeep-like work. I personally hate Ford and think all the modern trucks are too big and too ugly--despite the fact I recently purchased a 1990 Ford F-150 as a utility hauler. I bought the truck for a short-term need but what I really want is the Jeep truck. That's the only thing I would ever trade my Wrangler Unlimited for, but now that I have an F-150, I've got an even better trade-in vehicle. I can be a 2-Jeep house.
You guys have all been Overlanding -- and didn't even know it.
Well, with one exception at least.
In doing a little more research and just downright being nosy, I found this set of definitions for Overlanding:
http://www.expeditionportal.com/what-is-overlanding/definition.html
So now this makes the original question even weirder because apparently there is no "best" overlanding vehicle because each type of overlanding can probably be improved upon by simply modding the vehicle of choice. Jeepers are overlanders even though overlanders are not necessarily Jeepers.
However, on further reading on the site, they consider "lift kits" as unnecessary because they supposedly have no functional effect on the stability and safety of the vehicle where load and agility are concerned. They suggest minimal tire size increases and only 60mm of "lift" for ground clearance only in order to ensure the stock safety and reliability of the vehicle.
You'd have to read it yourself because I believe the author of that particular article totally misunderstands even the purpose of some typical Jeep mods. He's arguing against the hot-rodders more than he is against people like yourselves. One thing that makes sense in one way but not in others is that he insists on "LT" (light truck) tires only. He believes that wider tires can (and do in many cases) restrict factory turning radii leading to reduced overall safety. He also spoke against mods like the "stinger" bumper (I do see the need in more extreme cases) but emphasizes front cage-like bumpers that include heavy headlight and grill protection along with some form of winch support.
Well, here I am repeating some of what he said and if you study that "Expedition Portal" site, especially his articles about vehicle selection and equipping you can determine for yourselves if he's right or wrong. That said, for my own purposes I would agree with some of what he says for my own rig, but I almost totally disagree with other things he says. He may be opposed to CB radios (for instance) in general, but CB at least here in the States is probably more effective and far less expensive than 3-meter HAM, even if lower range. Internationally, HAM may be the better choice. However you look at it, it appears common sense should be the ultimate rule and some people just don't have that.
Well, with one exception at least.
In doing a little more research and just downright being nosy, I found this set of definitions for Overlanding:
http://www.expeditionportal.com/what-is-overlanding/definition.html
So now this makes the original question even weirder because apparently there is no "best" overlanding vehicle because each type of overlanding can probably be improved upon by simply modding the vehicle of choice. Jeepers are overlanders even though overlanders are not necessarily Jeepers.
However, on further reading on the site, they consider "lift kits" as unnecessary because they supposedly have no functional effect on the stability and safety of the vehicle where load and agility are concerned. They suggest minimal tire size increases and only 60mm of "lift" for ground clearance only in order to ensure the stock safety and reliability of the vehicle.
You'd have to read it yourself because I believe the author of that particular article totally misunderstands even the purpose of some typical Jeep mods. He's arguing against the hot-rodders more than he is against people like yourselves. One thing that makes sense in one way but not in others is that he insists on "LT" (light truck) tires only. He believes that wider tires can (and do in many cases) restrict factory turning radii leading to reduced overall safety. He also spoke against mods like the "stinger" bumper (I do see the need in more extreme cases) but emphasizes front cage-like bumpers that include heavy headlight and grill protection along with some form of winch support.
Well, here I am repeating some of what he said and if you study that "Expedition Portal" site, especially his articles about vehicle selection and equipping you can determine for yourselves if he's right or wrong. That said, for my own purposes I would agree with some of what he says for my own rig, but I almost totally disagree with other things he says. He may be opposed to CB radios (for instance) in general, but CB at least here in the States is probably more effective and far less expensive than 3-meter HAM, even if lower range. Internationally, HAM may be the better choice. However you look at it, it appears common sense should be the ultimate rule and some people just don't have that.
Last edited:
clearly, this guy has never run a properly lifted jeep and understands nothing about spring rates or articulation and how it can actually make your vehicle more stable and agile. as far as ensuring stock vehicle safety and reliability goes, i haven't the foggiest clue as to what he might be referring to and, i'd be willing to bet that he doesn't either.
"belief" is what people hold onto when they are unable to prove what they imagine. there is no need for "belief" when you have actual experience and first hand knowledge.
i'd be the first to admit that things like stingers for the most part serve no function what so ever - they just look cool.
even if HAM radios were dirt cheap, loose and open conversations on them are kinda discouraged. CB's may not have the range of a HAM but, they are very practical and useful for group communication and for even spotting. but hey, what do i know.
GCM 2
New member
Overlanding video
An absolutely fantastic example of very well built, very capable rigs doing some "overlanding"
Overlanding, this is it!!
An absolutely fantastic example of very well built, very capable rigs doing some "overlanding"
Overlanding, this is it!!
knnphillips
New member
GCM 2 said:
Wait isn't that the same examples y'all have given repetitively? lol
I don't think that's a fair characterization of his position. I think he fully understands their intent and purpose, and he is making an explicit choice not to run them for practical reasons. I think some of the "safety" arguments are a little trumped up, but it's hard to argue with the logic that says if you don't need a big lift and MT tires to get where you want to go, there is no reason to run them. There are very few corners of this country let alone the world that really can't be reached on a very mildly built JK but can be reached on a Moby-like build, and that's been my point all along. Can Moby dominate on obstacles? Yes, without a doubt. But keep in mind that's not the goal of the "overland" sport. Will Moby be more reliable? Maybe. Will it be more comfortable getting there? Probably. Will it be less "safe"? Maybe, but by a margin so small that it probably doesn't matter in practice. At this point we're really into the territory of individual tradeoffs. And FWIW, anyone would be hard pressed to go up against the author of that article in terms of real-world experience with this stuff. As for a lot of the members of his forum... well, that's another story.
The JK-Experience looks like it was a truly epic trip, but it doesn't really qualify as "overlanding" by any generally-accepted definition of that term that I know of. I really don't mean to down-play it, but those were pretty well-worn trails that were all less than a half day's drive to a hotel. Absolutely stunning scenery and wheeling that I hope to experience some day.
EDIT: Forgot to get in my potshot on ham vs. CB... CB is cheap and easy to get in to, no question. Ham (or really 2m FM, and I would put race radios in this boat as well) is hands down better in every other regard. Full stop. One thing I've never understood is dumping $10K on axles and cheaping out on good comms... :bleh:
Last edited:
If you visit the site that I linked earlier and go to History>Definitions he gives five distinct definitions of Overlanding of which trips like the JK-Experience falls directly within one of those definitions. Sure, for us in the US such trips can be considered "day trips", but that is under one of the definitions. Even according to the author's own definitions, an exploratory Overland trip can be doesn't necessarily mean going to some place never before visited. His #5 definition emphasizes the ultimate Overland which covers scientific and sociological researches, but each of the others pare down to exploration for individuals and even WayofLife enjoys seeing new places that can only be reached by a Jeep or similar vehicle.
By the way, your definition of a "big lift" and WayofLife's may differ considering some of the discussion that went on earlier. According to the author of that article, any lift over about 2" is too much because it supposedly weakens the load-bearing capability of the vehicle itself while any tire larger than about 33"--especially if they're wider than, say 235mm could cause rubbing in the fender wells and limit the turning radius of the vehicle. He also seems to either not know or ignore the capabilities of today's trail tires to run at 0psi on the trails with little to no damage to the tires themselves while emphasizing that every rig should have some form of tire inflation pump, acknowledging the need on occasion to reduce tire pressure for some of the more technical aspects of a trip. I, personally, don't consider 4" extreme when I see Jeeps and trucks riding as much as 12" of lift and still driving on the highways.
My plans for my own JK are a total of 3" of lift (75mm) and upgrading to 35" tires once this second set of 32"s wears down. Even these 32 inchers do very well if I can just avoid bottoming out on the rocks of a moderate (#5 trail rating) run. That 3" (1" body, 2" suspension) should carry me up to a #7 or #8 trail fairly well though I'm not sure it could handle the Rubicon (the only #9 trail) on these tires. Lockers might be a good idea, too, even though I'm running limited slip front and rear. If I break an axle, then I'll up the axles to 50/60 or so, but until then I'm ok with the 30/44s under her now.
Addendum: I thought the Rubicon was the only #9 trail... guess I was wrong. It's the only #10 trail?
Last edited:
Yeah I thought about this one a little more and I think you're right -- by a fairly broad definition the Experience would fit, though I think even on that page it falls under the "Backcountry Adventure" heading vs. "Overland" or "Expedition." I don't think it even needs to be defined that crisply or narrowly. I guess my point was that the Experience doesn't typify "overland" style travel. It does have that point-to-point aspect which seems key (vs. multiple day trips). :idontknow:
but, based on what? if you were to tell me that this guy actually has years of experience running rigs that were significantly more modified and is now using the knowledge he's gained from that to base his so called pratical reasons, i might be more receptive to his opinions on the matter. however, it would appear that his explicit choices are not based on fact or experience but rather, imagined threats. granted, i don't know this guy from adam so, maybe i'm wrong here.
but, depending on the year, time of year, amount of rain fall or amount of snow, it's been my experience that even the easiest of trails can quickly degrade into near impassible boulder strewn chasms. for instance, getting up to someplace like hungry bills ranch is something a honda civic can do most years but, during the winter of 2004, a crazy rain year, the trail was almost impassible in our highly modified TJ. in 1997, goler wash, a trail that charles mason took a school bus up to his hideaway got completely washed out in a flash flood creating a huge dry fall that, until the park service came in to level it out, was extremely difficult to climb in all but more highly modified vehicles. while you may not need a bigger lift (i don't like "big" lifts - just big enough to clear the tires i am running) and MT tires to get you to where you want to go most of the time, isn't the whole idea of "overland" to be self-sufficient and prepared to take on whatever comes your way? sure, a lot can be done in a mildly built JK but, the amount of effort that is required to move that vehicle across the same terrain is often significant enough to cause unnecessary breaks. again, i would be the first to say that these breaks i speak of are ones that i personally have suffered and, much of why moby is what he is today is a result of me trying to find ways to mitigate them in the future.
i've wheeled stock, mildly built, well built and highly built JK's and can tell you with out a doubt, as is, moby is more reliable today than it's ever been. it is way more comfortable getting there, way more stable and therefore, way more safe or, at least in my opinion. with the exception of high cost, i'm not sure where there tradeoff is.
well, i'm all to eager to hear about his real-world experiences running highly built rigs. i would love to learn about all the pitfalls he's discovered running them for years and how those experiences have shown him the light.
in all fairness, the hotel thing was something they did this year only and only as a saftey precaution due to the high altitudes that we were at the whole week. previous years really put you out in the middle of nowhere and required a lot more of camping.
LOL!! i'm with you on this and now have a race radio too (way better than a CB) and would probably have a HAM already too if it weren't for the fact that someone in our group always has one and for the most part, i'd only really use it for safety purposes. but, until more people see the light, most are still running CB's and i would prefer to have the ability to communicate with the people in my group than some guy halfway around the world.
and this all seems just so crazy to me. loading up a stock JK with a roof rack, super heavy tent and a ton of gear will weaken the load-bearing capabilities of a stock vehicle and put an enormous strain on its drive train components. as far as rubbing of the fender wells go, he must be referring to vehicles other than a JK but even still, aftermarket wheels with proper back spacing will address that minor concern.
and, that's my point as well. what one can imagine is nice but, you can learn a lot more from real life expereince.
trail ratings are subjective to the people to rate them. the rubicon is NOT what i would consider a 9 or 10 on a scale of 1-10. more like a 6-7 at most and maybe a 10 if you were to take on specific obstacles like the soup bowl or the little sluice.
The fact that he's been able to get to all the places he's been without running a big build is exactly the point I'm trying to make. There are very few places you really can't go with even a stock Rubicon and a winch.
Sure, but your personal experience with Moby is based on wheeling it way harder than would be required for "overland" wheeling, so the fact that it's more reliable for you is not surprising, since you've built it up to serve that purpose. Cost is a huge factor in all this, of course, and probably even the most compelling one for the "if you don't need it, why run it?" argument.
Beyond that, you don't need tons of experience personally running big lifts and tires to see the theoretical down-sides -- it's mostly just physics. Bigger tires, heavier axles, and decorative bumpers means more mass that has to be stopped, turned, and hauled over any obstacles. I'm not sure I completely see the "bigger contact patch = bad" argument personally, but whatever. That said, I think in practice these down-sides can be mitigated almost completely. That's where the real-world experience does come in. Having D60-sized brakes, for example, seems like a good strategy for stopping the 40's attached to them. Likewise, people act like if you run a roof tent your rig will instantly flip over, tumble down a ravine, and you'll die a horrible death. I can tell you from real-world experience that's absolutely true.
hmmm, i guess i need to take some time to see where all he's been.
maybe, but that would be more than i would prefer. and again, it doesn't take much to make even the easiest destinations, one of those few places.
well, if this is all about cost, i definitely see that as a valid argument. what i find funny is that a lot of this thread getting started was because of a conversation i was having with some guys who were trying to justify the need to buy over priced control arm relocation brackets and dual rate springs claiming, that when it came to doing overland builds right, cost shouldn't be a factor. but, i know this isn't the case with you.
actually, big heavy axles and big heavy tires provide great "unsprung" weight and are a huge benefit in lowering your COG and providing stability. of course, the bigger axles will also be able to take the strain of moving that extra weight and so much more.
Likewise, people act like if you run a roof tent your rig will instantly flip over, tumble down a ravine, and you'll die a horrible death. I can tell you from real-world experience that's absolutely true.
:cheesy: you know i'm just razzin ya
piginajeep
The Original Smartass
. Likewise, people act like if you run a roof tent your rig will instantly flip over, tumble down a ravine, and you'll die a horrible death. I can tell you from real-world experience that's absolutely true.
I think its more dangerous when your drinking and trying to get into the roof top tent :standing wave:
Yep, it's a problem. That's why I recommend you always travel with a buddy or two who can physically hoist you up there if needed.
:cheesy::drunkbuds::clap2:
piginajeep
The Original Smartass
:cheesy::clap2::standing wave:
So, I've asked this before and I feel like it needs to be asked again, even if money is an issue, why wouldn't you want to make it a priority to install better components that have proven themselves to be superior to OEM. I mean, the factory front axle housing whether it be a Dana 30 or 44 really isn't that great. The end forgings are weak and prone to bend, the tubes are thin and there have clearly been examples of where they've broken even on stock setups, the ball joints are un-greasable and use plastic components that tend to fail prematurely and the shafts have yokes that only use C-clips. To me, investing in something like a Dynatrac Pro Rock 44 with chromoly shafts and Pro Steer ball joints is a worthy investment and one that will help ensure you will not suffer needless breakdowns on the trail.
As far as drive shafts go, the ones that come from the factory work well enough but, if you lift your Jeep at all, the front shaft will come into contact with your automatic transmission sump pan, tear off the slip shaft boot and will eventually cause a transmission leak. Of cousre, the greater angle that it gets placed in puts the CV boot in a constant state of pinch and, over time causes it to fail and that ultimately leads to the failure of the joint itself. Along those lines, Rzeppa joints aren't exactly something you can find at your local Napa autoparts store or even something that most local drive line shops can work on. 1310 u-joints can be found just about anywhere, for cheap and a standard u-joint style drive shaft is definitely something that you can have worked on anywhere. Of course, for those who will actually take the time to regear, all this is to say nothing about things like how really really small a 5.13 pinion is on a Dana 30 or 5.38 is on a Dana 44.
Even if you were to run just 33" or 35", for all the weight "overland" types likes to carry, I just don't understand why drivetrain upgrades never even make it onto the list of things you should invest in. Sure, things like limb risers and a Snow Peak kitchen set are nice and all but, to me, they would fall more under the category of "if you don't need it, why get it". But, that's just me.
As far as drive shafts go, the ones that come from the factory work well enough but, if you lift your Jeep at all, the front shaft will come into contact with your automatic transmission sump pan, tear off the slip shaft boot and will eventually cause a transmission leak. Of cousre, the greater angle that it gets placed in puts the CV boot in a constant state of pinch and, over time causes it to fail and that ultimately leads to the failure of the joint itself. Along those lines, Rzeppa joints aren't exactly something you can find at your local Napa autoparts store or even something that most local drive line shops can work on. 1310 u-joints can be found just about anywhere, for cheap and a standard u-joint style drive shaft is definitely something that you can have worked on anywhere. Of course, for those who will actually take the time to regear, all this is to say nothing about things like how really really small a 5.13 pinion is on a Dana 30 or 5.38 is on a Dana 44.
Even if you were to run just 33" or 35", for all the weight "overland" types likes to carry, I just don't understand why drivetrain upgrades never even make it onto the list of things you should invest in. Sure, things like limb risers and a Snow Peak kitchen set are nice and all but, to me, they would fall more under the category of "if you don't need it, why get it". But, that's just me.
:cheesy:.....