A note from Hagerty’s collector cars on Jeep TJ

Davidtj

TJ Addict
Supporting Member
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
1,206
Location
Winter Haven Florida, United States
A note from Hagerty’s collector cars on Jeep TJ


1997–2006 Jeep Wrangler
39344903rubicon19-1024x687.jpg
FCA/Wieck
Average value in #3 (Good) condition:$12,400
TJ Wranglers are rightfully regarded as peak Wrangler among the Jeep faithful. Wranglers have a lot to offer; they are very capable off-road, but take the top and the doors off and you have the perfect weekend cruiser. As far as Wranglers go, the TJ has some special sauce.
The obvious perk is that the looks were greatly improved over the previous YJ, but the major attraction is that it retains Jeep’s venerable 4.0-liter inline-six, and it was the first Wrangler to sport a more capable four-link rear suspension. The TJ also introduced the Rubicon variant, which added heavier duty Dana 44 axles with locking differentials, noticeably improving off-road capability and toughness. Mechanically, these are bulletproof vehicles. However, like all Jeeps that came before it, rust is a pain point. Frames are especially susceptible to rot, so be sure to get underneath any TJ you are considering and inspect it carefully. Rust issues are fixable by a competent welder, but it is best not have to deal with the issue at all.
Values for TJs in #2 (Excellent) condition have begun to creep up across the board, but depending on where you live, values can vary widely in regions with a strong Jeep following. $15,000 can net you a very solid Rubicon. For less money you can snag a standard model and have cash left over for a bunch of upgrades. Like the Fox-body Mustang, the TJ is a canvas for the imagination.
 
My dad just sent me that article. Love it but you have to be if a certain generation I guess.

And no sir Fox body Mustangs were and still are awesome. The ugliest and most pathetic Mustangs ever were the Mustang II, 74-78
Pathetic? Yes. Ugly - oh hell no! One of the best ever made as far as looks went! No accounting for taste and all that...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aviatortroy
Nah, the Mustang II, basically a Pinto in disguise was the worst looking ever. At least with the Fox body Mustang, performance was no longer a dirty word.

Love the Fox body Mustangs myself and have owned a few; however, the early Fox bodies were dogs. The 4.2L (255 cu in) V8 may have been the low point of that generation. Things started to really take shape in '85 when you could get a 5.0L with forged pistons, roller cam, and Holley 600 cfm carb. Had one and loved it.