like Chris, I too am looking for Clean LJ, I'm coming form a CJ what can I say.. Seems I was naïve to think the LJ's were more affordable than the JK's. I didn't realize the LJ's had become the collectors item they are today.
Some may know my ideal ride will be practically modded, quality 2.5" 3" lift, LJ OME, JK AEV. 33" ish rubber, 4:10's 4:11's locked or limited slipped. some armor, keeping the mostly modded factory look. pass on the angry bird and 22"s.
Getting to my point. Seems some of you have had both JK's and LJ's, some are coming back to a LJ after owning a JK, JKU, If you care to share your wisdom, id like to ask why. Is it looks? certainly not comfort. Is it simplicity of being able to do most work your self with out a deep tool box of electrical component test gear? Is it for something that has not been mentioned yet, the superiority of the jeep wave perhaps?
Seems one can get a better LJ for 16-22K, seems one can get a pretty nice 13-16 JK for about the same price. I chose 2013 as a starting year because of the 3.8 to 3.6 change out, Im aware the 3.6 came out in 12 ish, never liked first year change of anything myself.
If one had there jeep stolen or wrecked Id think it would be easier to get your insurance coverage to cover your newer jeep than your older one wouldn't it? No haggling over street value vs agreed upon value. I bring up the insurance question because I could never get my old CJ covered for what I had invested for parts, let alone labor.
I understand this isn't my thread and I do not intend on hi-jacking but in my old man opinion it's more to the point than splitting the hairs over the generation naming convention isn't... gulp,,, no offence intended it's all in good fun,,
I can just hear John Wayne and Clint Eastwood discussing there generation name during a smoke and a whisky now, not a vape and a 12 dollar beer, lol.
I do enjoy the forum.
Thanks,
Jim.
If you plan on daily driving your Jeep, commuting, or doing lots of long highway drives, the JK is undoubtedly the better vehicle.
Hell, even stock-versus-stock, the JK is going to be better off-road than the TJ / LJ. It's a newer vehicle, and generally a manufacturer doesn't make a newer vehicle that is worse than the old one.
A well optioned 2012+ JK Rubicon will cost a bit more than a low mileage, clean, LJ Rubicon (depending), so to the LJ should still be cheaper, but usually not by that much. Now if you get a Hard Rock or a Recon model JK Rubicon, then you're going to spend 30k or more, at which point it's a lot more than a LJ Rubicon.
Do you consider your Jeep to be a recreational vehicle or a commuter / daily driver? I like to think of Wranglers as serving no other purpose than being a recreational vehicle / toy. Given that train of thought, I want a cheaper toy for one (hence the TJ / LJ is a better buy), but I also want my "toy" to be easy to work on for the most part.
I can tell you from having owned a JK Rubicon that if you plan on working on that thing yourself, you're in for a world of hurt. That thing is packed to the brim with electronics, wiring, etc. One look under the hood and you'll quickly miss all the room in the 4.0 engine bay, the simplicity of the OHV setup, etc.
The TJ / LJ platform is the last Jeep that the average DIY mechanic can work on. The JK rides better and performs better in every way, but it lacks the "soul" that the older TJ and LJ has. It feels like a well built SUV. Quiet, smooth, and easy to drive.
In my mind they are both great vehicles, but I'd rather have the simpler one, as I like to do most of my own stuff (when the kids permit), and I personally see the TJ / LJ as eventually becoming the more sought after Jeep.
If I could afford both, I would own both, but given the choice between the two, the TJ platform is the platform for me.
