Would it make sense for Jeep to offer a LJ version of the JL? If so, how many of you would jump on one? What if they went even further and offered a bare bones Jeep LJR with the 4.0.
Would it make sense for Jeep to offer a LJ version of the JL?
If so, how many of you would jump on one?
What if they went even further and offered a bare bones Jeep LJR with the 4.0.
Is there a way to express a harder no because if there is, that is my vote.A 2 door Gladiator? Sure. But a hard no to the 4.0.
How does it compare with the 4.0? The guy who rebuilt my 42RLE said some of the autos paired with the 3.8 in JKs were locking the torque converter too soon and lugging the engine, and that while mine was also locking a little too soon in his opinion the 4.0 had enough torque to not matter.I am impressed with the 3.8 in my wife's JK, torque galore at low rpm's
Why the hate on the 4.0? I got a Jeep out of a strong preference for the 4.0. It's not the G.O.A.T 4.9 but fairly close.
I have lugged the wife's JK down to 800 rpms and it pulled as good as my 4.6 stroker or even better... the JK is a 6 speed the stroker has a 32RHHow does it compare with the 4.0? The guy who rebuilt my 42RLE said some of the autos paired with the 3.8 in JKs were locking the torque converter too soon and lugging the engine, and that while mine was also locking a little too soon in his opinion the 4.0 had enough torque to not matter.
It was good for it's day. It is reliable and resilient. But it is big, heavy and under powered compared to what is available today. It would be silly to put one in a modern vehicle.
The 4.0 has one worthy attribute. It is fairly reliable.Why the hate on the 4.0? I got a Jeep out of a strong preference for the 4.0. It's not the G.O.A.T 4.9 but fairly close.
The 4.0 has one worthy attribute. It is fairly reliable.
Why the hate on the 4.0?
I'd rather have 100 HP for 300K miles than 300 HP for 100K miles.