Jeep Gladiator Mojave Edition! [Updated With Live Pics and Chassis/Suspension Breakdown]

[Etoimos]

All of these upgrades come with compromise: While the Mojave's payload capacity matches the Rubicon's 1200 pound rating, towing capacity has been decreased from 7000 to 6000 pounds.

That is true, the tow rating is down to 6000lbs. But lets not kid our selves, that is more than enough to pull any true off road trailer (including the Black Series HQ15 which is 23' long, over 7' wide and almost 10' tall). So while it is a compromise, it is one that has little real world effect.

Sponsored

 

[Etoimos]

So, the wider stance is done with wheel backspacing, not different axles.

It seems that this would be a capable model. The main scenarios I can think of where it theoretically would have an advantage over a JTR like mine with similar after-market shocks, a robust lift, and greater wheel backspacing would be:

1. Wheeling in 4H with rear lockers on above 30 mph.

2. Handling jumping and landing better.

I'm not a sand rat, so my thought process might be off on this. But I would think in dune running that you could have wheel speeds in excess of 30mph while the vehicle was going slower than 30mph. That only applies if the JT uses wheel sensors to determine it's speed.

 

[Jhoude19]

can anyone confirm that the wheel base has been extended for the Mojave?

 

[JRobes]

can anyone confirm that the wheel base has been extended for the Mojave?

It hasn't according to all the tech summaries I've read. Only change is different offset on the wheels that pushes the tires out an extra 15mm past the rubicon's factory width. I think a couple articles mistakenly said "longer wheelbase" (wheelbase is distance between front and rear axles) when it was supposed to say "wider axles" with the HD rubi/max tow axle.

 

[MarineHawk]

It hasn't according to all the tech summaries I've read. Only change is different offset on the wheels that pushes the tires out an extra 15mm past the rubicon's factory width. I think a couple articles mistakenly said "longer wheelbase" (wheelbase is distance between front and rear axles) when it was supposed to say "wider axles" with the HD rubi/max tow axle.

Right. Just to clarify, the wheels each have 7.5mm more backspacing (for a total of 15 mm wider), and the axles are the same as the JTR. https://www.fourwheeler.com/news/jeep-jt-gladiator-mojave-vs-gladiator-rubicon-whats-difference/

 

[Jhoude19]

so after reading a few articles it sounds like the Mojave is a better platform vs. the rubicon.. sound like beefed the frame a bit in a few spots.

 

[PyrPatriot]

Are we sure the wheel base hasnt been lengthened? If they made changes to the frame for reinforcement it is reasonable for them to go ahead and lengthen it to accommodate better performance

 

[BAT]

Man very cool and I haven't gotten mine yet which I guess maybe is a good thing since they keep coming out with new models every couple of months. But dang its probably not going to be something I am going to want to pay as much as they want to sell it for (LOL). Maybe if I could take out a 10 year term (LOL). I was pretty much set on the Sport S Max Tow as I really didn't have an interest in the Rubicon cause I don't do rock crawling but dang this is nice. Sell it in Gobi and it will blend with the sand

 

[MarineHawk]

so after reading a few articles it sounds like the Mojave is a better platform vs. the rubicon.. sound like beefed the frame a bit in a few spots.

The Mojave is designed to be better on high-speed Baja-like trails.

The Rubi is designed to be better on slower-speed crawling on rocks. The Rubi has a front locker and lower 4L T-case gearing, which is better on the rocks. Also, the front locker on the Rubi would be better for running through deep mud.

 

[MarineHawk]

Are we sure the wheel base hasnt been lengthened? If they made changes to the frame for reinforcement it is reasonable for them to go ahead and lengthen it to accommodate better performance

I feel pretty sure. None of the articles that actually mention specific changes have suggested any lengthening of the wheel base, which would be extremely costly and unnecessary. They brought the tires out about a 1/3" to help accommodate the larger shocks. I did the same or more with $130 aftermarket wheels:

 

[Jhoude19]

The Mojave is designed to be better on high-speed Baja-like trails.

The Rubi is designed to be better on slower-speed crawling on rocks. The Rubi has a front locker and lower 4L T-case gearing, which is better on the rocks. Also, the front locker on the Rubi would be better for running through deep mud.

thing that would have be sold on the Mojave is the steel knuckles, and reinforced frame. lockers can easily be added. only con to the Mojave atleast for me would be tcase gearing... those 2 things are really the only thing that id be interested in. the shocks and bumpers would all be replaced any ways so to me it would be a waste of money. but the Mojave to me seems like a better platform then a rubicon, unless someone is dead seat on factory lockers.

 

[Jhoude19]

also I noticed there is some wording issues with these articles from what iv read the wheelbase has not actually been widened.. if that was the case they would have to have a completely different frame, and wheel well design for the mojaves vs other JTs. but what has been changed is the trackwidth and that is only due to different offset wheels that come factory.

 

[Jhoude19]

I feel pretty sure. None of the articles that actually mention specific changes have suggested any lengthening of the wheel base, which would be extremely costly and unnecessary. They brought the tires out about a 1/3" to help accommodate the larger shocks. I did the same or more with $130 aftermarket wheels:

the articles are worded wrong, they changed the track width, not the wheelbase. a new wheel base would mean a new frame design, wheelwells, bed etc.. the widened the track width with different offset wheels from the factory.

 

[MarineHawk]

thing that would have be sold on the Mojave is the steel knuckles, and reinforced frame. lockers can easily be added. only con to the Mojave atleast for me would be tcase gearing... those 2 things are really the only thing that id be interested in. the shocks and bumpers would all be replaced any ways so to me it would be a waste of money. but the Mojave to me seems like a better platform then a rubicon, unless someone is dead seat on factory lockers.

It depends on your needs. The Mojave frame upgrade can’t be anything but a good thing. But I don’t really think I would ever get into jumping my JT through the air and landing hard. The suspension-strengthening stuff I already have on mine or more. from the aftermarket. And I would have that even if I had a Mojave, as I would have wanted more than a 1" lift over the stock JTR. With my 3" lift, I just cleared this one: https://imgur.com/CCqjYcx

I definitely prefer the 4:1 T-Case ratio.

I definitely prefer having front lockers, but, yes, you could add them to any Jeep.

 

[JRobes]

Man very cool and I haven't gotten mine yet which I guess maybe is a good thing since they keep coming out with new models every couple of months. But dang its probably not going to be something I am going to want to pay as much as they want to sell it for (LOL). Maybe if I could take out a 10 year term (LOL). I was pretty much set on the Sport S Max Tow as I really didn't have an interest in the Rubicon cause I don't do rock crawling but dang this is nice. Sell it in Gobi and it will blend with the sand

If you're not against putting your own lockers in (and on-board air), the Max Tow is still a desirable choice for an overlanding rig, you still get the best payload/towing #'s on the door jamb placard which is what I plan on doing with mine.

Sponsored