Flexin
Well-Known Member
lol, spoken like a current JK owner, lol.You’re so correct! The poor sales and plethora of Gladiator inventory 100% prove that!
Sponsored
lol, spoken like a current JK owner, lol.You’re so correct! The poor sales and plethora of Gladiator inventory 100% prove that!
Haha.... keep on driving (or pushing) your Nissan, dude....You’re so correct! The poor sales and plethora of Gladiator inventory 100% prove that!
Nissan? I don’t have a Nissan, but nice try fella. I actually have a Wrangler and another non Nissan vehicle.Haha.... keep on driving (or pushing) your Nissan, dude....
If these Jeeps were $100k, would i be pissed? Ya, probably, but only because i couldn't afford one.
Would i begrudge FCA for for seeking the maximum price point? Never in a million years, and neither should you.
good post.Nissan? I don’t have a Nissan, but nice try fella. I actually have a Wrangler and another non Nissan vehicle.
I’m pro capitalism. My issue is a $50k Gladiator that doesn’t come with basic safety features that most $25k vehicles come with standard. I don’t begrudge FCA, necessarily. I think they missed the mark. One could say they are asking beyond the maximum price point. Proof is in the sales figures and the dusty Gladiators sitting on the lot. Prove me wrong. Just be happy you are driving a unique vehicle. That’s always the #1 argument when people own a sales loser.
Nah, we are fine, you and i, and i am happy to eat a big slice of that humble pie. In my haste, your post seemed similar to that of a troll's.Nissan? I don’t have a Nissan, but nice try fella. I actually have a Wrangler and another non Nissan vehicle.
I’m pro capitalism. My issue is a $50k Gladiator that doesn’t come with basic safety features that most $25k vehicles come with standard. I don’t begrudge FCA, necessarily. I think they missed the mark. One could say they are asking beyond the maximum price point. Proof is in the sales figures and the dusty Gladiators sitting on the lot. Prove me wrong. Just be happy you are driving a unique vehicle. That’s always the #1 argument when people own a sales loser.
Thank you!good post.
I don’t even know what that means. Lol, perhaps you can explain your logic, lol.lol, spoken like a current JK owner, lol.
Thanks, Wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something . I ordered Mojave march 6th. It Didn't even occur to me it wouldn't have the step when I ordered. Oh wellRe-reading the Mojave page on Jeep's website, it says "available rugged step sand sliders". Whether or not it was implied they were standard when the Mojave was announced, I can't say.
Hah. Old and tired V6? That's how I felt about the 3.8l on my JKU Rubicon. Even with stock tires, 6 speed manual, and 4.10 gears it struggled. The 3.6l is fine, it never feels inadequate. I liked the power of the 3.6l in my 2017 Canyon better, but I only really notice a difference when I floor it and it goes over 4k RPM. The Canyon was noticeably more powerful there. That was a more modern V6 with direct injection, cylinder deactivation, and more power/liter. The 3.6l in the Gladiator sounds a lot better though so that almost makes up for it IMO. I never liked the sound of that GM 3.6l. Back to your point, the Jeep's 3.6l doesn't have cylinder deactivation or DI, so less stuff to go wrong. My 2 cents.I don’t even know what that means. Lol, perhaps you can explain your logic, lol.
I love my JK! It sits pretty in the fourth bay. Naked all year long and only taken out on nice days. When it came time to plunking down $60k I chose something else. I couldn’t stand paying $60k for an old and tired v6. Reliable, but inadequate. I’d love to combine a couple of vehicles into the Gladiator, but couldn’t swallow having the same engine my JK has in something that weighs much more.
The Rubicon floats over pot holes like an old Cadillac, so, they are almost non-existent.Will it handle potholes better at 50 mph than other versions?
yes... Also Direct injection is a maint. headache because it allows the valves to be coated with carbon. Just ask BMW owners. Unless the engine has the new design with an additional injector solely to clean the valves, then, valve cleaning is required sometime down the line...Hah. Old and tired V6? That's how I felt about the 3.8l on my JKU Rubicon. Even with stock tires, 6 speed manual, and 4.10 gears it struggled. The 3.6l is fine, it never feels inadequate. I liked the power of the 3.6l in my 2017 Canyon better, but I only really notice a difference when I floor it and it goes over 4k RPM. The Canyon was noticeably more powerful there. That was a more modern V6 with direct injection, cylinder deactivation, and more power/liter. The 3.6l in the Gladiator sounds a lot better though so that almost makes up for it IMO. I never liked the sound of that GM 3.6l. Back to your point, the Jeep's 3.6l doesn't have cylinder deactivation or DI, so less stuff to go wrong. My 2 cents.
Yes. That's 100% true. However, that LGZ version of the 3.6l does not have a carbon build up issue. The previous gen did or sure. But we are agreed on that point...The Rubicon floats over pot holes like an old Cadillac, so, they are almost non-existent.
yes... Also Direct injection is a maint. headache because it allows the valves to be coated with carbon. Just ask BMW owners. Unless the engine has the new design with an additional injector solely to clean the valves, then, valve cleaning is required sometime down the line...