Is the Gladiator at risk for cancellation?

[BigRed2020]

Poor MPGs, lack of power, and steering wandering are probably due to the fact that a lot of us on here have non factory suspension, heavy steel bumpers and armor, larger than factory tire sizes, and “overland” equipment weighing down the rear of the truck.

So, if you have steering wandering, it could be because you have a tent/camper in or on the bed that turns your truck into a sail while also putting it overweight. All of which will also drop your MPGs and make the engine feel like a dog.

Most people that buy these trucks won’t do any of the above, and as such won’t have the problems some of us do. Therefore, the problems some of us have aren’t representative of the Gladiator as a whole, and aren’t the reason why it’ll get canceled.

The Gladiator is what the masses wanted from Jeep. A dual cab (which the mass market favors, not the small amount of us enthusiasts) truck that is also a Jeep. The mainstream Jeep buyer didn’t expect FCA to price them into unobtainium for as long as they did. That’s why the sales suck.

If you bought a Gladiator thinking it was going to be something else, that’s on you. If you wanted to put a camper on a truck, you should’ve bought a F-250. If you wanted a better solid axle off-road vehicle, you should’ve bought a Wrangler (I fall into this category). If you wanted better power or MPGs, you should’ve bought literally anything else.

I have a guy at work I go wheeling with that has a Rubicon complete with an overland set up and he does all the extreme trails around us in VT/NH/ME. The other guy has a leveled Mojave and he’s getting around the same mileage as me but both our commutes are less than 10 miles each way… I know with mods it goes down so that’s why I find it weird that these people complain about MPGs in these trucks and if we’re being honest outside of the ranger non of the others do much better…

Sponsored

 

[ZoMojave]

I don’t have a heavy foot and on my new mojave city I am getting 14. Now only 500 miles on it so could get better but I am getting to the point where if being lite on the pedal won't get me much better why bother?

Maybe, but mine didn't. Winter fuel: 14 mpg. Summer fuel: 17mpg. My driving habits didn't change it.

 

[JamesWyatt]

My Mojave wandered so bad at interstate speeds I thought I was going to die on the drive home from the dealer after buying it. Swapping out the shitty Falken MTs for 35 KO2s completely fixed the issue.

Regarding engines, it's not that the 3.6 is bad, it just the JT could be so much more fun to drive with something better. I briefly owned a Willys XR with the 4:56 gears and the 2.0L engine, and the thing was a blast to drive while feeling solid as a rock on the interstate.

Just my 2 cents that all stock JT 3.6 models with 33" tires should come with the 4:56 gears, and the models with smaller tires should have 4:10s. And 4:88 should be optional on the Rubicon and Mojave JTs.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Just my 2 cents that all stock JT 3.6 models with 33" tires should come with the 4:56 gears, and the models with smaller tires should have 4:10s. And 4:88 should be optional on the Rubicon and Mojave JTs.

And there would go tow ratings and CAFE numbers.
They have to walk a fine line to survive.

 

[JamesWyatt]

And there would go tow ratings and CAFE numbers.
They have to walk a fine line to survive.

Tow rating goes down with lower gears? Are they trying to tow at 85mph?

At least make 4:56 and 4:88 options then.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Tow rating goes down with lower gears? Are they trying to tow at 85mph?

At least make 4:56 and 4:88 options then.

Engine RPM and heat rejection and so on - it's a science. They have the max tow, just for an example, at the sweet spot of tire size, gearing and engine RPM for that rating. Any changes take it out of that sweet spot.
Yeah, lower gears can - it doesn't actually give you "more power", it just feels good.

 

[JamesWyatt]

Engine RPM and heat rejection and so on - it's a science. They have the max tow, just for an example, at the sweet spot of tire size, gearing and engine RPM for that rating. Any changes take it out of that sweet spot.
Yeah, lower gears can - it doesn't actually give you "more power", it just feels good.

I'm guessing they do the testing at lower altitudes on level grade as well. At higher altitudes and steeper climbs, I wonder if the stock gears with the 3.6 are below what that sweet spot would be if it were tested where the air is thinner. I think performance for non-turbos is what, 2-3% loss per 1,000 feet above sea level?

 

[ShadowsPapa]

I'm guessing they do the testing at lower altitudes as well. At higher altitudes, I wonder if the stock gears with the 3.6 are below what that sweet spot would be if it were tested where the air is thinner. I think performance for non-turbos is what, 2-3% loss per 1,000 feet above sea level?

SAE J2807 tow test

The test involves this stretch of highway -
The Davis Dam Grade Arizona State Route 68 is a stretch of road that starts in the Davis Dam area of the Colorado River, close to Laughlin, Nevada, and Bullhead City, Arizona, with an elevation of just about 550 feet. This stretch of highway travels through the Black Mountains and climbs to Highway 93 near Kingman, Arizona.

The section used for the SAE J2807 Highway Gradeability Test starts just past the intersection of SR 68 and Highway 95 outside of Laughlin and climbs to more than 3,500 feet in just 11.4 miles

To pass this test, a truck-and-trailer combination must be able to drive at 40 mph (35 mph for dualies) and never drop below that speed until the end of the test segment at the peak of Union Pass. Test drivers are allowed to go faster than the minimum speed requirement in the sections of the grade where posted speed limits are 55 mph and 65 mph, but there are other requirements the vehicle must still meet. Under “drivetrain system performance,” the J2807 standard requires there be no component failures, along with no “check engine” lights or any other alerts or warnings for the driver. The “cooling system performance” requirement also requires zero part failures, no error codes, no driver warnings of any other kind, and no loss of coolant fluid during the test.

 

[JamesWyatt]

SAE J2807 tow test

The test involves this stretch of highway -
The Davis Dam Grade Arizona State Route 68 is a stretch of road that starts in the Davis Dam area of the Colorado River, close to Laughlin, Nevada, and Bullhead City, Arizona, with an elevation of just about 550 feet. This stretch of highway travels through the Black Mountains and climbs to Highway 93 near Kingman, Arizona.

The section used for the SAE J2807 Highway Gradeability Test starts just past the intersection of SR 68 and Highway 95 outside of Laughlin and climbs to more than 3,500 feet in just 11.4 miles

To pass this test, a truck-and-trailer combination must be able to drive at 40 mph (35 mph for dualies) and never drop below that speed until the end of the test segment at the peak of Union Pass. Test drivers are allowed to go faster than the minimum speed requirement in the sections of the grade where posted speed limits are 55 mph and 65 mph, but there are other requirements the vehicle must still meet. Under “drivetrain system performance,” the J2807 standard requires there be no component failures, along with no “check engine” lights or any other alerts or warnings for the driver. The “cooling system performance” requirement also requires zero part failures, no error codes, no driver warnings of any other kind, and no loss of coolant fluid during the test.

I just want to go up a steep grade above 5K' at 80mph without the engine screaming bloody murder. I haven't tried the Wrangler XR 4:56 with the 3.6, but with the 2.0L, it wouldn't even downshift in the same scenario where the 3.6 on 4:10s screams bloody murder and looses speed.

Since tow ratings don't matter to me, I would probably be a good candidate for the diesel instead of the 3.6.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

I just want to go up a steep grade above 5K' at 80mph without the engine screaming bloody murder. I haven't tried the Wrangler XR 4:56 with the 3.6, but with the 2.0L, it wouldn't even downshift in the same scenario where the 3.6 on 4:10s screams bloody murder and looses speed.

Since tow ratings don't matter to me, I would probably be a good candidate for the diesel instead of the 3.6.

4xe works for that - doesn't even downshift much, if at all.........
Yeah, you'd find the diesel able to do that better than the 3.6.
I'm not a diesel guy in my Jeeps, but hey, credit where credit's due.

 

[JamesWyatt]

4xe works for that - doesn't even downshift much, if at all.........
Yeah, you'd find the diesel able to do that better than the 3.6.
I'm not a diesel guy in my Jeeps, but hey, credit where credit's due.

I test drove a 4xe over a year ago, but at the time, I had no idea about putting it in 4-auto in order to feel the power. Needless to say, it just felt like a heavier 3.6 model. Major fail by the sales person, IMO.

 

[redriderjf87]

And there would go tow ratings and CAFE numbers.
They have to walk a fine line to survive.

CAFE numbers must have nothing to do with actual fuel economy if that's the case.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

CAFE numbers must have nothing to do with actual fuel economy if that's the case.

Why?

 

[redriderjf87]

Why?

In my experience shortening the diff ratio with the 3.6 to 4.10 or somewhere closer to 4.56 wouldn't hurt the highway mpg. And would help the city mpg.

 

[west_bymidwest]

My Mojave wandered so bad at interstate speeds I thought I was going to die on the drive home from the dealer after buying it. Swapping out the shitty Falken MTs for 35 KO2s completely fixed the issue.

Regarding engines, it's not that the 3.6 is bad, it just the JT could be so much more fun to drive with something better. I briefly owned a Willys XR with the 4:56 gears and the 2.0L engine, and the thing was a blast to drive while feeling solid as a rock on the interstate.

Just my 2 cents that all stock JT 3.6 models with 33" tires should come with the 4:56 gears, and the models with smaller tires should have 4:10s. And 4:88 should be optional on the Rubicon and Mojave JTs.

I despised the A/T Falkens I had. Terrible ride, poor wear (even with a proper alignment), loud, and bad MPGs. My ride quality and MPGs are substantially better with KO2’s, and they’re even taller than the Falkens.

So, if any of you have Falkens on from factory and have a poor ride, maybe try a C rated KO2. It made my 2.5 inch lift with stiff coils drive like an Escalade (not an exaggeration)

Sponsored