Ordering Sport S with Max Tow

[JmattNYC]

Thanks! That Hydro Blue diesel JT is still going down in southern Kentucky. Last I heard it was coming up on 90,000 miles. The second owners had an underhood fire and it sat at the dealership for 3 months. They decided to ditch it. So I guess it eventually got fixed and now another owner is racking up miles on it!

As far as the full floating axles go, I feel like Jeep did this on JL because they realized that a lot of people put 37" and larger tires on them. I believe the 43% increase in towing capacity was something they marketed, but the axles didn't really provide that because obviously JT has much higher tow rating without it. Still, who's going to complain about a stronger axle, right?

I'm waiting to see if the 5.7L goes into the Gladiator next fall like the rumors suggest. If so, I'll have my order in as soon as I can.

wow that hydro-blue diesel has had an history!! I think your advice on using that additive help me save my diesel till that damm recall CP3 pump was released to public. Wow crazy to think the JT is pushing 7 years now..

Anyway thank you for that insight and i guess your right!! I could see myself in a 5.7 as well but still love the old V6!! Thinking about what you said in one of your recent videos that soon we will not have many simple options left. Mybe get a wrangler to add to the fleet and just keep rebuilding them.

Sponsored

 

[JmattNYC]

I don't see where a full float axle would amount to anything unless you are severely loaded all of the time and want better bearing support. You don't get any of the true 'full float' benefits like being able to change out the axle shaft with the tire and wheel still on. I guess it will still retain the tire and wheel if you break an axle shaft. I suppose more people than I realize are tearing up axle shafts every weekend

Half ton trucks these days don't even have full float axles and are rated for much higher payload and towing capacities. I think the TRX, RHO and perhaps the Raptor may be the only ones with such an axle...

The only reasonable story I can find is that the JLU received a full float axle to further stabilize the rear end to help increase towing capacity. The JLU had some stability limits due to chassis, suspension, etc.

The whole back half of the Gladiator (suspension, frame, etc) was engineered to haul and tow more weight from the get go - and so Jeep did not need to do anything further with the axle to get the test results.

Or could be a bunch of BS. It's the internet after all.

But I just do suburban dad truck stuff with mine and only occasionally go 'offroad' so take my opinion for what its worth.

Thanks for your insight and you bring up great points.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Why doesn't JT get the full floating rear axle that JL Rubicon has?

Anyhow, back in 2020 I remember doing some videos on my Max Tow JT compared to a non-Max Tow JT and the differences were actually very few and minor.

Axle Won't matter for tow rating.

I bet the differences were more than you realized, especially in the early JT years.

 

[IamPro2A]

wow that hydro-blue diesel has had an history!! I think your advice on using that additive help me save my diesel till that damm recall CP3 pump was released to public. Wow crazy to think the JT is pushing 7 years now..

Anyway thank you for that insight and i guess your right!! I could see myself in a 5.7 as well but still love the old V6!! Thinking about what you said in one of your recent videos that soon we will not have many simple options left. Mybe get a wrangler to add to the fleet and just keep rebuilding them.

I could see myself paying a bit more for a 5.7 Gladiator, especially if it included heavier duty drivetrain etc and upped the towing/payload capacity. But the 392 is just overkill for a daily driver.

Overall, I've been pretty happy with the 3.6L in the Gladiator. Seems to strike a good balance. I would be less happy with the 3.6L in a full size truck.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

I could see myself paying a bit more for a 5.7 Gladiator, especially if it included heavier duty drivetrain etc and upped the towing/payload capacity. But the 392 is just overkill for a daily driver.

The only drive train change would be the 75 instead of the 50 transmission. The rest will be the same.
I have extreme doubts about any change to towing capacity............ there's still the heat issue and the fact the diesel never got the increased towing capacity because of it.
In all likelihood you'll get the same drive shafts, axles, brakes, and so on and same, if not a tad less, towing capacity as the 3.6
(at least until they make the Gladiator nose very different from the Wrangler's)

 

[JmattNYC]

I could see myself paying a bit more for a 5.7 Gladiator, especially if it included heavier duty drivetrain etc and upped the towing/payload capacity. But the 392 is just overkill for a daily driver.

Overall, I've been pretty happy with the 3.6L in the Gladiator. Seems to strike a good balance. I would be less happy with the 3.6L in a full size truck.

I could see myself paying a bit more for a 5.7 Gladiator, especially if it included heavier duty drivetrain etc and upped the towing/payload capacity. But the 392 is just overkill for a daily driver.

Overall, I've been pretty happy with the 3.6L in the Gladiator. Seems to strike a good balance. I would be less happy with the 3.6L in a full size truck.

I think some capbilities will be increased but think shadowspapa is right about a drastic change increase in towing/hauling because of his reasons stated and also i dont think they will want to hurt the ram sales. This will def be de-tune similar to how the V6 is tune between the ram and gladiator. Also not sure if the whole etorque will make its way over

 

[MPMB]

The only drive train change would be the 75 instead of the 50 transmission. The rest will be the same.
I have extreme doubts about any change to towing capacity............ there's still the heat issue and the fact the diesel never got the increased towing capacity because of it.
In all likelihood you'll get the same drive shafts, axles, brakes, and so on and same, if not a tad less, towing capacity as the 3.6
(at least until they make the Gladiator nose very different from the Wrangler's)

Yeah, towing capacity won't change, too many downsides. A brick towing a brick is a multiplied mistake, not a divided one anyway.

They can't change towing rates because of 2 reasons - cost of improved braking components and the likely reclassification of the Gladiator and losing all marketing positions.

The JT is in Class 1 truck category, and bumping up the towing capacity would put it in Class 2a, where it goes up against the full size 1/2-ton trucks, where the only thing the JT really beats any full-size truck on is the ability to be a convertible.

All those ads where they say "Best in class towing" or "Best in class gas mileage" (not the JT, obvs)? That's Class 1 - against the Maverick, Ranger, Tacoma, Colorado, etc. Moving to Class 2 puts it against the F-series, Silverado, Ram, etc. Not going to happen.

 

[Zachanadandy]

Yeah, towing capacity won't change, too many downsides. A brick towing a brick is a multiplied mistake, not a divided one anyway.

They can't change towing rates because of 2 reasons - cost of improved braking components and the likely reclassification of the Gladiator and losing all marketing positions.

The JT is in Class 1 truck category, and bumping up the towing capacity would put it in Class 2a, where it goes up against the full size 1/2-ton trucks, where the only thing the JT really beats any full-size truck on is the ability to be a convertible.

All those ads where they say "Best in class towing" or "Best in class gas mileage" (not the JT, obvs)? That's Class 1 - against the Maverick, Ranger, Tacoma, Colorado, etc. Moving to Class 2 puts it against the F-series, Silverado, Ram, etc. Not going to happen.

The convertible ability is far from the only thing the gladiator does better than any full size. Maneuverability. Firing on tight trails. Breakover and departure angles. Articulation. Pretty much anything that makes a vehicle good off road the gladiator does better than any pickup in any class. If it was just for hauling and towing on the street there's no reason not to run a full size truck. Better power and better fuel economy. Better payload and towing. Much roomier interiors. But nothing full size comes close off road. Not even a power wagon as it's just too big for a lot of trails.

 

[JmattNYC]

Yeah, towing capacity won't change, too many downsides. A brick towing a brick is a multiplied mistake, not a divided one anyway.

They can't change towing rates because of 2 reasons - cost of improved braking components and the likely reclassification of the Gladiator and losing all marketing positions.

The JT is in Class 1 truck category, and bumping up the towing capacity would put it in Class 2a, where it goes up against the full size 1/2-ton trucks, where the only thing the JT really beats any full-size truck on is the ability to be a convertible.

All those ads where they say "Best in class towing" or "Best in class gas mileage" (not the JT, obvs)? That's Class 1 - against the Maverick, Ranger, Tacoma, Colorado, etc. Moving to Class 2 puts it against the F-series, Silverado, Ram, etc. Not going to happen.

Great points.. I could see slight increase like 300lbs to 500lbs of extra payload and mybe similar for towing. This would also depend on the trim as we all know.

 

[MPMB]

The convertible ability is far from the only thing the gladiator does better than any full size. Maneuverability. Firing on tight trails. Breakover and departure angles. Articulation. Pretty much anything that makes a vehicle good off road the gladiator does better than any pickup in any class. If it was just for hauling and towing on the street there's no reason not to run a full size truck. Better power and better fuel economy. Better payload and towing. Much roomier interiors. But nothing full size comes close off road. Not even a power wagon as it's just too big for a lot of trails.

I'd venture that 90%+ of truck buyers give a f-all to off-road capability. The point is that the JT will lose on virtually every marketing point - the vehicle aspects that the majority of buyers want (or think that they want) - when up against a full-size competitor.

The vast majority of buyers want: comfort, space, and MPGs.

Leg room? Not the JT.
Head room? Not the JT.
Shoulder room? Not the JT.
Rear seat leg room? Not the JT.
Rear seat shoulder room? Not the JT.
Rear seat 3rd seat space? Not the JT.
Gas mileage? Not the JT.
Bed volume? Not the JT.
Payload? Not the JT.
Towing capacity? Not the JT.

The JT can say it's the only convertible. Smaller turning radius - Yes. So obviously, because of its size it will be more maneuverable in the city and the crammed parking lots vs. the full-size trucks.

But only a small % of the buyers care about off-road specs. And 8 out 10 of those buyers will choose one of the more fun options - Raptor/TRX - and b**ch about the trails being too narrow.

 

[Zachanadandy]

I'd venture that 90%+ of truck buyers give a f-all to off-road capability. The point is that the JT will lose on virtually every marketing point - the vehicle aspects that the majority of buyers want (or think that they want) - when up against a full-size competitor.

The vast majority of buyers want: comfort, space, and MPGs.

Leg room? Not the JT.
Head room? Not the JT.
Shoulder room? Not the JT.
Rear seat leg room? Not the JT.
Rear seat shoulder room? Not the JT.
Rear seat 3rd seat space? Not the JT.
Gas mileage? Not the JT.
Bed volume? Not the JT.
Payload? Not the JT.
Towing capacity? Not the JT.

The JT can say it's the only convertible. Smaller turning radius - Yes. So obviously, because of its size it will be more maneuverable in the city and the crammed parking lots vs. the full-size trucks.

But only a small % of the buyers care about off-road specs. And 8 out 10 of those buyers will choose one of the more fun options - Raptor/TRX - and b**ch about the trails being too narrow.

Ford doesn't publish Rator sales separate from the F150 line as a whole, but the best estimates I can find are 20-30k per year. The gladiator sales between 73k and 43k per year. But 8-10 will choose the overpriced truck that's a whale by comparison and yet only tows 500lbs more while selling half as many trucks? Must be that common core math they are teaching kids these days? As a whole I agree most truck buyers could care less about off road capabilities. Those that butyJeeps on the other hand? I'd guess it's more than half easy. I'm a huge Jeep fan, but wouldn't but a JT or a wrangler if I wasn't taking it off road. There are far better street trucks inside and outside the brand. If you want a road only SUV buy a grand cherokee. Road only truck get a Ram. There are clear and obvious compromises in the JL/JT that make them great off road but make them worse dailies and street vehicles period.

 

[mac68]

Hey I don’t know if you’re interested in 2025 leftover ones, but there is a dealership in Cleveland Ohio that has 2 advertised for 44,631.00that are the premium Sport S with a lot of options. It’s Willoughby CDJR

 

[IamPro2A]

I'd venture that 90%+ of truck buyers give a f-all to off-road capability. The point is that the JT will lose on virtually every marketing point - the vehicle aspects that the majority of buyers want (or think that they want) - when up against a full-size competitor.

The vast majority of buyers want: comfort, space, and MPGs.

Leg room? Not the JT.
Head room? Not the JT.
Shoulder room? Not the JT.
Rear seat leg room? Not the JT.
Rear seat shoulder room? Not the JT.
Rear seat 3rd seat space? Not the JT.
Gas mileage? Not the JT.
Bed volume? Not the JT.
Payload? Not the JT.
Towing capacity? Not the JT.

The JT can say it's the only convertible. Smaller turning radius - Yes. So obviously, because of its size it will be more maneuverable in the city and the crammed parking lots vs. the full-size trucks.

But only a small % of the buyers care about off-road specs. And 8 out 10 of those buyers will choose one of the more fun options - Raptor/TRX - and b**ch about the trails being too narrow.

You are comparing 2 (actually 3) different markets. The JT isn't competing with full size trucks, and it certainly isnt competing with with full-size performance trucks like the Raptor and TRX.

The Gladiator is competing for Maverick/Ranger/Santa Cruz/Taco/Colorado/Ridgeline sales.
In that class it is certainly very competitive in all the categories you list, and superior when it comes to aftermarket/off-road options.

And hell; for all their size, horsepower, and cost, the Raptor and TRX both have less payload capacity than a base JT with the $2k max tow package, and only slightly higher towing capacity.

 

[RubiNewbCB]

Same with payload capacity. Even 500lbs in the back of the max tow is noticeable. I probably don't want 1500lbs back there. The Rubicon is 1200lbs, that's still 1/2 ton and a driver. I'm good with that.

My 22 JTRD payload/ccc is 975# not 1200. JTRD is greatly reduced. Diesel weight and soft suspension. I'm a solid 225 pounds wife 115, daughter 90, once we're all in the truck we can barely put anything in it, especially if the TT is connected to it.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Leg room? Not the JT.
Head room? Not the JT.
Shoulder room? Not the JT.
Rear seat leg room? Not the JT.
Rear seat shoulder room? Not the JT.
Rear seat 3rd seat space? Not the JT.
Gas mileage? Not the JT.
Bed volume? Not the JT.
Payload? Not the JT.
Towing capacity? Not the JT.

Leg room - agree.
Head room hasn't been an issue even for my 6'2" son.
Shoulder room? Never noticed a problem. I don't wear football shoulder pads in it.
Rear seat - my son says it's better than the rear seat my Silverado had.
Gas mileage could be better, but it's a brick.. I'm getting too old to care.
Bed volume is just fine. I can haul an amazing load of stuff in it and have pictures for proof - from plywood to 12' steel poles.. I have trailers if I need more.
Payload sucks. But - I have trailers.
Towing capacity - I only need to tow 5,000-6,000 pounds. I don't care if it can't tow 8,000 pounds!

I've had other trucks.
this one lives in Iowa, if I go off-road I piss off the cattle farmers, and soybean farmers or someone else. I didn't buy it for off-road use, but because it really checks all of the "I need" boxes and many of the "it would be nice if....." boxes. The rest I'll live with.
It plows snow in the winter, it hauls stuff in the summer. I can take the panels off if I want and have fresh air.

Sponsored