Trouble Maker

:dumb:

The FJ and Wrangler comparison is reasonable, but already the FJ is maybe too far down the path of a 1 trick pony. I was just putting it out there as another idea to see what the hive mind though. For me the Wrangler's are even further down the path of does only 1 thing really well. Maybe if I were looking for off-road focused vehicle, a 2 door would be cool. 4 doors seem huge, bigger than what I feel a Wrangler should be. They are about the size of the Grand Cherokee or 4 runner. But with less towing capacity and what seems like less usable cargo room.

I think I've essentially narrowed it down to a Jeep Grand Cherokee V8 (WK2) for the best combo of off-road and towing for me. But I worry about the reliability with it being an FCA vehicle. Can anyone offer any good info on their reliability? Any thoughts on an FJ Cruiser? If I was ignoring my parents getting a camper, the easy decision would be the 4Runner. But then I remembered FJ Cruiser, that I've always really liked (the idea) of them. If my parents end up wanting a bigger camper than what the Jeep can town, they will just get a truck to tow it and I can focus less on the towing capability. Manual option is cool, and it has what seems like the better 4WD system. But with having not a ton of experience off roading I'm wondering if the MT will add a level of difficulty. The auto is not as tempting since it doesn't have an on-roadable 4WD system. They also seem like they have kept their value very well from a quick search, so the 4Runner might be the better deal.

I got the Zacapa Edicion Negra and it's exactly like what you are describing. It's quite a bit more expensive than the Mount Gay Black Barrel though. I think I described it to a friend who likes both rum and whisky as 25% of the way from a rum to a whisky. Zacapa 23 was my daily drive rum in Japan, rum availability there was really low and this was one of the few good ones. I need to get a bottle of it here. And I want to get the ZacapaXO and do a tasting with all 3.

BTW, in chat Kerry and Mitch gave me two immensely useful links that I wanted to add in here and thank them again. https://www.jeep.com/hostd/windowsticker/getWindowStickerPdf.do?vin=1C4RJFCT2EC211672 Replace the VIN after the = with with the VIN you want to lookup. It will give you Jeep and I believe any FCA window sticker so you can see the options on that particular car. It think it's impossible just looking at pictures online to know if the car has Quadra-Drive II otherwise. And http://www.wk2jeeps.com/wk2menu.htm It seems like anything you would ever want to know about any Grand Cherokee is somewhere there. That's for the WK2 (2011-Current), but the have pages for the others too.

Like you kind of alluded to, I think the Jeeps in RV parks on flat tow is about the weight capacity. That combined with money and what they want for a fun run about. For the smaller car's on dollys it's probably they can do it and it keeps the miles and wear off of the car. I would guess Chevy Spark is probably the cheapest thing used in that segment. Fit's or even a Yaris probably keep their value better, so that one makes sense too. For Clay's use, a run-about the combo of weight requirement, stick shift. It also needs to work for his family and a few items. IMHO the Fit is hard to beat there due to the interior configuration. I guess he could probably still be under 3k even with a dolly, since the Fit is only about 2,500 pounds. But anything lighter is probably better here since he's going to be pushing his RV a bit harder and it's already power light. So he has a smaller weight and price budget than most people in RV parks and a little different purpose/target compared to pushers which just need to be small and cheap but just capable enough.

I mean, there's probably a reason for that. But I think it's more along the lines of 100% encompassed Venn diagram of where you are at and people with money or people who think 'Honda Fits/Minis/Fiat 500/VW Beetles are for pussies'. But I can also get on board that Mini's are usually just a terrible idea of other reasons.

Yeah, way too old even if reliable. This will be my every day car. If my parents get a camper they will take it out west with this for 4-6 weeks, probably do weekend trips with my sisters kids. We'll do trips with it too. I feel like I need something newer for that. That's the next conversation, how serious are they about the camper and what is their image so I can get an idea of actual weight. I think they will get one if I get this.

I'm leaning that way, but V8's in this price range are slim pickings. As far as I can tell, then Grand Cherokee V6 vs V8 doesn't effect their tow capacity, but the V8 would surely make it easier to tow. V8s This one might be the ticket. Higher miles that I would like, but that's true with all that list. Some parts of the interior look just a little beat up, but from what I can tell in the pictures it would probably clean up OK and seems reasonably reflected in the price. https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?listingId=567289487

Alright, help me narrow things down a bit. 4Runners, LexusGX460, Tacoma and Grand Cherokee in the $20k-$25k range near me. Or if I bump the price range up just a bit, I fell like it starts to get into some really nice options. $25k-$27.5k What trim level or options do I need for some of these to get the higher towing capacity? I need to talk to my paretns about what camper they want, but I don't think 5,000 pounds is going to cut it once you load the camper/car up. It seems like the 4Runner's fixed at 4,700 or 5,000 pounds depending on year. GX460 is fixed at at 6,500 But the Tacoma and Grand Cherokee are the one's I'm not sure about Tacoma = 3,500-6,800 pounds, is it just a tow package? Grand Cherokee = 3,500 - 7,200 pounds. I can't for the life of me figure what it's exactly tied to, even for brand new ones. Thinking about it more, I also really think an SUV would work better for me, putting skis or bikes or other gear in the back.

It was an MT. Most of my time in that car was spent on highway near 80mph on the way to and from work. The CVT has a wider gear range and can spin low enough on the highway. The gear ratio span of the MT was about 4.8:1 and the CVT 6.3:1. By my calculations and memory the MT's at almost 4krpm at 80mph. Which is way above the most efficient RPM range of most engines like this. Calculations show the CVT to run around 2.5krpms at 80mph. which is probably around the sweet spot. And because the CVT is at a lower overall ratio it needs more engine TQ to cruise to the same speed, which actually helps. Just as an example, this might be something like where to MT (1) and CVT (2) lived on the highway, the % islands are engine efficiencey.

I owned a (Turd gen) Fit for about 2.5 years roughly 3-5 years ago. The only real reason I sold it was because the 2 door Civic w/trubo & MT came out and I had been waiting on that to company lease one. Berto's parents bought it and I think are still with it. The Fit was dog shit slow even with an MT. I think I would have hated that car with a CVT. The gearing in the MT was too high for US highway use so the fuel economy was good but not amazing. The Civic was geared much lower and got much better fuel economy. I think I got something around 30mpg with the Fit but near 40mpg with the Civic, with much higher performance to boot. But for a run-about to tow behind the RV probably not really an issue. I think the size of the Fit combined with that interior would be perfect for this. The interior space in the Fit is amazing, like CRV levels of space. I have a friend who's taken at that point in time his family of 5 on vacation in one with a hitch mounted cargo carrier. 2 of my coworkers who were over 6' could comfortably sit in the front and rear passenger side seat. There was (is?) a FWD MT version of them in the lower trim levels. Another option might be an HRV. They are on the same chassis as the Fit and have the magic seats, so probably also a ton of space inside and I would hope more passenger room. I also wonder if the HRV has kept it's value worse than the Fit and might be a better deal. But the way both of these have probably kept their value might be an issue. Clay, I have a friend who's in UA, the one I mentioned earlier here, that has an older Fit that's having some staling issues. It's one of the earlier US ones, 2nd gen, I would guess late 00"s-2010 at the newest. I've been trying to convince him to get something new, a Tesla probably 3 or Y. This might might be kismet, if you're OK with something that needs just a bit of work.

Yeah, the wife would get really mad if we were truly stuck out in the woods. Also, that spelling always gets me. And, just kidding hunny you're not a wench.

I do really like Jeeps for what they are, I was thinking to suggest the Glaidator to my parents for a new/tow vehicle. But since I'm buying the car, I get to get what I want in my budget. Wranglers don't have the towing capacity I'm looking. Glaidators are too new to have the deprecation I look for, regardless of that they are outside of my price range, and they are bigger than the vehicles I'm looking at. I normally chose to drive something the size of a 2 door Civic or my S2000 if I have the choice. The vehicle I'm looking at will be huge compared to what I normally like and drive. I've decided I'm specifically not looking for a full sized truck in size or capability. My general feeling after renting a Rubicon in Moab was that it would make most trails boring/easy until you got to the point of needing to wench yourself over and around stuff and I'm honestly not all about that.

I would tend to agree. We took our (AWD) CRV into Great Sand Dunes National Park and it did fine, but it was mostly packed sand so a FWD car would have probably done fine. We almost ran out of ground clearance a few times though. A lot of people probably overestimate what they will do with a car in general but especially in use cases like this; towing, off-road, etc. And they underestimate what the cars are actually capable of. They usually don't have much experience there and probably want to be over prepared or confident if they ever go do that thing. Margin is not a bad thing, but also for me for off-roading it can also make it kind of boring. Even though I have a bit of background in this area, I'm probably doing this a bit. I see the regular trim 4Runner or Grand Cherokee and automatically think I need the TRD or Summit/Overland. Granted those do or often have other nice to have features. The drive mode select and often for the Grand Cherokee's air sus that comes with those levels would be some very nice to have features. But also I'm at a specific price point so I can either chose those features or a newer car. So I need to be realistic about what I'm going to do with this car, it's all about trade-offs. Having said that, no way I'm purchasing anything that FWD based with only a (weak ass) single clutch rear diff for wanting to do any offroading. I've driven vehicles in this segment enough every kind of drive layout in just about every imaginable condition to know I would never be happy with one of these. Base for me is FWD based with twin clutch rear diff (Pilot, Ridgeline, Rav4 TRD) or anything more capable. And anyway the RAV4/CRV segment doesn't even come close to what I want to tow and the other FWD based cars only get so close. I've towed with our LDTs at their max weight pretty extensively and it's not where I want to live if I have the choice. So I'll get something else that has some margin. My parents are going to buy a camper and we'll split use of this car and camper for trips. So especially with my parents towing I want something that's going to be easy for them to tow with. The next talk is about what they really want and will get in a camper to see what this needs tow. But I've casually shopped around enough to have a rough idea that's it's probably going to end up in the 4-6k# GVWR range. I do like your point about tires, it always comes down to tires!

Trying to ferret out the trim levels and options/packages for these cars is daunting. I know conceptually what capability I want, but what trim level, options and package will get me there is difficult to find. Then it's a whole other level of idiocy to try to figure out what combo the car I'm looking at on Auto Trader has.

Part of my strategy isn't just getting in at a specific price point. To me that feels about as useful as getting in at specific monthly payment with no other info. Like when you're at a dealer and they try to up sell you by just making the payment term longer. More importantly to me is a specific age where hopefully most of the steep part of the deprecation curve is over, paid for by someone else, but new enough where I'm not dealing with problems or big ticket maintenance right away. The Gladiators are still too new for that, and from what I'm seeing the reality is they are no where close to my price point.

I like the idea, but we have no room for a full size trailer at the house. I could probably stash it at my parents, or one of those folding utility trailers would probably be more than enough for what I would want to usually do and squeeze it into a corner of the garage.

I'm not really interested in that segment. Like you said, the towing/hauling just don't get to anywhere near I want to be. There are a few with some off-road chops, like the Renegade TrailHawk or the RAV4 TRD. I imagine they are near their reasonable limit from the factory. I could also get a better deal on something like a Ridgeline or Pilot through my work, do a few small things (small lift, tires, few skid plates) and be around the same off-road level as those with more towing if I were going the less-truck like route. I didn't want to get into the details in the original post, but I figured the idea of a lease would come up. I get that they can probably work really well for some situations. I'm not really interested in the deprecation that comes with a brand new car, which is true regardless of it being a lease or buy. The only new car's we've done are the employee leas deals through my work which is a different situation. This is just my personal financial direction, but I want to have as little debt/payments as possible, and we've got the cash in the car account for what my budget is so I'm pretty fixed on the target budget. Just trying to figure out what makes sense in that budget and vehicle type.

I don't know how accurate https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/price-trends/ is, but I did a quick check. These are over the last year. It seems like on average I'm pretty solidly in a 13' GX, 13' 4Runner or 13'-14' Tacoma. But also like everyone's been saying the prices of everything have went up recently, but especailly trucks and that's easy to see here too.

Again, with only being 3 miles from Menards multiple trips is easy. It's the current reality with the smaller vehicles than this we've had up until now. Anything in this segment is going to be a pretty big upgrade in the hauling area. It seems like not fitting full width plywood/drywall is just a fact of life outside of full size trucks. I don't have a real want or need for that outside of a few rare occasions. If I really needed to, renting a trailer, getting a cheap utility trailer, or building a quick and dirty platform to get over the wheel wells all seem like better options. The mid-size truck/SUV is going to be a better fit 99% of the time. Definitely an option with a truck. Its just a decision I need to make about utility of a bed VS interior space. With me being 50/50 on which one is better, if my shopping shows this to be true it makes the decision easier.

Part of this is definitely me trying to figure out what's out there and do some shopping research to see if my ideal even exist or if my price VS age idea is unrealistic. I don't know this market well at all, have never seriously shopped it. Our situation is also forcing us to buy at a bad, high priced time.

I'm torn between wanting a bed, properly guessing how much utility and use a mid-size truck bed actually gives me and an SUV that we could sleep in the back of. I lean towards the SUV for interior space/sleeping inside. We've done car camping trips w/ small SUVs and being able to fit everything behind the back seats under a cover is really nice. But we are also constantly doing house projects, so maybe the bed is better? I can always put boards in the back of an SUV but probably not full width of plywood. I could always get a cheap utility trailer with the SUV, maybe one of those folding ones from Harbor Freight; Menards is about 3 miles on surface streets from here. And do the mid-size trucks even fit full width sheets of drywall/plywood between the wheel wells? How are the prices of Tacomas VS 4Runners, where is the better value?

Some good options, keep them coming! Glad to see that Toyota SUVs/trucks seem to be good, a few of them were definitely in my initial thoughts too. I think they probably have the right mix of light off-road and towing for me. The (real) Land Cruiser and Lexus LX are too expensive/old for my budget and age target. To get down to my price target the newest Land Cruiser I can find is around 2009 and LX around 2011 w/140kmi and, early-mid 2000s w/ 100kmi or higher. I'm sure they are a lot of car for the money VS new, but it feels like the wrong combination of price, age and miles for me. I would worry about expensive fixes being needed soon. The GX460/470 is a great option I didn't think about. I drove the Land Cruiser version (Prado) w/diesel over in New Zealand a few times. I really liked it other than the lack of power, especially 50-70mph passing on 2 lane back-roads. But a 4.6L V8 vs the smallish diesel in those should help fix that problem. I'm seeing a 2014 w/87k mile in that range as 1 example. That is just a hair older and higher miles than I feel like would be ideal. But much better than the Land Curiser/LX above that are about twice as old and twice as many miles.