|
Num Posts
Sort Order
|
|
Posted: 04/21/06 08:13 AM
|
|
I think if i had stupid amounts of money i would go with a unimog or a pitsgauer ( i think thats how its spelt) you can make them both into 4wd motor homes
But my next project is 95 edie bauer ( i wanna cut it to pieces ) shortining it and carving the wheel wells
|
|
Posted: 04/21/06 03:11 PM
|
|
Yeah i'd have to agree with 4x4ranger about that one if you want to talk boutcars go on over to car and driver we are talking about trucks
|
|
Posted: 04/21/06 03:16 PM
|
|
yeah i like the older chevys as well cause there motors are easily modifyed and the solid fronts with abudant parts but, i wheel a 1999 tacoma for the fact the v-6 can spin my 35x15 tsls while still getting close to 20 miles to the gallon and cause the factory locker i use it mostly to wheel on the beach and behind the dunes
|
|
|
|
Posted: 04/21/06 03:32 PM
|
|
yes but when you say that you never see a stock ranger on the trails that is because mos the time now days nobody wheel there rig bone stock anymore as im sure yours isn't either with equal amount of money in each the ranger with much more aggressive tires and limited slip will be way ahead of the decently equipped bronco
|
|
Posted: 04/22/06 12:48 PM
|
|
I think the article was pretty accurate except for the jeep entry. the '05 Grand Cherokee won 4x4 of the year but did not make the list? It did so by beating the Rubicon Unlimited and the Power Wagon. Go figure. By the way I would trade my wife for either the Rubi or the Power Wagon, I,m just reminding you what you wrote last year in 4x4 of the year. Also I would put a stock H3 up against a 1 ton 73 to 87 chevy (stock also) any day of the week, as it would walk the dog on the big truck with little tires (that's stock). They are great build platforms , there is no doubt about that.
|
joe666
New User
| Posts: 4
| Joined: 04/06
Posted: 04/26/06 04:52 PM
|
|
It's funny that you say "if you put a limited slip into a ranger it'll be way better than a bronco" But you could get broncos from the factory with limited slips front and rear. besides, am i the only one who read it was about stock potential, and not the ease of modifications to the platform, or what they perform like modified? it seems everyone overlooked that part of the article. Also, incase you didn't notice, they put one best 4x4 for each manufacturer, not the best out of all of them.
Edited 4/26/2006 5:57 pm by joe666 (joe6668)
|
PeterL
New User
| Posts: 1
| Joined: 04/06
Posted: 04/30/06 06:26 PM
|
|
i have to say that the scouts are the best 4x4s on earth. My dad and i have had other 4x4's in the past but the scout seems to be the best yet, They are practically tanks, dana 44's front and rear, dana 20 transfer case, the scout will pretty much drive straight up a tree, Its just too bad that you rarely ever see them anymore and that most were have been eatin out with rust
|
|
Posted: 05/20/06 07:02 PM
|
|
i like my 74 scout buggy the girlscout. but have enjoyed wheelin an h2,h3,k-5 blazer, 71 cj5 w/225 v6,90 mits motero, 88 nissan truck. but the toughest has to be the scout. i beat it severly, it begs for mor. you gotta love that!!!!!!!!!!
|
ruzuzu
New User
| Posts: 8
| Joined: 05/06
Posted: 05/21/06 02:26 PM
|
|
i totally agree with you on the limited slips ranger is decent truck but my 90 bronco like you said has factory limited slips front & rear.
|
tjboy
New User
| Posts: 1
| Joined: 05/06
Posted: 05/25/06 08:39 PM
|
|
The '71to'75 CJ-5 is the best in my opinion. You had a Dana 44 rear and 30 front with 304 V8 power avaliable. The short wheel base was good for tight trails too. Only bad thing was the front drum brakes. I really like those old scouts too. IH had there *** together.
|
zukedude
New User
| Posts: 1
| Joined: 06/06
Posted: 06/14/06 07:24 AM
|
|
Since I was about 9 I was in love with any year chevy 4x4. The first vehicle I test drove was a 81 chevy 4x4 but I didnt get it I got some thing even better. A 1985 suzuki samurai. I dosent have that V8 rumble or the class of a bow tie on the grill. but up here in canada or at least in my neck of the woods this is one of the badest off road rigs around. its so small I can go and play with my friends on quads but can keep up with my friend with 39 swamper baugers on his 85 chevy 3/4. I run the stock 1.3L with 32' BF mud terrains. now I am only 18 and still stuck in school so I can just work a few hours at a local shop. I dont have a lot of money so I payed 2000 bucks for my beast put in a tank of gas play with the jeeps and full sizes all day and still drive home on the same tank and with enough money to buy a cheep meal a McDicks. In my opinion the best 4x4 should be cheep to buy, cheep to run, and kick ass on the trail. so my suzuki does all of those and i can still do 110km on the highway at 25 mpg. some day i hope to move up to a CJ,1/4 ton or full size but not any time soon, cuz i have the best 4x4 on earth!!
|
|
Posted: 06/15/06 11:40 AM
|
|
03 Ram baby
|
89ramman
New User
| Posts: 11
| Joined: 06/06
Posted: 06/21/06 10:33 AM
|
|
id have to disagree with yah, the only good ram is the older ones, mostly the early 90's when cummin' started
or if your an old iron person, the old dodge powerwagons
|
fordfan07
New User
| Posts: 1
| Joined: 06/06
Posted: 06/23/06 08:51 AM
|
|
'87 Ford Rangers were awsome with their front and rear solid axles and light weight allowed them to go into pretty sloppy mud when you had good tires and get back out. The 5 sp manual tranny and 2.9 V-6 also was a good powertrain.
|
4x4Ranger
Enthusiast
| Posts: 454
| Joined: 02/06
Posted: 06/23/06 04:40 PM
|
|
You must not know your Ranger's too well, because they never came with solid front axles. Pre-98 models came with the TTB front suspension and 98 to present has IFS.
|