5.13 gears
JK Freak
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 693
Likes: 0
From: Clearwater, Florida
It drives just fine in the elevation honestly. Just not what your probably used to at sea level or close to it. Really need a tuner when its released for the '11's.
JK Junkie
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 3,017
Likes: 0
From: Lakewood, OH
A key attribute of any engine design for a passenger vehicle is having a flat torque band, beginning and ending at 90% of peak torque. It's extremely broad for the Pentastar and OK for the 3.8L. The bigger issue is they only put the manual transmission pre-2012s in a position where they take advantage of it.
JK Super Freak
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 1
From: Prosper, TX
Jpop and Planman: my point is you can't have it both ways.
You both claim it only takes 35 HP to drive a JK at at 70 MPH yet when presented with that fact that is acheived at a mere 1250 RPM you jump back to the other end of the spectrum and say you need more rpm. So which is it? You can't have it both ways. It is clearly obvious to me now that you really don't know what you are talking about.
The issue is you are using flawed data to make your choices. I have given example after example detailing how you are wrong and don't know what you are talking about. All valid data that is ignored. Why? Because it is easier for you to ignore facts and data and cling to your flawed beliefs.
Then, more absurd claims on your part about your vast knowledge and resources and when called on it, completely ignored.
Jpop, yes you are corrrect. You have dragged me down to your level and beaten me with experience. Why, because I have used the data you provided and have shown it is flawed yet you continue to argue. I have used the math and science that Planman wants, data he provided, shown the err of your ways and still nothing.
There are some that agree with me about gearing and I posted a link in this thread. I am not the lone dissenter that has the ability to see through the "facts" that some present and see it for what it really is. Chest thumping by the misinformed and those clinging to beliefs that have been proven wrong but are unwilling and unable to admit they were wrong.
So yes, I have been beaten by the experience as Jpop describes.
You both claim it only takes 35 HP to drive a JK at at 70 MPH yet when presented with that fact that is acheived at a mere 1250 RPM you jump back to the other end of the spectrum and say you need more rpm. So which is it? You can't have it both ways. It is clearly obvious to me now that you really don't know what you are talking about.
The issue is you are using flawed data to make your choices. I have given example after example detailing how you are wrong and don't know what you are talking about. All valid data that is ignored. Why? Because it is easier for you to ignore facts and data and cling to your flawed beliefs.
Then, more absurd claims on your part about your vast knowledge and resources and when called on it, completely ignored.
Jpop, yes you are corrrect. You have dragged me down to your level and beaten me with experience. Why, because I have used the data you provided and have shown it is flawed yet you continue to argue. I have used the math and science that Planman wants, data he provided, shown the err of your ways and still nothing.
There are some that agree with me about gearing and I posted a link in this thread. I am not the lone dissenter that has the ability to see through the "facts" that some present and see it for what it really is. Chest thumping by the misinformed and those clinging to beliefs that have been proven wrong but are unwilling and unable to admit they were wrong.
So yes, I have been beaten by the experience as Jpop describes.
JK Super Freak
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 1
From: Prosper, TX
Especially when you cling to the absurd belief that you only need 35 HP to do 70mph in a JK. That the 35 hp is acheived at 1250 rpm when you know full well there is not enough power at 1250 rpm to cruise at 70.
BTW, I never suggested 4.56 for 37s, so again you are wrong.
I'm sorry if your feelings got hurt because I said I took your advice and it was a mistake.
I have shown the err of your ways and the flaws in you process and yet continue to be ignored. I have used the data you brought and shown how you are wrong, yet you still continue to argue.
So yes, it has become silly.
JK Junkie
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 3,017
Likes: 0
From: Lakewood, OH
What is wrong with you?
When I mentioned the 35hp number at 70mph in the same sentence I stated it takes more than 80hp to rollover a 3 degree grade.
I made a comment about having more resources available than Chrysler engineers while in the same paragraph stated I would take my cues from the Mopar Design Team. That was greeted with Skunkworks and the Lower Forty project I can't buy off the show room floor. I still can't get dana 60s, gears higher than 4.10s, a hemi or tires more than 32" tall from the dealer unless they go out to a third party.
Are you simply choosing the bits and pieces that support your argument or do you have a comprehension problem?
Again,
When I mentioned the 35hp number at 70mph in the same sentence I stated it takes more than 80hp to rollover a 3 degree grade.
I made a comment about having more resources available than Chrysler engineers while in the same paragraph stated I would take my cues from the Mopar Design Team. That was greeted with Skunkworks and the Lower Forty project I can't buy off the show room floor. I still can't get dana 60s, gears higher than 4.10s, a hemi or tires more than 32" tall from the dealer unless they go out to a third party.
Are you simply choosing the bits and pieces that support your argument or do you have a comprehension problem?
Again,
JK Super Freak
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 1
From: Prosper, TX
Originally Posted by JPop
What is wrong with you?
When I mentioned the 35hp number at 70mph in the same sentence I stated it takes more than 80hp to rollover a 3 degree grade.
I made a comment about having more resources available than Chrysler engineers while in the same paragraph stated I would take my cues from the Mopar Design Team. That was greeted with Skunkworks and the Lower Forty project I can't buy off the show room floor. I still can't get dana 60s, gears higher than 4.10s, a hemi or tires more than 32" tall from the dealer unless they go out to a third party.
Are you simply choosing the bits and pieces that support your argument or do you have a comprehension problem?
Again,
When I mentioned the 35hp number at 70mph in the same sentence I stated it takes more than 80hp to rollover a 3 degree grade.
I made a comment about having more resources available than Chrysler engineers while in the same paragraph stated I would take my cues from the Mopar Design Team. That was greeted with Skunkworks and the Lower Forty project I can't buy off the show room floor. I still can't get dana 60s, gears higher than 4.10s, a hemi or tires more than 32" tall from the dealer unless they go out to a third party.
Are you simply choosing the bits and pieces that support your argument or do you have a comprehension problem?
Again,
JK Junkie
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 3,017
Likes: 0
From: Lakewood, OH
Looking on the bright side, there are a handful of people to be rescued who drive 50mph on highways flatter than a pancake.
JK Super Freak
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 1
From: Prosper, TX
Originally Posted by planman
You continue to ignore that a stock 07-11 Rubi 6 speed turns 2500+ rpm at 70 mph with stock wheels and tires--and that an automatic would need to come with 4.88s with stock wheels and tires to run the same rpm to experience the same fuel economy and power as a stock 6 speed.
You continue to ignore that even with a new, more powerful 3.6L engine, stock Rubi automatics with 4.10s turn 2500+ rpm from the factory and stock 6 speed turn barely under 2500 rpm from the factory.
You continue to ignore that the 0.69 OD transmission gear on the automatic 07-11s was a major complaint for 03-06 TJ owners with the straight 4.0L engine.
You continue to ignore that something else was going on with your rig--there is no way that an extra 100--150 rpm at highway speeds alone would cause a 1.5 mpg drop in fuel economy.
You continue to ignore the advice and experience of these people and vendors:
Teraflex
Rock Krawler
Off Road Evolution
Poison Spyder
Screamin Lizard Customs
Northridge4x4
MABTF
Hanson/PureJeep
WOL (on the orange 4 dr he sold)
Rebel Offroad
mkjeep
serveapurpose (Off Road Evolution)
sringer
seer1
kntr (Had 5.13s and sold JK because of it. New JK with 5.38s and loves it.)
blockrockin
Evolution
AZJeeper
x No Compromise Offroad x
GCM 2
Mowabb (another one who pulled 5.13s to regear his automatic to 5.38s)
m(a)ce
Northernmedic
...and the list would be much longer if I spent more than a few minutes using search.
Advice like yours results in people not only making the mistake of regearing twice, but some people have spent money on superchargers or even sold their JK because they were so unhappy with it's power (due primarily to low rpms from improper gearing).
Pic and choose data. I have proven you are wrong with the data sheets you provided yet you are unable to see that even when I show you the figures plain as day.
Too many here lack the simple ability to reason when it comes to 8 of 10 Jk models run 1900-2200 on the freeway. If you can't figure that out, that's far more than your precious Rubi example.
Then there is the example of the 7.3 diesel that is so easily dismissed because some lack the ability to reason.
So again this is silly when you are beaten with your own data yet continue to argue.
