Painted vs. non Painted...just wondering what your thoughts are. I found a couple jeeps that i like with them and with out them. I was wondering if there was a major difference other then being painted. I also was wondering how well they hold up. I know my TJ flares...just plastic hold up real well off road....i would think the painted ones wouldn't if they got pressed up against a tree or something.

 

The Saharas come stock with painted fenders, Rubicons and Xs do not have them unless someone added them. I have a Sahara with the painted fenders and like the way they look but they are more expensive to replace if you mess them up since they have to be painted to match. As far as structure I am pretty sure they are exactly the same except for the paint.

 

I like non-painted because they can take more abuse and look ok. My TJ flares had their share. Only a scuff or two on the JK flares so far, but eventually it will change.

 

I would go non-painted. They can take more abuse and look better as they get more scratches. Besides isn't that what owning a Jeep is about... building character.

 

Non Painted for me.

Got enough to worry about on the trail. Don't need to worry about scratching up painted fenders.

 

I like the painted flares on my Sahara. I'm leaning towards the Xenon flat flares (narrow) as an upgrade, but I like the Bushwacker pocket flares too. Either way I go, I will have them painted though.

 

yea, im not sure if i like the painted ones...they kinda take away from the rugged look i think...

 

I put a set of Sahara flares on my Rubi and I was totally pleased with how it looks. Personally for me, the black fares are much wider on the JK, and it was just much black plastic. Now my LJ RUbi had black flares on a yellow Jeep and I liked that combo. It's somewhat color dependant too. The black Jeeps look great either way, and so does Red Rock.

 

Very nice, but be carefull if you go wheeling

 

I have a black x unlimited and my flares look dam good