JKOwners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,497 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
those of you that owned TJ's before your JK's, how would you compare the two?
in terms of quality, performance, durability, RELIABILTY etc.
would you say the JK is a step in the right direction (but still in need of some changes) or would you say the TJ overall was better?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,738 Posts
My JK is more comfortable, better in most situations offroad, quieter and actually a bit faster (even though it feels slow as hell).

The only real downside is the size in some tight areas, but overall it's better.

The biggest complaint I have wth the JK is it doesn't like to be modified like the TJ. With my TJ, I could throw a part on it and it would work better. With the JK, you throw a part on it and it will sometimes make things worse. In order to get the benifit, you have to change 3 other things too. This has been mostly evident with the suspension on mine as I didn't buy a kit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
783 Posts
I agree with bly109, the only thing I really miss about my tj is the 4.0. The 3.8 seems to be just as reliable so far, but the bottom end power isn't quite what the 4.0 was. Other than that, the JK rides way better and seems to perform better offroad. Only real downsides I've seen with them is the weak front axle housings/c's, and weak trackbar brackets. I love my JK, but there are still times where I miss the less refined feel of the tj. That and parts are cheaper for them:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
My TJs' sheetmetal was certainly more substantial...I kinda dug the way the speaker in the center console shook my junk...it had more snot just off idle...it was a bit smaller

My JK has better seats...better dashboard...I like the looks better...engine doesn't sound like it's going to grenade at 3500RPMs...35s are a breeze...it just seems like a better vehicle.

I loved my TJs and I like the JK...I can't really dislike either of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,497 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
good thoughts guys.
I dont own a JK (or any jeep right now) but i had an 03 rubicon once upon a time and loved it. I read alot of complaints about JK's, leaks, fires, leaky fires, etc. TJ just seemed like a simple platform with a tried and true drivetrain. the JK seems to be a bit quirky (from what ive read) and still a bit unsure of itself.
so side by side, TJ and JK same mileage, options and price, you guys would still buy the jk again?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,343 Posts
in terms of quality, performance, durability, RELIABILTY etc.
would you say the JK is a step in the right direction
Still have my TJ. The JK is definitely a better Jeep and I agree with most of what oz97tj said but they both have pros and cons.

As far as suspension, the JK is easier to get 35's and 37's under. Think about how many JK's you see with 35" plus tires compared to TJ's. Also feel my JK is better for putting in 5+ hours of highway before I tackle the trails. 5 hours in my TJ on the highway and I am over it. Also comparing soft-top to soft-top.

Most other mods are easier on the TJ. The lines of the TJ make it easy for armor, fender mods and other body mods.

The JK is more complicated so something simple in the TJ like changing your seats is an issue with the JK that has seat airbags/at least on mine. This is just the tip of the iceberg and it is only going to get worse for future models.

I could go on and on talking about a bunch more stuff but I do think the JK is a better vehicle. Still love my TJ and will never sell it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
Definitely. I've got two JKs right now and I've owned 4 TJs. Given the choice between equivalent TJ and JK...equipped exactly the same...same condition...I would go JK. I've yet to encounter any of the quirks you mentioned. It's the next step in the evolution.

However...I know the kid who has my 2002 TJ that I ordered from the factory and I often think that I'd buy it back from him if he ever wants to sell it...for nostalgia.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
824 Posts
Had a 2002 TJ with a 5spd. Loved it, I think it was a "factory freak" as it ran high 15's low 16's at the track, and that was just with an AEM air intake. It had half doors and no A/C, but did have the upgraded sound system.

With the 2010 JK, it's much more capable off-road stock than the TJ was. The TJ had a RE BB on it, and it rode ok, but it didn't ride as nicely as the JK does.

Overall, I kind of wish I had a 4.0 in the JK with the 6spd and gears that I have now. But the 3.8 does ok for what I need it to do, and I think the JK overall was a step in the right direction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
274 Posts
good thoughts guys.
I dont own a JK (or any jeep right now) but i had an 03 rubicon once upon a time and loved it. I read alot of complaints about JK's, leaks, fires, leaky fires, etc. TJ just seemed like a simple platform with a tried and true drivetrain. the JK seems to be a bit quirky (from what ive read) and still a bit unsure of itself.
so side by side, TJ and JK same mileage, options and price, you guys would still buy the jk again?
Definitely. Despite all the issues you read about on forum etc, most people really don't have that many problems. the only issue we had was the clutch and to bearing at 16k. even if our jk had more issues, I still wouldn't go back to a tj.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,497 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
pretty encouraging guys. glad to hear the JK is a step up at least.
it is nice to get 35's on so easy, thats a bonus for sure.
by the time im ready to buy one maybe the new motor will be out and have some reviews.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
The only thing I miss about the TJ is it was more manuverable and the low end torque. My JK is better in every other way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,585 Posts
I currently own both (going to hand my TJ down to my son).

I can honestly say that the JK is a better jeep overall, just as the TJ was an improvement over the YJ (I owned a YJ too).

The 4.0 is a torquer for sure and has been reliable. Once I re-geared my JK and used the flashpaq, my JK engine is a better performer than my TJ. My TJ seems slow now every time I drive it.

The JK is very mod friendly and has great street manners, even lifted with big tires. Even though the JK has more "computer stuff", it is just as easy to work on as my TJ. Except for the gears, I easily did all the mods myself. Jeep made the JK with future mods in mind (except for the sheet metal).

The TJ does have thicker sheet metal, but the JK frame is way beefier.

Factory axles, skids, steering, and suspension components are also built sturdier in the JK. The JK also moved the fuel tank to a better location and took care of the steering box issues that the TJ has. Even if you don't get a Rubi with lockers, the factory brake-lock-dif system works way better than open difs on the TJ.

The interior layout, comfort, and ergonomics are far better in the JK. I laugh when people say they hate the JK because "jeeps aren't supposed to be comfortable".

I especially like the Shorter sloping hood of the JK for visibility on the trail. When I wheel the TJ now, The lack of visibility over the hood is quite noticeable.

My JK top leaked when I first bought it, but so did my TJ. I got shitty service at the Chrysler dealer with my other Jeeps, and have expected nothing less with my new one. Its a jeep thing.

I love my TJ, but my JK is definately my go-to vehicle now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,497 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
about the only things i can think of then that were nicer about the TJ was the 4.0 and it didnt seem so water sensative.
 

·
Official Monkey Business
Joined
·
12,215 Posts
I like everything about my JK over my TJ by 100% except for the sheet metal thickness - or lack of it on the JK.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,651 Posts
those of you that owned TJ's before your JK's, how would you compare the two?
in terms of quality, performance, durability, RELIABILTY etc.
would you say the JK is a step in the right direction (but still in need of some changes) or would you say the TJ overall was better?
Owned a 2000 Sport, 4.0L auto with 30" tire package. I loved it, had it about 5 yrs and put 120K miles on it all over the country. Sold it to my Mom and its still going strong for her.

That said, IMO JK>TJ in almost every way, except rear seat access (2-door JK). JK is better on-road, I like the extra size, and even with the 3.8L I feel performance is comparable, and the JK gets 2-3mpg better on average than the TJ (and that is with 32" M/Tson the JK). Off-road the JK also is a better performer, mostly due to the BLD function. In the Rockies, I've found that the 3.8L actually does better at higher elevation, another plus over the TJ, which really seemed to gasp for air. While I feel the 4.0L has a coolness factor the 3.8L will never have, I think it would be even worse in the JK than the 3.8L. It's low-end torque advantage is negliagable and only at a very narrow RPM band, the 3.8L has more in most spots, and walks away from the 4.0L once you get above 2800 rpms. From a value standpoint TJs are still great, and they definitely maintain an older school utilitarian image, I would have no problems owning another one (especially an Unlimited). For an all-around vehicle though, the JK has made a nice step forward. I love the stereo in the JK as well (compard to the TJ).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,651 Posts
good thoughts guys.
I dont own a JK (or any jeep right now) but i had an 03 rubicon once upon a time and loved it. I read alot of complaints about JK's, leaks, fires, leaky fires, etc. TJ just seemed like a simple platform with a tried and true drivetrain. the JK seems to be a bit quirky (from what ive read) and still a bit unsure of itself.
so side by side, TJ and JK same mileage, options and price, you guys would still buy the jk again?
Similar vehicle for similar price, JK hands down. The only thing that would make it a tough decision is if the TJ version was a significant money savings.
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Top