Roof Rack + Snorkel = Overland?

[JKBANDIT55]

Where is this?

It is in Saudi.

 

[MTG]

It is in Saudi.

That's what I thought. Cool picture!

 

[JKBANDIT55]

So an expedition build isn't as capable on more extream terrain but is built for maximum cargo? :thinking:

An expedition build is a vehicle built with the intent to travel, not 4 wheel. Your not going to throw 40" tires on a rig and say its gas friendly. Although 4 wheeling may occur while overlanding, your primary goal is travel. So therefor you build your rig to be ready for the unexpected conditions you will come by. Normally, you wouldn't see an expo vehicle heavily modified. Its more of the things you carry that make it what it is. While still having enough room of storage to be totally self efficient. So having a rig with 40" tires, plus a full rack of cargo, gas, materials to fix the vehicle, is simply too much for long adventure. If you are overlanding and something breaks, I highly doubt the nearest city will have the part you need to fix the problem since your vehicle is heavily modified and wont have the part. Ya it can be done, but wont be very efficient and more of a hassle than anything.

I would guess a JK with 42" tires alone weighs a lot more than a Jk on 33s loaded with full cargo. which means less money spent to do what you intend to do.

Hope this helps

 

[Hightower]

Spotted this on Saturday, would love to own it! I was going to post it in the "Spotted; any 4x4 other than a JK" thread because it didn't have a snorkel, however it was not a 4x4 so this thread wins out. Despite it not having rocksliders to protect those loooonngg sills, it did have some really ingenious low tech steps for climbing into the van. Looks like he adapted the wire rope steps you typically find on heavy construction equipment or made his own. Pretty badass since they would just fold out of the way on obstacles. He was running 35" BFG Project race rubber on stock wheels made into beadlocks too, had really sweet homemade front and rear bumpers, nice roof rack and a pretty cool flat camouflage pant job.

Sweet with a capital sweet

 

[Hightower]

An expedition build is a vehicle built with the intent to travel, not 4 wheel. Your not going to throw 40" tires on a rig and say its gas friendly. Although 4 wheeling may occur while overlanding, your primary goal is travel. So therefor you build your rig to be ready for the unexpected conditions you will come by. Normally, you wouldn't see an expo vehicle heavily modified. Its more of the things you carry that make it what it is. While still having enough room of storage to be totally self efficient. So having a rig with 40" tires, plus a full rack of cargo, gas, materials to fix the vehicle, is simply too much for long adventure. If you are overlanding and something breaks, I highly doubt the nearest city will have the part you need to fix the problem since your vehicle is heavily modified and wont have the part. Ya it can be done, but wont be very efficient and more of a hassle than anything.

I would guess a JK with 42" tires alone weighs a lot more than a Jk on 33s loaded with full cargo. which means less money spent to do what you intend to do.

Hope this helps

If you want efficiency a ten speed bike, 1 pair of short shorts, a nap sack and a case Budweiser will get you almost any where on earth. ;-) I run my rig with 40" rubber and her and i routinely makes 1200 to 1800mile oneway trips to go "off roading".

If your rig breaks down do what anyone with a problem does sort it out, fix it or jerry rig it. Some of the best times on any trip come from the stories at the camp fire recounting when a band aide and a water bottle got you home. Lol

 

[wayoflife]

An expedition build as a vehicle built with the intent to travel, not 4 wheel... although 4 wheeling may occur while overlanding, your primary goal is travel.

Funny, I always thought that's what I do now. :idontknow:

So therefor you build your rig to be ready for the unexpected conditions you will come by. While still having enough room of storage to be totally self efficient. So having a rig with 40" tires, plus a full rack of cargo, gas, materials to fix the vehicle, is simply too much for long adventure. Ya it can be done, but wont be very efficient and more of a hassle than anything.

Well, you would know more about this than me. Certainly, I have no experience being on long adventures, running 40" tires or having the means to not only be self-sufficient but, to be able to fix my rig as well those of others. I can only imagine that it'd be such a hassle that I would never want to do it.

Your not going to throw 40" tires on a rig and say its gas friendly.

You're not going to put an air dragging brillo pad on top of a brick, load it up with 2,000 lbs. of gear and say that it's gas friendly.

I would guess a JK with 42" tires alone weighs a lot more than a Jk on 33s loaded with full cargo. which means less money spent to do what you intend to do.

If an overland build is all about money or the lack there of to build something more substantial, I might be able to understand it. However, I've seen some serious coin being spent on fancy roof top tents and Snowpeak kitchens to think that's the case. But, I could be wrong.

 

[OverlanderJK]

An expedition build is a vehicle built with the intent to travel, not 4 wheel. Your not going to throw 40" tires on a rig and say its gas friendly. Although 4 wheeling may occur while overlanding, your primary goal is travel. So therefor you build your rig to be ready for the unexpected conditions you will come by. Normally, you wouldn't see an expo vehicle heavily modified. Its more of the things you carry that make it what it is. While still having enough room of storage to be totally self efficient. So having a rig with 40" tires, plus a full rack of cargo, gas, materials to fix the vehicle, is simply too much for long adventure. If you are overlanding and something breaks, I highly doubt the nearest city will have the part you need to fix the problem since your vehicle is heavily modified and wont have the part. Ya it can be done, but wont be very efficient and more of a hassle than anything.

I would guess a JK with 42" tires alone weighs a lot more than a Jk on 33s loaded with full cargo. which means less money spent to do what you intend to do.

Hope this helps

Some people build there rigs not to break. I think a JK on 40's could be a capable rig for overlanding if done correctly.

 

[JKBANDIT55]

Some people build there rigs not to break. I think a JK on 40's could be a capable rig for overlanding if done correctly.

Your right. "if done correctly".

Funny, I always thought that's what I do now. :idontknow:



Well, you would know more about this than me. Certainly, I have no experience being on long adventures, running 40" tires or having the means to not only be self-sufficient but, to be able to fix my rig as well those of others. I can only imagine that it'd be such a hassle that I would never want to do it.




You're not going to put an air dragging brillo pad on top of a brick, load it up with 2,000 lbs. of gear and say that it's gas friendly.

no your not, but its going to be more efficient, than a jk on 40s!



If an overland build is all about money or the lack there of to build something more substantial, I might be able to understand it. However, I've seen some serious coin being spent on fancy roof top tents and Snowpeak kitchens to think that's the case. But, I could be wrong.

Haha Lets be honest, you have one of the best rigs built, but I know you wouldn't dare to take your rig on a 2k mile+ adventure in unmarked land in Saudi. Heck if you were, might as well get you a roof rack, and leave all your mechanical parts, sleeping equip, and food at home. As you will only have enough storage for gas.

Your right. You also dont need an expensive lift and 40" tires to do the rubicon either. But you do it anyway to make your rig more efficient.

Just like the expensive rooftop tents. Not needed, but there to make the intent of the vehicle more efficient as not only are they a tent on top, but provide good water proof storage when on the road, leaving more room in the jeep for other things.

 

[GCM 2]

An expedition build is a vehicle built with the intent to travel, not 4 wheel. Your not going to throw 40" tires on a rig and say its gas friendly. Although 4 wheeling may occur while overlanding, your primary goal is travel. So therefor you build your rig to be ready for the unexpected conditions you will come by. Normally, you wouldn't see an expo vehicle heavily modified. Its more of the things you carry that make it what it is. While still having enough room of storage to be totally self efficient. So having a rig with 40" tires, plus a full rack of cargo, gas, materials to fix the vehicle, is simply too much for long adventure. If you are overlanding and something breaks, I highly doubt the nearest city will have the part you need to fix the problem since your vehicle is heavily modified and wont have the part. Ya it can be done, but wont be very efficient and more of a hassle than anything.

Hope this helps

You guys are killing me .....and once again I speak from experience, no urban soccer mom legend, no far away foreign-land myth, this is not hearsay or "I have a friend who...". I have owned the "overland" rigs and I have owned the "rock crawlers on 40"s" rig. Guess what, on the trail both types of rigs get the same mileage. My Land Rovers fully loaded on the trail over days of "exploring" saw a best of 8-12mpgs. Offroad, my JK on 40"s, loaded with lots of gear and parts, sees EXACTLY the same. Now if you think having 31-35" tires, little to no lift, a roof rack with gear on it, or a roof top tent and an interior also filled with comfort items is going to get great hwy mileage.......WRONG! Again, best I ever saw with Land Rovers on the highway was about 10-14mpg. The JK on 40"s sees exactly the same full of gear for a week and a half and thousands of miles of JK Experience.

Everyone on here that keeps trying to sell this "overlanders" are going to be better because....... It just doesn't work. If you guys had a well built vehicle on 40"s, with proper gearing you would know this. If you build your vehicle with stout, quality parts designed to do serious work, you aren't worried about looking for a replacement piece in some austere location.

-Picture 1) Overlander: 8-12mpg trail/10-14mpg hwy.

-Picture 2) Overlander: 8-12mpg trail/10- 14mpg hwy.

-Picture 3) Rock crawler on 40"s: 8-12mpg trail/10-14mpg hwy, also reliable enough to drive to michigan, make 10 jumps consecutively, finish the JKX, then drive back to Arizona. Parts broken in four years of driving like this; one wheel speed sensor, one transfer cable linkage bushing.......

I will await the perpetuation of any and all overlanding mythological responses. Thank you for your time and most importantly your patronage

Edit: Guess which picture I am having the most fun, with the biggest smile? Extra point for best response.

Edit 2.0: after 13 postings of my land rovers, I am deleting the pictures from my iPhoto files so I can no longer post pictures of my "overlanding rigs". I have beaten into overlanding submission.

 

[Prime8]

Greg wins.

Sent from my ADR6350 using WAYALIFE mobile app

 

[JKBANDIT55]

You guys are killing me .....and once again I speak from experience, no urban soccer mom legend, no far away foreign-land myth, this is not hearsay or "I have a friend who...". I have owned the "overland" rigs and I have owned the "rock crawlers on 40"s" rig. Guess what, on the trail both types of rigs get the same mileage. My Land Rovers fully loaded on the trail over days of "exploring" saw a best of 8-12mpgs. Offroad, my JK on 40"s, loaded with lots of gear and parts, sees EXACTLY the same. Now if you think having 31-35" tires, little to no lift, a roof rack with gear on it, or a roof top tent and an interior also filled with comfort items is going to get great hwy mileage.......WRONG! Again, best I ever saw with Land Rovers on the highway was about 10-14mpg. The JK on 40"s sees exactly the same full of gear for a week and a half and thousands of miles of JK Experience.

Everyone on here that keeps trying to sell this "overlanders" are going to be better because....... It just doesn't work. If you guys had a well built vehicle on 40"s, with proper gearing you would know this. If you build your vehicle with stout, quality parts designed to do serious work, you aren't worried about looking for a replacement piece in some austere location.

-Picture 1) Overlander: 8-12mpg trail/10-14mpg hwy.

-Picture 2) Overlander: 8-12mpg trail/10- 14mpg hwy.

-Picture 3) Rock crawler on 40"s: 8-12mpg trail/10-14mpg hwy, also reliable enough to drive to michigan, make 10 jumps consecutively, finish the JKX, then drive back to Arizona. Parts broken in four years of driving like this; one wheel speed sensor, one transfer cable linkage bushing.......

I will await the perpetuation of any and all overlanding mythological responses. Thank you for your time and most importantly your patronage

Your right. And you put the two different builds in two different categories. Which is my point.

No one is saying a JK on 40s cant overland. But its not going to be as efficient as a rig built intended of off road travel.

Where are you going to have all the room for food, gas, parts, tools, water, cookware, sleeping equip etc.. all in the back of the jeep? Unorganized making your vehicle less efficient than one who who has their rig properly built for that kind of travel and adventure? Thats more money out your wallet, getting your rig on 40s, mostly made for extreme wheeling to do these types of adventures. You dont need that big of a lift and tires to do a lot of the trails in the JKX, but you do it anyway to make your vehicle more efficient for that type of wheeling.

Get two JKs. One built like yours, on 40s, packed up with full gear for a week long adventure all in the back of the jeep.
Then one not as modified with 33" tires, and the same weight load of gear.

Which one get better gas milage? Making their vehicle more efficient.

 

[JKBANDIT55]

An overland build is going to be better fuel economy, cost less to maintain, better cargo room, less moving parts, smaller in size, and more efficient for long travel. The cost of travel with a JK on 40s loaded, is going to be A LOT more than a JK on 33s loaded properly. So the point of an expedition build is just that!


Each build is going to be better at what its made for.

 

[wayoflife]

Haha Lets be honest, you have one of the best rigs built, but I know you wouldn't dare to take your rig on a 2k mile+ adventure in unmarked land in Saudi. Heck if you were, might as well get you a roof rack, and leave all your mechanical parts, sleeping equip, and food at home. As you will only have enough storage for gas.

Again, I think you missed the part where I specifically said "here in America". I have no desires to go to Saudi and I don't know too many self-proclaimed overlander types who seriously would either.

Your right. You also dont need an expensive lift and 40" tires to do the rubicon either. But you do it anyway to make your rig more efficient.

There are bigger and tougher trails than the Rubicon and that's why I run 40" tires - so I can travel and explore wherever I want.

Just like the expensive rooftop tents. Not needed, but there to make the intent of the vehicle more efficient as not only are they a tent on top, but provide good water proof storage when on the road, leaving more room in the jeep for other things.

Well, I run a Trektop on my white JK which robs me of even more room that a standard soft top or hard top - I don't know how I ever manage to survive :crazyeyes:

No one is saying a JK on 40s cant overland. But its not going to be as efficient as a rig built intended of off road travel.

I can only assume that you keep on making these declarations based on personal experience running 40" tires because you sure sound like you know more about it than Greg or me. :yup:

Where are you going to have all the room for food, gas, parts, tools, water, cookware, sleeping equip etc.. all in the back of the jeep? Unorganized making your vehicle less efficient than one who who has their rig properly built for that kind of travel and adventure?

Oh, you must be talking about Greg's Jeep cause he's the most unorganized and messy guy I know :cheesy:

Thats more money out your wallet, getting your rig on 40s, mostly made for extreme wheeling to do these types of adventures. You dont need that big of a lift and tires to do a lot of the trails in the JKX, but you do it anyway to make your vehicle more efficient for that type of wheeling.

Yes, you're right, a rig like mine is made for extreme wheeling and an overland rig is not. As Greg said earlier, "I can go anywhere an overland rig can go BUT, an overland rig cannot go where I can go." Yes, it does cost more money to build but, if you have it, I don't know why you'd want to limit yourself. But hey, that's just me.

Get two JKs. One built like yours, on 40s, packed up with full gear for a week long adventure all in the back of the jeep. Then one not as modified with 33" tires, and the same weight load of gear.

Which one get better gas milage? Making their vehicle more efficient.

You'll forgive me but, you're assuming that we'd carry the same kind of gear. Greg already stated what kind of MPG he gets and I would concur. What kind of MPG do you get?

 

[GCM 2]

Your right. And you put the two different builds in two different categories. Which is my point.

No one is saying a JK on 40s cant overland. But its not going to be as efficient as a rig built intended of off road travel.

Where are you going to have all the room for food, gas, parts, tools, water, cookware, sleeping equip etc.. all in the back of the jeep? Unorganized making your vehicle less efficient than one who who has their rig properly built for that kind of travel and adventure? Thats more money out your wallet, getting your rig on 40s, mostly made for extreme wheeling to do these types of adventures. You dont need that big of a lift and tires to do a lot of the trails in the JKX, but you do it anyway to make your vehicle more efficient for that type of wheeling.

Get two JKs. One built like yours, on 40s, packed up with full gear for a week long adventure all in the back of the jeep.
Then one not as modified with 33" tires, and the same weight load of gear.

Which one get better gas milage? Making their vehicle more efficient.

Oh, I completely get your point and none what you write holds water. What makes you think the inside of my JK is unorganized? :thinking: Simply because I don't have a sliding fridge/cook top combo? :thinking: haha! If you only knew how anal I am about organiztion :cheesy: That fridge/cook top combo takes up lots of room to do only one thing, cook or cool, that's it. It's heavy and takes up tons of room. I could run one but I refuse to because it's not a flexible as my current set up. The 40"s vs 33"s and gas mileage.....if you are talking only highway, maybe, but not by much if any. 40"s vs 33"s on the trail....zero difference. All the time you will spend looking for a bypass or dragging over rocks, idling while getting pulled off of obstacle, just plain getting your vehicle stuck and/or beat to shit, you are burning fuel. If you have driven a rig like mine, Wayolife's, Clarsen's, Trailbud's, RubiCat, EVO1, heck pick any EVO built rig on 37"s or bigger and you will have a "come to Jesus" moment on all you thought you knew about vehicle builds. I have been offroading (same as overlanding), exploring (read: overlanding) adventuring (e.g. Overlanding), instructing Offroad mobility (reference: overlanding training) as part of my earning a living, as a Wayalife, for hobby, for competition, and from point a to point b, in 17 different countries, for about 29 years now. I guess all this time I was doing it uncomfortablely because I didnt have a cook top on a slide, I guess I was unorganized because I didn't have aircraft style tie down points for my goose down sleeping bag.

Soooo, I guess my overly sarcastic point is, until you have owned a "Moby" and a traditional overland rig you can't really say you know what the difference is and it's all just a theory or based on hypotheticals. Oh wait....I have and do own those kinds of rigs

 

[wayoflife]

An overland build is going to be better fuel economy

What kind of fuel economy do you get?

cost less to maintain

How so?

better cargo room

Not everyone needs or wants a big center of gravity throwing roof rack and/or roof top tent. Also, not everyone runs components that are prone to breaking thus requiring the need to carry tons of spare parts.

less moving parts

Meaning what?

smaller in size

A clear disadvantage on any trail that requires the ability to negotiate obstacles.

more efficient for long travel...

The cost of travel with a JK on 40s loaded, is going to be A LOT more than a JK on 33s loaded properly.

You know this based on personal experience?

So the point of an expedition build is just that!

So, the point of an expedition build to to make a good camper! If it were me, I might just get a Sportsmobile or Superduty with a camper top on it.

Each build is going to be better at what its made for.

I disagree. My build can take me anywhere and it does all the time. An overland expedition build cannot go where I can go.

 

[JKBANDIT55]

You guys are right. I dont have a built JK like yours. But here is someone who does. Lo2ay. He has a jk built like yours and an LJ made for overlanding. And yes he has been on JKX trip here in co. I asked him what separates the two and would he take his JK on an overland that he takes his LJ.

His reply.

 

[JKBANDIT55]

What kind of fuel economy do you get?



How so?



Not everyone needs or wants a big center of gravity throwing roof rack and/or roof top tent. Also, not everyone runs components that are prone to breaking thus requiring the need to carry tons of spare parts.



Meaning what?



A clear disadvantage on any trail that requires the ability to negotiate obstacles.



You know this based on personal experience?



So, the point of an expedition build to to make a good camper! If it were me, I might just get a Sportsmobile or Superduty with a camper top on it.



I disagree. My build can take me anywhere and it does all the time. An overland expedition build cannot go where I can go.

I get 21 MPG city and 14-16 when in 4 wheel drive. And that is loaded. Then again I dont have all the extra weight you guys have.

And from the post above, someone with the experience in both types of vehicles clearly states one serves a certain point and best at what its made for.

So I guess, unless you have both rigs and have done long overlands in both, you cant really compare the two. Obviously he has, and clearly states the difference and purpose of an "overland Build"

 

[MTG]

Oh boy! Where is the man eating popcorn icon? just doesn't cut it.

 

[Hightower]

Edit 2.0: after 13 postings of my land rovers, I am deleting the pictures from my iPhoto files so I can no longer post pictures of my "overlanding rigs". I have beaten into overlanding submission.[/QUOTE]

Greg please do not delete the pictures it would be like deleting the pictures of your prom, first date, or YOUR wedding dress. without real photographic evidence how can we ever know for sure that a persons hair was was terrible in high school, they did marry their first love, and in your case yes you did look fabulous in WHITE. Lol

 

[GCM 2]

I know Luai personally, have done two JKX with him. His LJ is badass......however, that LJ has as much custom work as his JK. So it ain't even close to stock or off the shelf parts and is closer to his JK despite what you think. By stock, maybe he means motor and trans, everything else is aftermarket. Sorry, but the JK 4 door still has more room than the LJ. If you are comparing a stock JK, LJ, TJ, YJ, to a built up crawler, well then sure a dealer can service the stock vehicles. But in 4 yeas of ownership with my built up "rock crawler" I have yet to need the dealer to look at anything left with what's stock, and I have yet to do anything other than regular maintenance to what is modified. Do some research on what is getting broken and replaced on jeeps and you will find its the stock, weaker, inferior components. You upgrade to better aftermarket pieces so you aren't visiting dealers. I am not going to argue fuel consumption, I know what I know as fact from not only my personal vehicles, but the vehicles (hilux, landcruisers, land rovers, pinzguers, gelanderwagons) I have crossed foreign countries with, vehicle with much smaller tires still running tubes on split rims . I'm not going off of a friend who has a vehicle that once told me how great his mileage is with 33"s

Next question......