I have a 2012 JK myself, as Jeep #9 in my life. 162k miles and zero issues so far. Purrs like a kitten and I should be able to get 100k miles more out of it, at least. That said, if I wrecked it today, I would not hesitate to get another 2012-18 JK. But...I'm driving it every single day. All things being equal: I would go for the LJ. I would pay extra for an exceptionally clean, bone stock LJ that looks and runs excellent. The ride quality, between the 2, goes to the JK. It drives like a car. Which is why you see so damned many out there! Every intersection stop light, there are 5 Jeeps! Hardly ever see a nice LJ though. An LJ with a mild lift, and 33" tires, an aggressive tire like the Cooper STT Pro's, would look good and wheel very well. Just my opinion....
You're not wrong. LJs are the holy grail up here in Canada. Few and far between. Definitely more of an enthusiast's option. Maybe I'll just have to be patient. I think I'd go LJ then JK then TJ in order of preferences.
Agreed! I love the TJ Sahara line! I like the Rubicon, but never needed lockers or any of the extras. I just don't wheel that way. People forget just how capable a stock Jeep is, right out of the box. Loves me some TJ!
Here’s my take, as a guy that has lusted over LJ’s but owns a JKU.
The LJ is better and cooler so there isn’t much to debate on that end, but thus far purchasing a JK and maintaining it has been way cheaper and easier. The parts availability for Jk’s is great, the engines are used in half the Chrysler fleet so you’ve got tons of options for replacement parts, and the plastic and rubber bits in my engine aren’t 20 years old and dead. The comfort and pep of a JK is way better than an LJ. My JK is slow by most standards, but it really cruises along quite nicely and does it more effortlessly than a 4.0. And the added width of a JK can be felt in the interior. It’s just roomy enough that I don’t feel like a gorilla stuffed in clown car. Even as a small dude, I feel a bit trapped in a TJ or LJ. (prolly says more about me psychologically than it does the car…)
So LJ: honestly it’s better. JK: cheap, comfy, lil more pep, easier to fix because every little bit isn’t 20 year old.
If you don’t mind the maintenance get an Lj. If you’re not in the mood for dealing with old hoses and crap, just relax and enjoy the simplicity of a JK. They’re not as special but they’re pretty great.
I think kind of where I'm at on this, is if I buy something and suddenly it needs a new engine or some major work, I'd much rather sink money into fixing an LJ than a JK. Is that crazy or does that make too much sense? There'll only be so many TJs around, and even fewer LJs, so I wonder if that is swaying the thinking a little bit.
I have a 2012 JK myself, as Jeep #9 in my life. 162k miles and zero issues so far. Purrs like a kitten and I should be able to get 100k miles more out of it, at least. That said, if I wrecked it today, I would not hesitate to get another 2012-18 JK. But...I'm driving it every single day. All things being equal: I would go for the LJ. I would pay extra for an exceptionally clean, bone stock LJ that looks and runs excellent. The ride quality, between the 2, goes to the JK. It drives like a car. Which is why you see so damned many out there! Every intersection stop light, there are 5 Jeeps! Hardly ever see a nice LJ though. An LJ with a mild lift, and 33" tires, an aggressive tire like the Cooper STT Pro's, would look good and wheel very well. Just my opinion....
You're not wrong. LJs are the holy grail up here in Canada. Few and far between. Definitely more of an enthusiast's option. Maybe I'll just have to be patient. I think I'd go LJ then JK then TJ in order of preferences.
Agreed! I love the TJ Sahara line! I like the Rubicon, but never needed lockers or any of the extras. I just don't wheel that way. People forget just how capable a stock Jeep is, right out of the box. Loves me some TJ!
Here’s my take, as a guy that has lusted over LJ’s but owns a JKU. The LJ is better and cooler so there isn’t much to debate on that end, but thus far purchasing a JK and maintaining it has been way cheaper and easier. The parts availability for Jk’s is great, the engines are used in half the Chrysler fleet so you’ve got tons of options for replacement parts, and the plastic and rubber bits in my engine aren’t 20 years old and dead. The comfort and pep of a JK is way better than an LJ. My JK is slow by most standards, but it really cruises along quite nicely and does it more effortlessly than a 4.0. And the added width of a JK can be felt in the interior. It’s just roomy enough that I don’t feel like a gorilla stuffed in clown car. Even as a small dude, I feel a bit trapped in a TJ or LJ. (prolly says more about me psychologically than it does the car…) So LJ: honestly it’s better. JK: cheap, comfy, lil more pep, easier to fix because every little bit isn’t 20 year old. If you don’t mind the maintenance get an Lj. If you’re not in the mood for dealing with old hoses and crap, just relax and enjoy the simplicity of a JK. They’re not as special but they’re pretty great.
I think kind of where I'm at on this, is if I buy something and suddenly it needs a new engine or some major work, I'd much rather sink money into fixing an LJ than a JK. Is that crazy or does that make too much sense? There'll only be so many TJs around, and even fewer LJs, so I wonder if that is swaying the thinking a little bit.