Unlimited Analysis
The following document traces the various machinations of Chris’ brain as he tries to resolve what kind of a family, topless wheeling machine he would like to have. Initially this document was meant to be a direct comparison between the Unlimited and the options. Since it is unlikely that a TJ Unlimited would be purchased (cost, number of seats) this document has morphed into a comparison of what is good about the TJ Unlimited and how the alternatives can meet that role.
The base line: Jeep TJ Unlimited
Wheelbase is 103.4 inches. this compares to 93.4″ to the SWB. This means an extra 10″ between the wheels.
The difference in rear overhang is 156.1″ versus 167″. This means the rear overhang has been stretched 10.9″ in the rear tub. This assumes that the specifications on the Jeep.com web site are measured to the same location (tub versus tire carrier or whatever). These measurements are for the SWB and LWB Rubicon models.
The main purpose of the wheelbase change is to provide more people and cargo room. Additionally, it provides more stability for hill climbs and descents when off-road.
With that as a backdrop let us look at some TJ images to get a feel for the the Unlimited and it’s configuration in practical terms. First lets look at some images as provided by the Jeep web sites.
Here is a side view with gear showing stowed behind the rear bench. Appears to have a reasonable amount of cargo space.
It does look kind of “goofy” in stock form though. Here are a few images of a modified TJ.
Unfortunately I don’t have a side view of this particular vehicle. Here are a few images of other modified TJs.
The blue one is overbuilt for my tastes. The red one is an AEV demo vehicle. I suspect it is running a 35″ tire. More my speed.
Ok, back to the configuration. Here are a few images of the interior to see what useable space there is.
And here is compared to a SWB TJ (mildly built with Bushwacker flares).
We can see that there is a considerable amount of difference in rear leg room and cargo space. The SWB TJ looks like it is an either cargo or passengers kind of vehicle. Definitely not ideal as a family camping machine – at least not without adding a trailer to the mix. Also, in stock set up you can only seat 4 people total.
Just for the sake of comparison, here is what the interior of a Jeep Cherokee (XJ).
It appears to have considerably more room behind the bench and the rear bench itself is a three seat bench (This is actually a Beijing Jeep 2500 – note the extra 4″ of rear bench legroom and rear bench head rests). The awkward shape of the interior walls of a TJ precludes the use of a wider bench without doing some cutting of the sheet metal. This cutting would compromise the strength of the tub without some replacement metal to re-stiffen the tub. The Cherokee is a larger vehicle inside, while it has a similar wheelbase and length compared to the TJ Unlimited (wheelbase is 101.4″, length is 168.8″ VERIFY).
The design of the TJ Unlimited soft top is quite nice. It is a stretched version of the Bestop (OEM) sunrunner with sun roof foldable section and zip out sides.
The hard top that is available is basically a stretched SWB top. It is kind of goofy looking also, but then a Jeep will never win any fashion contests so it doesn’t really matter. Part of the attraction actually.
If we look at the cargo area we can get a feel for it’s general size and configuration through the following images. Here with the seat folded forward and down.
And again.
Notice the track across the top of the rear gate opening that supplies a surface to connect the rear opening on the soft top.
The following images show the size and configuration of the Unlimited’s rear overhang.
There is nothing terribly innovative in these images. It is a straightforward stretch with no new pieces added short of sheet metal and frame rails. It would have been nice to see an oversized fuel tank in this extra large area behind the rear axle.
This following image shows what the tub looks like with all the carpeting pulled up.
We can see the curves in the front rear of the tub that would make adding a larger bench difficult and surprisingly, the tub has a square shape at the rear just forward of the rear gate opening that is reminiscent of the tub shape in earlier SWB Jeeps like the YJ and CJ.
Comparisons: 1980-1985 Jeep Scrambler CJ8
There has been a lot said about how this Unlimited is similar to a CJ8 Scrambler. The Scrambler had much more space in the rear of the tub. It was longer and it used a different tub shape that was closer to a pick-up than a CJ tub. The interior walls were vertical and there were wheel wells for the inner fenders.
Here are some images comparing a TJ Unlimited to a CJ8 Scrambler.
Notice the difference in the rear overhang in particular. This Scrambler looks quite a bit larger than the Unlmited but that is because it appears to have a mild 2.5″ spring lift and 31″-32″ tires installed.
Here is an image that really show the differences in profile of the tubs. The top is a JP Off-Road bobbed Scrambler body, the middle is a TJ Unlmited body, the bottom is a JP Off-Road reproduction scrambler body.
Here are some images that show the shape of the inside of a Scrambler tub.
The front bulk head is there to support a pick-up cab style hard top. Note the wheel wells and the supports at the rear corners of the tub. There is a lot more room inside this tub for cargo and people. It shoul be possible to fit a Cherokee bench in one of these tubs. I measured the CJ7 tub I have and the rear bench in my Cherokee and the bench will have a few inches to spare when fit in this tub.
The question though is how stiff is this CJ8 style tub? Will it flex at the tub longitudinal corners? How is it stiffened. The CJ7/YJ has the “box” structure that runs the length of the tub to stiffen it but this tub does not. It must be stiff enough because the Scrambler was meant to be used as a small pick-up and as such it would have the tub filled with soil, cargo, whatever.
There have been a number of Scrambler owners that have “bobbed” their machine to close to Unlimited specifications in the interest of less overhang and better performance on the trail. Here are some examples.
Cutting a Scrambler tub raises a whole series of issues such as frame modification and strengthening, fuel filler, etc. The most difficulat one to solve though is what to do about a roof? For a “trailer queen” style off-road machine this may not be much of an issue. You can also make a bikini top fit. This does not give good all weather coverage though. Depending on how the Jeep is going to be used this may or may not be an issue.
There are several tops available for Scramblers; some may possible to modify to fit on a bobbed CJ8 tub or stretched YJ tub. Here are some images of the various types of tops out there.
Any of these tops should be fairly straightforward to shorten. Some have gone the other direction and modified a SWB Bestop to fit on a full length Scrambler.
Kind of goofy looking again, but it is form over function. I played around in Photoshop to see what the same approach would look like on an Unlimimted length tub.
I can’t make up my mind whether it looks good or not. Not that it really matters. It would boil down to whether you wanted the roll up safari style sides like on the STC Scrambler soft top or the zip out side windows like on the Bestop Super top. My preference is for the safari style top. This is what my old long wheelbasse Samurai had and I liked the flexibility of being able to throw gear over the side of the tub from any direction with the sides rolled up.
The Scrambler also had several hard tops available. One version was the normal dealer supplied version that was fiberglass and was basically a stretched CJ7 roof. The other was an all steel “postal” roof that looked quite a bit better. My assumption is that for postal route service the USPS was concerned with theft of mail so they wanted a more robust top for Scramblers used in mail delivery service. These postal style roofs were also available in South America and Australia. There was also a dealer option pick-up style roof. Here are some images of the tops.
Also note that the steel roof also comes with a full steel door.
Comparisons: CJ6
Before the CJ8 Scrambler there was also a stretched verison of the CJ5 called imaginatively enough the CJ6. It is basically a CJ5 with a stretched panel in front of the rear wheel opening. Here are some images of stock and modified CJ6s in various configurations.
Note how the early CJ style tub boxes run the full length of the tub.
While neat, this would not a be a large enough vehicle for 2 adults and 3 kids with weekend cargo.
Comparisons: C101 Commando
Another vehicle that the Unlimited has been compared to is the 1967-1973 C101 Jeepster Commando. These vehicles are relatively rare and funky/goofy looking. When built up they do look fairly butch though. Here are some images of the Commando.
The Commando is quite a bit different style vehicle compared to other Jeeps. It is much more car like with a non-folding windshield and finished interior. The hood and grille is wider than contemporary CJs of the same time. It is possible to swap the familiar CJ style grille, hood and fenders however.
In the last few images above that is a postal Jeep grille in place of a standard CJ grille. It is more bulbous and has less vertical slats. It is a common modification to CJs to be able to relocate the radiator forward to make room for modified drivetrains like V-8 engines and overdrive transmissions.
Interior space in a Command is somewhat like a cross between an Unlimited and a Scrambler.
These following images really show off the car like attributes of the Commando interior.
In some respects it is similar inside to a International Scout II. When we say car-like, it is no where near as plush as a Jeep TJ though.
There were several tops available for these Jeepsters as well. There is a fairly good representation in the pictures above. There is teh hard top in both full station wagon and pick-up cab style and the long and short soft top. Early Jeepster Commandos of this series also had a “convertible” configuration. STC currently makes a “safari” style top as well. This does not use a “fast-track” system for mounting however. These following images show the differences between the different soft and hard tops.
The convertible configuration is quite odd looking, even by Jeep standards.
Did anyone else have this Tonka Jeepster and jet boat set when they were a kid? I really had a lot of fun with this when I was a kid. I wonder where it is now.
Comparisons: Suzuki SJ413 Long Wheelbase
No comparison to the TJ Unlimited would be complete for me without comparing it to the long wheelbase SJ-413 (1985 Canadian spec Samurai) that I used to have. Here are some images of SJ-413/Samurais (not mine).
The configuration is quite similar to a CJ8 Scrambler but it is a much smaller vehicle. Ironically, the interior space is not that much different compared to a TJ Unlimited.
Here are some images of my Samurai.
There are days that I miss my Samurai but more often than not I am happy with the decision to sell it and all the rest of my Suzuki related gear. It was a small light vehicle that was easily buffeted around at highway speeds. I didn’t fit in it that well, and this had only gotten worse as middle age approached. I’m not getting any smaller. Also, the drivetrain was quite light duty in comparison to anything Jeep sized. Probably the biggest let down with the vehicle was the lack of a real hard top. The plastic (really, plastic!) hard top used on these trucks was just too flimsy for my tastes. The soft top was adequate – just.
Comparison: Jeep YJ Wrangler
The North American market never got a long wheelbase YJ. They were available over seas however. This has not stopped dedicated souls from creating a long wheelbase version.
Because of the similarity between the CJ7/CJ8 and the YJ tub this type of built would be the same as a CJ8 trimmed to Unlimited length but instead we would be adding to the tub from the normal short wheelbase YJ tub length. The top issues would be the same as a shortened CJ8 also.
Comparison: Jeep Cherokee XJ.
This is a different slant on the Jeep XJ. Let’s take a two door Cherokee and sawz-all the roof clean off.
Looks pretty good! Reminds me of a Scout II.
There are issues with this of course. the structure of the roof needs to be replaced with a new cage structure in addtion to the bottom fo the unibody requiring heavy reinforcement.
There is also the issue of what to do for a roof. Fabricating a hard top is probably out of the question unless you want to get right into the entire molding a compete roof from scratch thing.
Some have fangled up soft tops but I’m certian that this would be quite a serious amount of work to turn into a full, all-weather roof.
The plusses would be a good Jeep and drivetrain to start with, including a fairly modern and comforable interior. The negatives would be the amount of work required to make it into an all-weather machine.
Comparisons: All Vehicles Mentioned
Before getting into the direct comparison of the vehicles it is appropriate
to set guidelines for what the vehicles will be used for.
The primary role is for summer time fun when camping with the family (2 adults,
3 children, weekend worth of gear, light tent trailer). The vehicle should be
spacious enough and strong enough to perform the role without incurring too
high a work load on the driver. The secondary role of the vehicle is to be a
competent vehicle to use for occasional and extended commuting chores. The third
role a long range cruising/touring machine for a lesser number of people and
gear.
Some of the attributes that go into a vehicle that will perform these roles
include: comfort, smooth ride (caveats of solid axle 4×4 trucks apply), decent
range, decent power, reliability and parts availability. Additionally there
should be a balance with respect to what the vehicle costs to build/buy and
the time required to assemble the vehicle.
There are tertiary considerations that go with the look and style of the vehicle
in its proposed roles. Some of the things that are really desired for this vehicle
are:
Let’s have a re-look at the vehicles discussed above.
TJ Wrangler Unlimited (2003 on)
| Pro | |
| Just add gas and you have a new vehicle off the show room floor | |
| The vehicle in Rubicon trim is more than adequate for most purposes | |
| No rust or other repairs required | |
| Coil front suspension | |
| Not much to do to build for 35″ tires. Add a lift, maybe regear axles as a later date. |
|
| Con | |
| Cost. Approx $35,ooo to purchase new Rubicon version (before taxes). Additional money for modifications. |
|
| Fitment of a 3 seat rear bench unlikely – if structurally possible are you really going to cut such a new machine? |
|
| Chrysler automatic transmission (NVG3550 manual available if so inclined) | |
| Rubicon trim level air lockers are not known to be strong | |
| Front axle is D44/D30 hybrid with low pinion D44 differential section |
Jeep CJ8 Scrambler (1980-1985)
| Pro | |
| Size for the most part is correct | |
| Able to install 3 seat rear bench with some work | |
| Reasonable roof options, even bobbing the tub would not be too onerous if a soft top would be good enough. |
|
| Con | |
| Rare to find/purchase | |
| expensive/time to build (restoration/modification) | |
| Cutting the tub is time intensive | |
YJ Wrangler (1987-1995)
| Pro | |
| Good availability | |
| Reasonably cheap | |
| Among the largest of the Jeep engine bays. “Easy” to fit any common drivetrains including small block Chevrolet with overdrive transmission. |
|
| Con | |
| Modifying tub may be difficult because of tub design: length of wheelwell boxes in tub that would need to be cut and then reinforced where the bench would fit. |
|
| Cutting the tub is time intensive. | |
| Not classic “Jeep” styling but I like the square headlights so not a problem |
|
Jeep CJ6 (1955 – 1976)
| Pro | |
| Neat in general | |
| Classic styling | |
| Con | |
| Rare to find/purchase | |
| expensive/time to build (restoration/modification) | |
| Modifying tub may be difficult because of tub design: length of wheelwell boxes in tub that would need to be cut and then reinforced where the bench would fit. |
|
| Cutting the tub is time intensive. | |
| May be some parts availability issues such as interior bits and other non-hard parts. (These days you can buy just about anything on ebay though) |
|
| Door configuration may not be the best for all-weather use. | |
Jeepster C101 Commando (1967 – 1973)
| Pro | |
| Neat in general | |
| No modification of tub required other than bracketry for rear bench install - similar to CJ8 in this regard. |
|
| Con | |
| Rare to find/purchase (I know where there is one!) | |
| expensive/time to build (restoration/modification) | |
| May be some parts availability issues such as interior bits and other non-hard parts. (These days you can buy just about anything on ebay though) |
|
| Soft top options while there do not include a “fast-track” system where the soft top connects to the tub using tracks in lieu of snaps. Something that can be reverse engineered later? |
|
| Windshield does not fold down |
Suzuki SJ-413 (1985-1988)
| Pro | |
| Neat in general | |
| No modification of tub required other than bracketry for rear bench (Sidekick) install. Similar to CJ8 in this regard. |
|
| Con | |
| Rare to find/purchase. Would probably buy rust free example from British Columbia if I were to go this route again. |
|
| Small hardware (engine, axles, etc.) | |
| expensive/time to build (restoration/modification) | |
| Small size. Too small for dealing with long highway cruising and full load of people gear for the weekend. |
|
| Barely adequate soft top, poor hard top availability. | |
| Parts are starting to get scarece although aftermarket is making movements. Always ebay |
|
| It really is more of a toy than a real vehicle. |
Jeep Cherokee XJ 2 Door (1997-1999)
| Pro | |
| Available cheaply (relative) | |
| Nice interior and road manners | |
| Good cargo space, rear bench cramped for adults (leg room in particular) | |
| Con | |
| Heavy modifications for roofless use. (!!!) | |
| Windshield does not fold down. | |
| Doors do not remove without looking like a redneck creation | |
| No all-weather roof available if steel roof removed. | |
| Unknown structural strength after steel roof removed. Unlike other vehicles above this is a unibody structure and as such less resistance to body modification. |
Of the options above the Suzuki and Cherokee can be removed from the beginning.
Neither are practical; the Suzuki is too small and underpowered while the Cherokee
would have too many issues to make it work within the intended look and feel
of this vehicle.
This reduces the short list to the Unlimited, CJ8, CJ6, YJ and C101.
Price will eliminate the Unlimited unfortunately. The CJ6 is too small and generally
impractical for this intended usage as well. If the door structure on a CJ6
were closer to that of the CJ8/YJ it may have fared better.
Of the three remaining options the C101 does not have a fold down windshield.
This is not enough of a problem to eliminate the vehicle however.
In order to make the CJ8 or the YJ work within the Unlimited size envelope will
require fairly involved body modification: stretching or bobbing. The C101 could
be used as is.
The YJ is much more available. The CJ8 is probably easier to to shorten than
the YJ to lengthen.’
OF these three options we are looking at old vehicles and they will have mechanical
issues. Some of this problem can be mitigated by assuming that no matter which
platform is chosen the axles will be replaced. In order to have a modern engine
and an overdrive automatic transmission all three will require their engines
and transmissions to be replaced. As a result, from the perspective of drivetrain
desirablility they are all equal.
Of the three vehicles only one has a galvanized steel tub (YJ Wrangler). Of
the three, only the Commando and the Scrambler have “classic” styling.
| Attribute |
YJ Wrangler
|
CJ8 Scrambler
|
C101 Commando
|
|||
|
Classic Styling |
debatable
|
yes
|
classically odd
|
|||
|
Adequate Tub (no bodywork) |
modified
|
modified
|
stock
|
|||
|
Adequate Drivetrain |
no
|
no
|
no
|
|||
|
Aftermarket Soft Top |
stock
|
stock
|
stock
|
|||
|
Requires Modification of Soft Top |
modified
|
modified
|
stock
|
|||
|
FastTrack style soft top available |
modified
|
modified
|
none
|
|||
|
Hard Top Available |
modified
|
modified
|
stock
|
|||
|
Aftermarket Support |
yes
|
CJ7/CJ8
|
little
|
|||
|
5 / 3
|
4 / 4
|
3 / 5
|
||||