Just a sticker
| LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/ |
|
| Woody Kit http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6140 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | the1jferg [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 11:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Woody Kit |
Not a Wagoneer substitute http://www.automotiveconcepts.net/store ... ct=Liberty |
|
| Author: | auggy [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 11:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just a sticker
|
|
| Author: | Skyjump136 [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 12:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Good way to ruin a perfectly good KJ, IMO. I know some people like the look, but I don't get it at all. |
|
| Author: | x3rdxStrikex [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 12:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
 that's just WRONG!!! If someone actually has that on their jeep, you may as well buy a PT LOSER.
|
|
| Author: | Boi1ermaker [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Good way to ruin a perfectly good KJ, IMO. I know some people like the look, but I don't get it at all
Agreed. reminds me more of the beaten down station wagon my mom used to drive when we were kids. |
|
| Author: | ManicMechanicJoe [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 3:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
x3rdxStrikex wrote: :shock: that's just WRONG!!! If someone actually has that on their jeep, you may as well buy a PT LOSER.
what happened to this being a friendly forum? my dad has a PT Cruiser. At first I hated it, but now after he's had it for a while it's started to grow on me. It gets 30 miles to the gallon, has a decent stereo, sunroof, leather (not my thing but i know some folks like it). Oh and it can haul more cargo (volume, not weight) then my KJ. His has 110,000 miles on it and the only replacement part we have done to it was a $7 thermostat... |
|
| Author: | Tokyojoe [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 4:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Because the PT Cruiser is all show and no go. Cruisers (old days 50's and 60's) were meant to still have some sort of power but the creation of the PT Cruiser does not fit the true cruiser ideal. My sister has one and while it is nice looking it has nothing under its hood. |
|
| Author: | x3rdxStrikex [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 5:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Don't get me wrong Manic, I'm not knockin on your pops for having one, i'm basing my opinion on a rental i had. The outside was clean but mechanically it was a nightmare.......engine knock, exhaust rattles, irrregular RPM at idle, a horn delay, and a few speakers blown. I wasn't impressed w/the interior either. THATS why I call it a PT Loser. And I would hate if someone even said it resembled one! And I am fully aware of some rental companies that don't take care of their cars, i never would've expected that from enterprise, since i have rented from them before. Also, my ex-gf had similar troubles before 50k miles on hers too. |
|
| Author: | Skyjump136 [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 6:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: what happened to this being a friendly forum?
I don't think that someone stating they dislike a particular car makes this an un-friendly place. We're all here to give and receive opinions about a car afterall. We certainly do watch out for personal attacks, but this wasn't directed at anyone in particular. Being "friendly" doesn't mean everything is going to be positive... |
|
| Author: | ManicMechanicJoe [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 6:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
the reason the PT has no power is because it's an economy car...at least it doesn't look like a plain jane econobox... I realize it wasn't a personal attack and I didn't take offense to it. That's the problem with these forums-nobody can detect the tone of your voice so it's pretty easy to get mixed up. Does that mean when other forums bash the KJ, they are being friendly? Those aren't personal attacks...Those are fairly general attacks towards all KJ owners based largely on looks and IFS/aluminum diff. |
|
| Author: | Skyjump136 [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 6:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Those are fairly general attacks towards all KJ owners based largely on looks and IFS/aluminum diff.
As you stated some of those are directed towards the KJ OWNERS based on the looks of the car they drive (that's absurd)...the above statement was directed toward the car alone (based on experience). Apples and oranges. He didn't make the leap that all PT owners must also be losers because he dislikes the car...just that his experience wasn't good. BTW, the PT Cruiser I had to drive for a week was a total death trap...a shaking, rattling, leaking death trap. I know folks who love them though and that's fine. I wouldn't make any judgements about their character based on the one car I drove. That's the difference between us and those other forums. 
|
|
| Author: | ManicMechanicJoe [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I see what you're saying...kind of...Most of the comments on the Jeep I have seen are related more towards the switch to IFS or the cute-ute styling, not the owners. |
|
| Author: | Jeepjeepster [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Skyjump136 wrote: Quote: Those are fairly general attacks towards all KJ owners based largely on looks and IFS/aluminum diff. As you stated some of those are directed towards the KJ OWNERS based on the looks of the car they drive (that's absurd)...the above statement was directed toward the car alone (based on experience). Apples and oranges. He didn't make the leap that all PT owners must also be losers because he dislikes the car...just that his experience wasn't good. BTW, the PT Cruiser I had to drive for a week was a total death trap...a shaking, rattling, leaking death trap. I know folks who love them though and that's fine. I wouldn't make any judgements about their character based on the one car I drove. That's the difference between us and those other forums. Id say there are many kj's out there that are the same way. Any car will suck if you dont take care of it. I'd say its best to stop talking about the PT cruiser, and I kinda like them is its the right one. 
|
|
| Author: | USAFCOP [ Sat Feb 25, 2006 11:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, the woody kit is cool on a waggy, but not the KJ, too small to have the forrest on the sides 
As for the PT I think they are all right, until wrecked, once wrecked it will never be right again... As for power, gotta try the Turbo... NICE! |
|
| Author: | ManicMechanicJoe [ Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
the turbo PT's are pretty quick, I test drove one with a stick shift and it was plenty quick. I would geuss 0-60 to be in the high 6 second range. I know it's the same motor as the Neon SRT-4 which will run 0-60 in the sub 6 seconds range... At least DC is getting away from their boring cars of yesterday... |
|
| Author: | Edwin [ Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I's not for me, but to each his own. 
|
|
| Author: | Edwin [ Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Tokyojoe wrote: it has nothing under its hood.
I recken it's got a motor ain't it?
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|