>think the idea of a smallish off-roader is cool
>don't want to pay out the ass for a ww2 era one that's going on 80 years old
>not willing to drive anything with a Chrysler/Jeep engine
what's the ideal car? old bronco/blazer? SBC swapped wrangler? suzuki samurai?
Obvious answer is Studebaker
Depends on your ressources and location
But one of these is your best bet if you can't find or afford Samurai
Holy based, I didn't know trackers had convertibles
Were sold as Geo, Chevy and Suzuki, 2nd gen also came as convertibles so make sure to cover all that if you're searching for one
At that point you could also suggest a modified Roxor
Mitsubishi made a Jeep until 1998
They came with various different gas and diesel 4-cylinders
They range from $5k-15k depending on the year (the older models are more expensive) plus whatever it costs to import.
Yes there is some imports like Suzuki and whatnot you can get into, but aftermarket support and general parts availability and resources is not comparable to ye old Jeep, be it a cj5 or cj7, I wouldn't trek much further than that as far as newer goes. The other alternative is buy a shell r build your own tube chassis offloader.
>tfw 77 cj7
Oh, and as for bronco/blazer, both tend to run a premium and are usually as or worse clapped than the equivalent jeep. I'm extremely biased towards squarebodies in general, I own 4, but the issue with the K5s (likely bronco too) is the body has no give like a truck, they twist bend and flex, it doesn't take much to rip the door strikers out or crack the tailgates of them. Upside of a K5 being an absolute shitton of aftermarket support.
Places like DIY4X, ORD Offroad Design, M.O.R.E Mountain Offroad, TMR industries, Quadratec, BDS, etc, very good places to source parts and DIY shit from.
Get your self a nice Mahindra. They tried to buy Jeep a while back.
How are the Indians in safety and general build quality?
I'd rather trust an Indian than any Chrysler product post-1960s
The motorcycles are not great
>safety
Corners got cut.
>build quality
Corners got cut.
>I want a Jeep
>As long as its not a Jeep
OP is always a moron
>I want an off roader
>I want it to have a reliable engine, not a 4.0 shitbox
>"This is somehow contradictory! I am very smart."
Did you just blow in from moron town?
>I want a small reliable capable offroader
You just defined the Jeep, Captain moron.
>jeep
>reliable
You should be a comedian
OP created a bait thread and we all know it. a thinly veiled Jeep-hate thread with a pic of a Jeep in the OP to attract Jeep fans and foes alike.
An "army jeep" and Jeep the Chrysler brand are 2 seperate things, you know that right?
>4.0 shitbox
You take that back right now
He's probably the idiot that experienced shitty Chrysler electronics and thinks the entire powerplant is trash.
I'll take it back when Chrysler puts out an apology for putting a reverse-flow head on a 2004 model year car
chrysler didnt even make the 4.0, they just kicked that can down the road since it was better than anything else they had
i even saw a mighty mite on pallets go for 6500, i was very tempted but i assumed it was taken apart for a reason, very low prod numbers, dont want to know what its like to source parts
>not a 4.0 shitbox
Confirmed for being 14 years old and unable to get past the amc straight 6 filter. Jesus that's embarrassing.
>you don't like driving shitbox engines! this is somehow a bad thing!
Sue me for wanting an engine that's not 50 years obsolete. At least the other Chrysler divisons, as well as GM and Ford, made actual updates to their 50s era engines rather than just duct-taping EFI to the same archaic boat-anchor
>duct-taping EFI to the same archaic boat-anchor
That's the exact reason why that engine is prized for its reliability. Again, if you got filtered by the amc 242, you should probably just give up and buy a bus pass.
>You don't like it when your car has 1950s problems, this somehow reflects badly on you.
Go adjust your points or something. Those of us who have driver's licenses would rather be out driving than babysitting a paperweight of an engine.
>1950s problems
Wtf are you talking about? Can you name a single one? Show me your bus pass junior
Just one? Easy. Having reverse flow heads in the 21st century is already a dealbreaker.
UAZ 469B
Suzuki jimnys are light weight fun 4x4s can be found in the uk for £3000
>not willing to drive anything with a Chrysler/Jeep engine
Good news, you can have a Wrangler with an Alfa engine now
Bet its a 3cyl turbo 1.4
most of these that werent military vehicles are cheap as frick, and ive even seen mutts go as low as 5k, just find a narrow track cj5 or some shit
Why so hostile, muhamud?
You can buy everything including whole frames and bodies for WW2 jeeps, and there are plenty of parts available to put more modern drivetrains in them. If I had the resources I'd build one from scratch with those parts and then get a worthless trashed vintage one and swap the VIN plates so I could register it. Given values on other small off-roaders these days and how much you'll have to sink into one to make it viable it's probably a decently economical proposition too.
Lada has to be on the list.
>reliable
Reliable enough and easy to fix.
You won't get one from Russia any time soon but there are some 2023 spec ones in the wild.
There's a reason even Russians prefer Jeeps to those if they can afford them.
Status, but 469 is more reliable than the Jeep and that's why it's the choice of armies in so many countries. It's mil-spec unlike your soft civcuck Jeep, the real American equivalent nowadays would be the military Humvee.
>Status
Old rusty rewelded Jeeps lack it.
>469 is more reliable than the Jeep
Bullshit. Even Jeep which is really a bottom of the barrel of the American Three has better QC than the UAZ, always had.
>that's why it's the choice of armies in so many countries
Are you moronic? These countries get it because they want to be friends with Russia and that's what Russia can give them in "light unarmored utility" category.
>It's mil-spec
Larper please. Mil-spec is purely American term.
>unlike your soft civcuck Jeep
I don't own one.
>the real American equivalent nowadays would be the military Humvee.
You're fricking moronic, now I'm sure of it.
>Old rusty rewelded Jeeps lack it.
Not where they're rare imports.
>Bullshit. Even Jeep which is really a bottom of the barrel of the American Three has better QC than the UAZ, always had.
QC can't fix quality of design. Even with sloppy QC the UAZ is so robust it doesn't matter.
>Are you moronic? These countries get it because they want to be friends with Russia and that's what Russia can give them in "light unarmored utility" category.
Countries don't have friends, they have interests. It fulfills the price/performance requirements perfectly well.
>Larper please. Mil-spec is purely American term.
And this is an American site.
>I don't own one.
Is "the soft civcuck Jeep in your example" any better?
>You're fricking moronic, now I'm sure of it.
Name another American vehicle that fills the role the UAZ has in the army
It's not mil-spec, it conforms to one military standard.
Meanwhile the UAZ is made for military use.
>Not where they're rare imports.
They aren't.
> Even with sloppy QC the UAZ is so robust it doesn't matter.
Are you fricking kidding?
>Countries don't have friends, they have interests
Are you fricking kidding[x2]?
>And this is an American site.
But we're talking about a Soviet vehicle. Mнe тeбя нaхyй пo-pyccки пocлaть чтo ль нaдo, дoлбoёб?
>And this is an American site.
Running on computers made in China, your point?
>It's mil-spec unlike your soft civcuck Jeep
My motherboard is mil-spec. You can slap that label on anything you want, it doesn't mean a thing.
4x4 moke was the Twin Moke and had two completely seperate engine and drive train assemblys.
Memory is bad but they may have had seperate controls too.
>zero ground clearance
?si=4USfITUk4VqhrUko
UTVs from the likes of Polaris and Can-Am are the spiritual successor to the old Willys Jeeps.
they used to sell those jeeps in th JC whitney catalog for $40 unassembled.
they don’t sell them like they used to
If you're not driving it on the road get a UTV or side by side. I like the Honda Pioneer if you want to go cheap. Polaris RZR if you don't, only because they have a top speed of fricking 90 and I've see them on the freeway.
there are so many options
>pajero
>prado
>jimny
>trooper
>samurai
>vitara
>lada
>og rav4
>patrol
>>og rav4
Please frick off with this. Just because they are far better than the current shite doesn't mean they compare with anything else on your list.
If you insist on leaving that on the list you might as well include a 2005 Hyundai Tucson. More clearance than the OG rav 4 and the center locks up fully. I lost a front CV in one on some pretty rough mountain road and it surprised me when it was able to make it up a steep and slippery track like a RWD vehicle.
they were AWD had high clearance and a manual transmission, you really don't need anything else
OP never said anything about rock crawling