[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/o/ - Auto


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: raptor.jpg (267 KB, 1280x850)
267 KB
267 KB JPG
is a raptor better offroad than a wrangler?
>>
Idk but it is much cooler than any wrangler
>>
>>28111012
But on what tires and what type of terrain ?
>>
>>28111012

No
>>
>>28111012
Better in what way? More capable? It's heavier and longer wheel based with less aggressive tires than a Rubicon so it'll be worse at crawling. That long travel IFS and higher horsepower means the raptor would crush the jeep at higher speed Baja type shit. The Ford has way higher tow/haul if you're trying to get something up a mountain road, but is slushbox only so if you want to have fun it'll be no good.
>>
File: NWneR4B.gif (498 KB, 300x222)
498 KB
498 KB GIF
>>28111012
>>
>>28111012
For dune running, yes. For rock crawling, no. It's kind of stupid to label off-roading as a single category when it encompasses so many different niches.
>>
>>28111093

>with less aggressive tires than a Rubicon

I dont understand why people use stock tires as a performance metric. They are literally the cheap barely passable version of what you get in the tire shops.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.