You did not answer my question Brian: What is it in the mechanicals of the Rubicon and the Power Wagon that you do not like?
It's the general reliabity ratings of that and similier makes compared to Toyota that I'm critisizing. Both stasticially, as proven by a number of resources and from my own personal experience. What more do you want me to say? Do you want me to dig up even more evidence? I'm not critisizing the lockers, or the T-case or the goodies that they come with. I think, as I've said before, those are great features and make them very capable rigs.
And don't you think that it is a bit misleading to post those photos in this thread and then say "oh yeah, they don't mean anything". <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/shame.gif" alt="" />
Lets assume I didn't put any disclaimer on there, which I did. What is misleading about telling and showing you the facts. A bone stock (OK sorry, it had 1" taller tires) IFS 4Runner did better on a particular stretch of trail, than a bone stock Rubicon? Obviously, other people can make their own judgements as to why. (Driver skill, fluke, etc.) This isn't meant to imply that the Jeep sucks off road. But does bring up the point that maybe the IFS 4Runner is a pretty good tough rig.
Getting back to the point of the thread, if Toyota were to include twin lockers lower T-case gearing etc, I think it might give the Rubicon a run for it's money and I still stand by my assertion that the Toyota is likely to be more reliable overall.
