HikeArizona.COM

What kind of vehicles do you guys all drive when your going hiking? Im thinking about investing in a 4wd high clearance Jeep or something of the sort so I could get to some places where I definitely couldnt get to with what Im driving now (73 mustang):) I saw a Jeep Grand Cherokee today for $2600 and I was thinking about checking it out. What "hiking vehicle" is easiest to drive and which gets the best gas mileage (even though I know most wouldnt be too fuel efficient.)

We were behind one of these coming to work this morn. Had no idea they were brought back. $110,000 and it has a Bud Light cooler next to the driver and seat massage. Try and and find the Jeep logo though.
[ youtube video ]

@Alston_Neal
wow, that's fugly!

@Pivo
I still have my 07 blue FJ with 235,000 on it.

Jeep driver all my life, learned to drive in a 62 short bed chevy. Either one you can get some air if driving done a mountain and putting in the clutch.

The 2021 Ford Bronco is now the focus of a federal safety investigation after 32 Bronco owners complained of alarming engine failure experiences.
"Under normal driving conditions without warning the vehicle may experience a loss of motive power without restart due to catastrophic engine failure related to a faulty valve within 2.7 L Eco-Boost Engines," according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) report. It says the investigation opened May 27.
Documents filed by Ford with NHTSA say 25,538 Broncos may have this problem.

I have a bearing issue in the rear diff on my Jeep; it will be going into my Jeep build guy soon. He was telling me having all sorts of quality issues with transmissions he is building. No matter who he buys from seems most of the dealers having gotten a bad run of machining on some of the parts ( yes mostly china and Taiwan). He does some work for the Toyota dealers in Tucson and he says even Toyota is having some problems with quality control.

RedRoxx44 wrote:problems with quality control

So I can't speak for auto parts specifically, but I work in supply chain management and this has become pretty common in the last two years. In an effort to make up production loss during factory shutdowns (Vietnam and Taiwan were hit harder than most in this regard, with Vietnam being responsible for a large proportion of outdoor industry textiles and Taiwan, electronics) many companies and factories worldwide lowered the QA requirements formally and then, informally, we're seeing a lot of factories ship products and components that are/were out of normal allowed tolerances but 'good enough'. It'll be interesting to see how this cascades over the next few years on brands that normally were extremely reliable as they're also taking shortcuts and/or being the unfortunate victim of factories doing so.

xsproutx wrote: many companies and factories worldwide lowered the QA requirements formally and then, informally, we're seeing a lot of factories ship products and components that are/were out of normal allowed tolerances but 'good enough'.

I'm seeing that, too. One example is specialty 3-D printed electronics enclosures, which we buy from a collection of nearby manufacturers that have gone through our qualification on ability to consistently meet dimensional tolerances. Suddenly we're getting deliveries in which every single part of the lot is out of tolerance on multiple dimensions. Some of them are functionally usable or can be machined into usability, but many need to be scrapped.

It's eating a ton of time and money. It's also not easily explainable. They're using the same equipment and (they claim) the same processes. I'm dubious. It sure looks like increased human error to me. I stand behind the old saying: the part of the car most likely to fail is the nut behind the wheel.

big_load wrote:t sure looks like increased human error to me.

Obviously not familiar with the exact product/factory/facility you're talking about but this is mostly what we're seeing. Most places that produce a lot of product QA by random lot; they'll take a certain amount off a lot, test, and then if the test fails, it triggers a deeper dive. What we're seeing a lot of now is pressure on the QA people to pass more lots than they normally would. This also has a cascade effect because a QA fail will often trigger a deeper look into the equipment and recalibration; if that's not done, then you end up with more lots failing QA than before. So you end up with much more crap coming out of the exact same facilities as previous.

xsproutx wrote: ↑Jun 06 2022 6:20 pm

big_load wrote:t sure looks like increased human error to me.

Obviously not familiar with the exact product/factory/facility you're talking about but this is mostly what we're seeing. Most places that produce a lot of product QA by random lot; they'll take a certain amount off a lot, test, and then if the test fails, it triggers a deeper dive. What we're seeing a lot of now is pressure on the QA people to pass more lots than they normally would. This also has a cascade effect because a QA fail will often trigger a deeper look into the equipment and recalibration; if that's not done, then you end up with more lots failing QA than before. So you end up with much more crap coming out of the exact same facilities as previous.

We get evasive answers when we ask how material gets QA'd. We have 100% incoming inspection with calibrated 3D laser scanners and we did a lot of hand measurements to confirm when things started going bad. We've sent manufacturers the specs on their own equipment to show that we're not being unreasonable. We loosened specs to match a lot as delivered, only to have the next lot come with greater variation. Officially it's not my problem, but it turns into my problem when it gets bad enough.

I may have traded in my Last Haz sticker I mean vehicle. No…Yertle is still a member of the family. My commuter has changed and is waiting for some stuff so it will not be finished and camping ready for awhile. It will just be a commuter. More capable than the Tuscon, but lower gas mileage slightly. Not planning a lift or front locker until after I wear out tires, but it should sleep 4 comfortably and get most places, and be preferable to Yertle on longer non technical trips. First vehicle I’ve had in 17 years without the iconic HAZ sticker as The Who’s looks best is locked and the shop appears to be closed. When completed it will Pay homage to my original HAZ ride with some modern updates. Despite the massive overhaul of 14er trails I have actually had difficulty getting to trailheads and other trails with the AWD Tuscon.

sneakySASQUATCH wrote:I may have traded in my Last Haz sticker I mean vehicle.

I'm saving my last one to put on a real hiking vehicle when I finally get one.

@sneakySASQUATCH
Well, what did you get?

@big_load That’s what I should have done the Tuscon probably shouldn’t have gotten a sticker. HAHA! The market is bad for buying a new car unless you trade. I’m sure they still are making a profit off it in used car market, but they gave me $1000 more than I paid brand new and 56000 miles ago for the Tuscon and $7000 of that came from them totaling my 230000+K 2001 Nissan Frontier after the deer collision. So with a week to find a commuter that vehicle was pretty much free transportation for the last 3 years.

sneakySASQUATCH *TuCson

@LosDosSloFolks
Back to having a pick up and through divine happenstance and my wife’s color preference having a stupid $1000 cosmetic worthless accessory that would have to be removed for a topper that they couldn’t remove from vehicle sticker, We ended up with a very similar color to the original. Hopefully Matilda II will be as good as the original.

@Pivo I like “Tuscan”.

PrestonSands wrote: ↑Aug 03 2022 10:18 am @Pivo I like “Tuscan”.

It must be the Mediterranean climate.

big_load wrote: ↑Aug 03 2022 10:26 am

PrestonSands wrote: ↑Aug 03 2022 10:18 am @Pivo I like “Tuscan”.

It must be the Mediterranean climate.

Which stands to reason. I know it's south of the Mongolian Rim.