[sandy_rubicon]

For those who chose the Sahara 4XE over the Rubicon 4XE, what was your rationale?

For my family, this is our first Jeep Wrangler, and while I wanted a Rubicon, we likely won’t be doing much off-roading. I won’t say we won’t do any, but I bet 90+% will be family driving, taking the kids around town, and going on weekend trips, etc. We also live in SoCal, so we plan to take the tops off quite a bit (it’s always 70 and sunny!) - we expect to have a blast with the Jeep.

Also, the Sahara was pitched as a more “family / kid friendly” ride, and more importantly, my wife liked the look (and less aggressive nature) of the Sahara versus the Rubicon.

My grand plan is to get a Rubicon 4XE next, but the Sahara is perfect for what we need at present, and we are enjoying it thoroughly.

 

[da9125]

Color. I wanted Sarge Green and it's not offered on the Rubicon.

 

[Wrangler4XEFan]

The Sahara rides a little nicer and is more efficient. For me, the Rubicon was just more hardware that I would not use regularly. Plus for me it was just more money than I was willing to spend on a vehicle.

 

[Dan80]

I chose it because there was no Rubicon on the dealer lot and Sahara is cheaper.

 

[yngrshr]

The Sahara rides a little nicer and is more efficient. For me, the Rubicon was just more hardware that I would not use regularly. Plus for me it was just more money than I was willing to spend on a vehicle.

Precisely the same reasoning as me.

 

[JeepNerd]

Color for us, my wife was set on Snazzleberry with black hard top, also will periodically be driving 75+ on highways around here and was worried about gearing topping out, we won’t likely go up in tire sizes so Sahara was a great stock option for us.

 

[Joemcxc9]

99% of my driving is commuting to work, and when off road the Sahara is more capable than most anything else just stock. I’ll be going on trails, but not making YouTube videos or anything

 

[S2kChris]

I ordered a Rubicon, I’d love to say it’s because I’m a hardcore off-roader and needed the capability.

In reality it’s because I love to go top off and I wanted cloth seats instead of leather and you can only get cloth on the Rubi 🤫

 

[SnB4xe]

The Sahara rides a little nicer and is more efficient. For me, the Rubicon was just more hardware that I would not use regularly. Plus for me it was just more money than I was willing to spend on a vehicle.

Exact same reason here. In the end it came down to price and the dealer was much more willing to negotiate with us on the High Altitude vs the Rubicon.

 

[michail]

I ordered a Rubicon, I’d love to say it’s because I’m a hardcore off-roader and needed the capability.

In reality it’s because I love to go top off and I wanted cloth seats instead of leather and you can only get cloth on the Rubi 🤫

Are the elements really bad for the leather? I grew up riding horses and we would ride in the rain and cross lakes with thousands of dollars worth of leather tack, boots, etc. We'd often do it on purpose to break in new gear.

 

[S2kChris]

Are the elements really bad for the leather? I grew up riding horses and we would ride in the rain and cross lakes with thousands of dollars worth of leather tack, boots, etc. We'd often do it on purpose to break in new gear.

It’s not the leather I’m worried about; it’s the scorching hot seats on my tender heiney when I get in.

 

[michail]

Back OT for me, I liked the Rubicon hood and wheels, but I would have been spending more for stuff I'm not able to really use where I live. If I lived in Arizona, Utah, etc. then it may have been different.

 

[michail]

It’s not the leather I’m worried about; it’s the scorching hot seats on my tender heiney when I get in.

LOL, yes. That's one reason why I got the tan, saddle leather seats.

There were times I had to remote start my Mustang and let the seat coolers run before I could sit. This was only an issue at work as I didn't park the Mustang under the trees since the leaves would get stuck everywhere. The jeep doesn't seem to have an issue with the leaves.

 

[NH87]

Price, availability, and utility. In that order. I went with the Sahara. Wanted something for work that rode nice and smooth, wasn’t too loud (Rubicon is louder with off-road tires) since I am commonly driving colleagues/clients around and/or am on the phone, and didn’t need the off-road bells and whistles.

Disclaimer: I also own a Gladiator Rubicon that is the opposite of all the above and gets put thru it’s paces regularly.

 

[michail]

Not sure how bad the Sahara is off road. Jeeps says it can do the Rubicon trail.

I watched a TFC video where they took a Sahara on the trail. All they did was complain that it wasn't a good idea, were nervous, etc. Then the video just ended after a few minutes without anything seeming to go poorly.

 

[S2kChris]

On the Sahara, I have a Sport currently (3.6L 8AT) and it is perfectly capable off-road for 95% of what people really want to do. Put some real tires on it and you’re really not going to have problems 95% of the time.

 

[Skades89]

Color for us, my wife as set on Snazzleberry with black hard top, also will periodically be driving 75+ on highways around here and was worried about gearing topping out, we won’t likely go up in tire sizes so Sahara was a great stock option for us.

I’m confused about the 75+ and grearing topping out comment. Could you please explain? Im really leaning towards the Rubicon for the full time 4x4 option but if it’s not a good highway vehicle then…

 

[SnB4xe]

I’m confused about the 75+ and grearing topping out comment. Could you please explain? Im really leaning towards the Rubicon for the full time 4x4 option but if it’s not a good highway vehicle then…

The Rubicon has 4.10 gear ratio vs 3.73 in the non-Rubicon 4xe models. Tire diameter is the same across the models but the rolling resistance of the Rubicon tires is greater than the Sahara tires. So all else being equal, the Rubicon gear ratio and type type will be less efficient compared to the Sahara.

Neither vehicle is very efficient though....so it really isn't likely to amount to much delta either way.

 

[michail]

I’m confused about the 75+ and grearing topping out comment. Could you please explain? Im really leaning towards the Rubicon for the full time 4x4 option but if it’s not a good highway vehicle then…

Rubicons are governed at 97 mph and the Sahara at 110 mph. Either of which is insanity for a brick.

Both the Rubicon have full time 4x4 (or part time as the transfer case calles it). They like to preface the Rock Track with full time 4x4 for some reason.

I'm a bit confused myself if the lower gear ratios are as important/needed when electric motors are involved. In 4L the Sahara 4xe feels like it would pull a house down.

It's probably shallow of me, but one reason I had considered the Rubicon 4xe was the hood.

 

[SamCanada]

Not sure how bad the Sahara is off road. Jeeps says it can do the Rubicon trail.

I watched a TFC video where they took a Sahara on the trail. All they did was complain that it wasn't a good idea, were nervous, etc. Then the video just ended after a few minutes without anything seeming to go poorly.

If you mean TFL. They are not the smartest in my opinion. I went Sahara because I will be 95% on road and for 5% in trails it will do just great. If you are hardcore off-roader then it is something else. For me I wanted convertible suv I can use summer and winter. Soon I will say bye bye to my mustang