Sahara Homepage

Question: What is the difference between a sahara and a rubicon jeep?

(Posted by: RocketDog on 2009-12-22 12:58:14)

Which ones better(in your opinion) for what, and what are their differences?

Posted by: Corey on 2009-12-22, 13:06:20

I love them both sooooooooo much. The difference is simple and easy. You will remember the rest of your life. The Sahara is more for sand and stuff like that. The rubicon is more off-road with rocks and mud. But honestly, you can use them both for the same thing. In my opinion the Jeep Rubicon is better. Its more off-road suitable than the sahara. It might cost an extra $2,000 difference in the price, but think of how much better it would be than the sahara.

Posted by: Ashlee on 2009-12-22, 13:09:11

The difference are the options, they both share the same platform. As to which is better, that depends on what you are looking for. The Rubicon is an "out the box " off road machine that is cabable of going just about anywhere you point it (if you know how to drive it properly). This is due to the Lockers in both the front and rear axles and an ultra low 4.1:1 transfer case. Sahara was the most decked out Wrangler, it came with most of the option blocks checked including body color flares and "Sahara Edition " green seats. If you are looking for a Wrangler that will go just about anywhere you put it with no modifications the Sahara will fit the bill nicely. If you plan on tackleing the hardcore trails and don't want to modify anything then the Rubicon would be the way to go. A lot of people "think " they need lockers and only drive to and from Walmart but that is just a waste of an awsome Jeep. Good luck and hope it helps.

Posted by: Johnny Rotten on 2009-12-22, 20:09:11

Sahara is the base yj...The rubicon or tj has dana 44 front axle and lower gears in the transfer case...This makes it tougher and better suited for real 4 wheeling....It also has better suspension than the yj....