Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've driven wranglers for almost 30 years and comfortably passed one down to my daughter (and will be getting one for her little sister soon). They are plenty safe if you drive them properly. If they scare you, don't drive one and don't give them to your teen. They are not terribly practical or comfortable but they can go places and do things that your Volvo can't. Plus, there is nothing better than taking the doors and top off and enjoying a warm, sunny day driving on the beach.

OP here. It’s not that I’m worried about her driving it safely. I’m worried about somebody else driving in safely and hitting her. And flipping the wrangler. Or the airbag not deploying. Or the passenger hitting the roof. All the things the IIHS notes.

Any and every accident is different. Sometimes rolling is the safest option. A kid from my daughter's school was hit in the side with a VW. The sun basically drove over top of him and he had to be cut out of it. Major life changing issues for him. He most likely would have been better off rolling over a couple of times.

You’re insane.

DP

You’re not being very nice to that poster who probably understands a great deal more about physics than you do.

Without going into the minutiae of the dynamics of energy transfer during a crash, the one thing that’s important for you to understand is something called “Delta V”, shorthand for “change in velocity”. The higher the Delta V the greater the energy transfer into the vehicle and therefore your body. A smaller Delta V results in less energy transfer into you.

So an impact that sends a car rolling over a couple times will have a much lower Delta V (and therefore less energy transferred into the occupants than a crash which instantly stops the vehicle at the site of the crash. The crumple zones in a modern vehicle are just an engineered way to lower the Delta V by extending the distance and time required to smash a crumple zone and expending energy there rather than sending it into the occupants. A crumple zone might be 24” long. That’s all the distance that can be used to expend that energy. A rollover might use 40 feet of distance to expend that same amount of energy as the crumple zone, over a much longer timeline. Therefore the rollover will have a much lower Delta V

Because SCIENCE!


-an electrical engineer

DP. But doesn’t rolling increase the risk of being ejected from the car? Maybe not, I’m not a scientist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've driven wranglers for almost 30 years and comfortably passed one down to my daughter (and will be getting one for her little sister soon). They are plenty safe if you drive them properly. If they scare you, don't drive one and don't give them to your teen. They are not terribly practical or comfortable but they can go places and do things that your Volvo can't. Plus, there is nothing better than taking the doors and top off and enjoying a warm, sunny day driving on the beach.

OP here. It’s not that I’m worried about her driving it safely. I’m worried about somebody else driving in safely and hitting her. And flipping the wrangler. Or the airbag not deploying. Or the passenger hitting the roof. All the things the IIHS notes.

Any and every accident is different. Sometimes rolling is the safest option. A kid from my daughter's school was hit in the side with a VW. The sun basically drove over top of him and he had to be cut out of it. Major life changing issues for him. He most likely would have been better off rolling over a couple of times.

You’re insane.

DP

You’re not being very nice to that poster who probably understands a great deal more about physics than you do.

Without going into the minutiae of the dynamics of energy transfer during a crash, the one thing that’s important for you to understand is something called “Delta V”, shorthand for “change in velocity”. The higher the Delta V the greater the energy transfer into the vehicle and therefore your body. A smaller Delta V results in less energy transfer into you.

So an impact that sends a car rolling over a couple times will have a much lower Delta V (and therefore less energy transferred into the occupants than a crash which instantly stops the vehicle at the site of the crash. The crumple zones in a modern vehicle are just an engineered way to lower the Delta V by extending the distance and time required to smash a crumple zone and expending energy there rather than sending it into the occupants. A crumple zone might be 24” long. That’s all the distance that can be used to expend that energy. A rollover might use 40 feet of distance to expend that same amount of energy as the crumple zone, over a much longer timeline. Therefore the rollover will have a much lower Delta V

Because SCIENCE!


-an electrical engineer

Anonymous wrote:Google “Jeep gas tank explosion”. They settle through arbitration so that they don’t ever have to recall vehicles. It’s mainly the Jeep Liberty, but I’ll never trust that company with anyone in my family.

Yes I know someone who had a fender bender and then her car burst into flames. Burns over 2/3 of her body.

Pass.

Liberty is built completely different.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've driven wranglers for almost 30 years and comfortably passed one down to my daughter (and will be getting one for her little sister soon). They are plenty safe if you drive them properly. If they scare you, don't drive one and don't give them to your teen. They are not terribly practical or comfortable but they can go places and do things that your Volvo can't. Plus, there is nothing better than taking the doors and top off and enjoying a warm, sunny day driving on the beach.

OP here. It’s not that I’m worried about her driving it safely. I’m worried about somebody else driving in safely and hitting her. And flipping the wrangler. Or the airbag not deploying. Or the passenger hitting the roof. All the things the IIHS notes.

If you remove the roof, then you don't need to worry. Would rather be hit in a wrangler than a mini or a Tesla which might self-immolate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kinda funny all the haters. Was just on a Wrangler group on Facebook. A insurance adjuster was saying how well Wranglers hold up during accidents. It's the only car he will buy. While a firefighter commented that he will always drive a Wrangler because they hold up so well when hit by other vehicles. This might by why they are cheap to insure. As a insurance agent told me when I asked him about a high performance Volvo. He said it was cheaper to buy and insure a Corvette. Why?? Because people that cant drive buy them. People that get into accidents buy Volvos.

I'd love to hear what actually makes Wranglers unreliable!! Not much to go wrong with them unless you get a hybrid one. Or beat on it hard off road.

OP here. I’m not a hater. Just looking to get facts to make a decision. Not questioning the reliability so much as asking how safe a wrangler is for a brand new driver. The responses seem to fall into (1) safe but not a great choice for a new driver based on how it drives and (potentially) a lack of driver-centric safety features that other cars provide standard, (2) you’re a fun-hating wimp for even asking this question, (3) you’re a fun-hating wimp for even asking this question, but the more I think about it I wouldn’t get one for my new driver, and (4) why do you hate Wranglers so much.

So, all in all, reasonably helpful for any number of reasons.

The answers you should be paying most attention to are the ones that say “depends on the kid”. Because that’s the deciding factor in whether it's a safe option or not. Some kids could drive a C8 Corvette as their first car and never have a problem or drive it unsafely or irresponsibly. Other kids would still find a way to be dangerous in a Volvo diesel station wagon. Only you know your kid. I’m a volunteer fire fighter in MoCo, and I’ve seen more kids wreck Honda Civic coupes than any other type of car. Most were hurt, a few were killed. But it’s a Honda Civic coupe so often it’s practically a meme in the fire service and ems responder profession. I’ve seen lots of car crashes, probably hundreds in 15 years I’ve been a volunteer. I’ve only ever responded to a single call for a badly crashed Jeep. It was T-boned by another car which ran through a red light and broadsided it at a pretty good speed. The Jeep did in fact roll over after being hit in the side. It rolled all the way over, actually, and was back on its wheels. At the time I remember being impressed about two things on the Jeep. 1) the roll cage that Jeep Wrangler models have is able to deal with a rollover crash really well. It is seriously strong and easily supports the weight of the vehicle upside down during a crash. 2) it had some type of rock skid guard running board things along the sides of the body just underneath the doors. They were made of very substantial steel apparently, because they completely prevented the T-boning car from intruding into the passenger compartment on the right side of the vehicle. Not all Jeeps have these I’ve noticed, but they all should because it was quite impressive. The driver and passenger in the Jeep had both self-extricated after the crash, and both had neck injuries (whiplash basically) from the side impact, which would be expected in that type of crash, as well as the driver probably having some cracked ribs on the right side from their seatbelt, which is also normal for a T-bone crash. The passenger was otherwise ok despite being on the side that took the hit, which really surprised us at first but after looking at the skid guard thing it made a little more sense. The front airbags did not go off, which is normal for that type of crash in some vehicles, since it wasn’t a frontal crash. There were no side airbags apparently, because if there were they would’ve gone off in this type of crash. The Jeep was actually driveable afterwards, because the driver moved it out of the intersection and out of traffic. The windshield was badly smashed and the convertible top was torn and ripped, but the roll cage held up fine. It had body damage on both sides where it rolled, but the side windows were all intact and all the doors still opened, which was also surprising to me at the time. So there’s a real world observation of a Jeep crash from maybe 6-7 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:Kinda funny all the haters. Was just on a Wrangler group on Facebook. A insurance adjuster was saying how well Wranglers hold up during accidents. It's the only car he will buy. While a firefighter commented that he will always drive a Wrangler because they hold up so well when hit by other vehicles. This might by why they are cheap to insure. As a insurance agent told me when I asked him about a high performance Volvo. He said it was cheaper to buy and insure a Corvette. Why?? Because people that cant drive buy them. People that get into accidents buy Volvos.

I'd love to hear what actually makes Wranglers unreliable!! Not much to go wrong with them unless you get a hybrid one. Or beat on it hard off road.

OP here. I’m not a hater. Just looking to get facts to make a decision. Not questioning the reliability so much as asking how safe a wrangler is for a brand new driver. The responses seem to fall into (1) safe but not a great choice for a new driver based on how it drives and (potentially) a lack of driver-centric safety features that other cars provide standard, (2) you’re a fun-hating wimp for even asking this question, (3) you’re a fun-hating wimp for even asking this question, but the more I think about it I wouldn’t get one for my new driver, and (4) why do you hate Wranglers so much.

So, all in all, reasonably helpful for any number of reasons.

I'm curious what Wrangler haters do for fun?? Listen to NPR?? I know you hate anything fun!! No horseback riding for you or your kids! Skiing is too dangerous for you guys too!! And we know you do not even remember the last time you had hot steamy sex! With your spouse or anyone else for that matter!!

Google “Jeep gas tank explosion”. They settle through arbitration so that they don’t ever have to recall vehicles. It’s mainly the Jeep Liberty, but I’ll never trust that company with anyone in my family.

Yes I know someone who had a fender bender and then her car burst into flames. Burns over 2/3 of her body.

Pass.

Kinda funny all the haters. Was just on a Wrangler group on Facebook. A insurance adjuster was saying how well Wranglers hold up during accidents. It's the only car he will buy. While a firefighter commented that he will always drive a Wrangler because they hold up so well when hit by other vehicles. This might by why they are cheap to insure. As a insurance agent told me when I asked him about a high performance Volvo. He said it was cheaper to buy and insure a Corvette. Why?? Because people that cant drive buy them. People that get into accidents buy Volvos.

I'd love to hear what actually makes Wranglers unreliable!! Not much to go wrong with them unless you get a hybrid one. Or beat on it hard off road.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Noting the poor IIHS reviews on the 2019-2023 Wranglers, and also noting the massive number of Wranglers I see on the road. I know people probably cannot answer this question with any precision, but what gives? Do others just have a higher risk tolerance than I do? DC wants a Wrangler (and seems that most of the drivers I see on the road in a Wrangler are teens). Seems an easy choice - don't get one.

I’ve owned 6 Jeep CJ’s or Wranglers, since 1993. Current Jeep is a ‘16 4-door.

Please accept this advice from me as a subject matter expert when it comes to Jeeps:

Stop trying to understand why people enjoy them - you are incapable of it. Just put it out of your mind and move on with your life. I definitely would NOT recommend getting your kid one, because being the buzzkill you are, you’ll suck the joy of out it like an energy vampire. Get your kid a Volvo or whatever other car safety conscious people buy for their kids, and when they’re an adult and on their own, they can buy one if they still want one.

But don’t get one. You don’t get it, you don’t understand it, and you’ll hate it. So just pretend they don’t exist.

I FORBID you from owning one.


Clear?

OP here. These posts - other than this one - have been very informative and helpful. But the PP who forbids me from getting a Jeep seems unhinged. Sorry I triggered you, snowflake. I’m not questioning YOUR entire life, just looking for some perspective. Go pet your little duckies and take a pill.

Hmm. You seem to be the zanax queen!!! Now go get some wine for breakfast!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Noting the poor IIHS reviews on the 2019-2023 Wranglers, and also noting the massive number of Wranglers I see on the road. I know people probably cannot answer this question with any precision, but what gives? Do others just have a higher risk tolerance than I do? DC wants a Wrangler (and seems that most of the drivers I see on the road in a Wrangler are teens). Seems an easy choice - don't get one.

I’ve owned 6 Jeep CJ’s or Wranglers, since 1993. Current Jeep is a ‘16 4-door.

Please accept this advice from me as a subject matter expert when it comes to Jeeps:

Stop trying to understand why people enjoy them - you are incapable of it. Just put it out of your mind and move on with your life. I definitely would NOT recommend getting your kid one, because being the buzzkill you are, you’ll suck the joy of out it like an energy vampire. Get your kid a Volvo or whatever other car safety conscious people buy for their kids, and when they’re an adult and on their own, they can buy one if they still want one.

But don’t get one. You don’t get it, you don’t understand it, and you’ll hate it. So just pretend they don’t exist.

I FORBID you from owning one.


Clear?

OP here. These posts - other than this one - have been very informative and helpful. But the PP who forbids me from getting a Jeep seems unhinged. Sorry I triggered you, snowflake. I’m not questioning YOUR entire life, just looking for some perspective. Go pet your little duckies and take a pill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Buying a Wrangler for your new teen driver is about assessing risk. It’s arguably a riskier car to drive based on the safety ratings. But the chances of getting to the type of accident that would cause the car to flip or experience the types of things the IIHS flagged is probably low if your DC is doing short commutes yay avoid the beltway. So it’s probably not more unsafe than any other car in those circumstances.

Some people still would not even take that risk. Some would. Neither is wrong. You do you.

This is excellent advice.

And given what I imagine the children of most posters here are probably like - spoiled, privileged, accustomed to always having their way and never hearing “no”, and most importantly having spent a decade watching their parents drive like complete a**holes - I can definitely understand why so many DCUM parents are hesitant to get their little sociopaths a Jeep. Because they know their kids will probably drive just like they do, and get themselves killed.

So yeah, this is good advice. It depends on the kid. And for most DCUM kids, it’s a bad choice.

If a kid is a bad or dangerous driver a bad accident in any vehicle is a problem.

Anonymous wrote:Buying a Wrangler for your new teen driver is about assessing risk. It’s arguably a riskier car to drive based on the safety ratings. But the chances of getting to the type of accident that would cause the car to flip or experience the types of things the IIHS flagged is probably low if your DC is doing short commutes yay avoid the beltway. So it’s probably not more unsafe than any other car in those circumstances.

Some people still would not even take that risk. Some would. Neither is wrong. You do you.

This is excellent advice.

And given what I imagine the children of most posters here are probably like - spoiled, privileged, accustomed to always having their way and never hearing “no”, and most importantly having spent a decade watching their parents drive like complete a**holes - I can definitely understand why so many DCUM parents are hesitant to get their little sociopaths a Jeep. Because they know their kids will probably drive just like they do, and get themselves killed.

So yeah, this is good advice. It depends on the kid. And for most DCUM kids, it’s a bad choice.

Anonymous wrote:I had a Wrangler after college. Back then Jeeps were a little more primitive- no AC, no auto transmission, no power windows, and they didn’t cost too much.

I have noticed Jeep pricing is pretty high. Especially considering they are rated about as poor as can be with regard to reliability. To OP’s concern, they also aren’t safe. Jeeps do poor in collision tests, handle poorly and are more prone to rollovers.

Clearly you haven't driven a new one if you think they handle poorly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! It is funny how many people comment and have zero experience with owning a Wrangler. We just passed down my wife's 2015 to my daughter, it only has 215,000 on it! She loves it and actually takes it off road. Many of her friends love her Jeep, along with most of her teachers!! Top and doors were off all summer while jamming out to Taylor Swift!! Great memories are made driving up the beach to stay in Carova for a week with top and doors off while seeing the wild horses everyday. Not while driving a hybrid in city traffic. Face it kids deserve to have fun!! Many people on here absolutely HATE any car that is fun to own. Why do you guys enjoy driving boring crap cars??

Yeah, it’s always worth noting how all the DCUM “experts” on the safety ratings or reliability scores for Wranglers never seem to own one - yet always speak with confident authority.

Most of those tests don't include the optional safety features nor the metal bumpers.