I think he fully understands their intent and purpose, and he is making an explicit choice not to run them for practical reasons.
but, based on what? if you were to tell me that this guy actually has years of experience running rigs that were significantly more modified and is now using the knowledge he's gained from that to base his so called pratical reasons, i might be more receptive to his opinions on the matter. however, it would appear that his explicit choices are not based on fact or experience but rather, imagined threats. granted, i don't know this guy from adam so, maybe i'm wrong here.
it's hard to argue with the logic that says if you don't need a big lift and MT tires to get where you want to go, there is no reason to run them. There are very few corners of this country let alone the world that really can't be reached on a very mildly built JK but can be reached on a Moby-like build, and that's been my point all along.
but, depending on the year, time of year, amount of rain fall or amount of snow, it's been my experience that even the easiest of trails can quickly degrade into near impassible boulder strewn chasms. for instance, getting up to someplace like hungry bills ranch is something a honda civic can do most years but, during the winter of 2004, a crazy rain year, the trail was almost impassible in our highly modified TJ. in 1997, goler wash, a trail that charles mason took a school bus up to his hideaway got completely washed out in a flash flood creating a huge dry fall that, until the park service came in to level it out, was extremely difficult to climb in all but more highly modified vehicles. while you may not need a bigger lift (i don't like "big" lifts - just big enough to clear the tires i am running) and MT tires to get you to where you want to go most of the time, isn't the whole idea of "overland" to be self-sufficient and prepared to take on whatever comes your way? sure, a lot can be done in a mildly built JK but, the amount of effort that is required to move that vehicle across the same terrain is often significant enough to cause unnecessary breaks. again, i would be the first to say that these breaks i speak of are ones that i personally have suffered and, much of why moby is what he is today is a result of me trying to find ways to mitigate them in the future.
Can Moby dominate on obstacles? Yes, without a doubt. But keep in mind that's not the goal of the "overland" sport. Will Moby be more reliable? Maybe. Will it be more comfortable getting there? Probably. Will it be less "safe"? Maybe, but by a margin so small that it probably doesn't matter in practice. At this point we're really into the territory of individual tradeoffs.
i've wheeled stock, mildly built, well built and highly built JK's and can tell you with out a doubt, as is, moby is more reliable today than it's ever been. it is way more comfortable getting there, way more stable and therefore, way more safe or, at least in my opinion. with the exception of high cost, i'm not sure where there tradeoff is.
And FWIW, anyone would be hard pressed to go up against the author of that article in terms of real-world experience with this stuff. As for a lot of the members of his forum... well, that's another story.
well, i'm all to eager to hear about his real-world experiences running highly built rigs. i would love to learn about all the pitfalls he's discovered running them for years and how those experiences have shown him the light.
The JK-Experience looks like it was a truly epic trip, but it doesn't really qualify as "overlanding" by any generally-accepted definition of that term that I know of. I really don't mean to down-play it, but those were pretty well-worn trails that were all less than a half day's drive to a hotel. Absolutely stunning scenery and wheeling that I hope to experience some day.
in all fairness, the hotel thing was something they did this year only and only as a saftey precaution due to the high altitudes that we were at the whole week. previous years really put you out in the middle of nowhere and required a lot more of camping.
EDIT: Forgot to get in my potshot on ham vs. CB... CB is cheap and easy to get in to, no question. Ham (or really 2m FM, and I would put race radios in this boat as well) is hands down better in every other regard. Full stop. One thing I've never understood is dumping $10K on axles and cheaping out on good comms... :bleh:
LOL!! i'm with you on this and now have a race radio too (way better than a CB) and would probably have a HAM already too if it weren't for the fact that someone in our group always has one and for the most part, i'd only really use it for safety purposes. but, until more people see the light, most are still running CB's and i would prefer to have the ability to communicate with the people in my group than some guy halfway around the world.