Forums » Off-topic discussion » Q about GRM's least favorite Jeeps 1 2

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 1:08 p.m. BoxheadTim SuperDork

  That'll be Grand Cherokees and 4-banger Wranglers then.

  My commuter truck is playing up again with the same symptoms that have been fixed several times now, only to reappear after a little while. Haven't had the fault code read yet but I'll check if the local NAPA can do that for me tomorrow morning.

  Anyway, I'm getting fed up with this thing - it's been in the shop pretty much once a month as I don't have the time to work on it and the other three projects, plus I need this one to get me to work.

  Around here, 4x4 is obviously in high demand and the few affordable ones that aren't complete jalopies are often either Jeep GCs or 4-cyl Wranglers. Both aren't that highly regarded in the GRM community for good reasons, I know, but I do actually need 4x4/AWD for winter and if I have to get something cheap-ish, we're either looking at another pickup truck or biting the bullet and looking at one of these suboptimal vehicles as I can get them for roughly the money I can sell the truck for. BTW, Cherokees sell for a lot more than Grand Cherokees out here if they aren't complete clunkers.

  So, just how bad are these two choices?

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 1:20 p.m. Grtechguy SuperDork

  I see the short wheel base of the wranglers sketchy in the snow. The longer GC will be better imho.

  Would rather be riding my Bi-Valve lnterior Combustion Twice-Exhausted Bi-Axle Nitro-Cycle

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 1:24 p.m. DILYSI Dave SuperDork

  What years are you looking at, or what is your budget?

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 1:26 p.m. BoxheadTim SuperDork

  Budget is somewhere between 3-4k at the moment unless I visit the local credit union. But I have an allergy against car payments...

  Out here, that'll get me a YJ four-banger, possibly even an early TJ, or a nineties GC.

  Sanity is vastly overrated.

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 1:33 p.m. DILYSI Dave SuperDork

  For a commuter, I'd be looking for a 4.0 GC.

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 1:37 p.m. Jay Dork

  My folks had a 1996 GC with the 318 & Quadratrac for quite a while. Very solid truck, it had some wonky issues but it was really good in (a lot of) snow and towed well too. Also it really didn't rust which probably is a non-issue where you live, but still... They sold it at 320 000 km for still more than $2000 and replaced it with a 2001 Explorer which never felt as confident in bad weather. I might have bought it off them myself but then I moved overseas.

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 2:21 p.m. BoxheadTim SuperDork

  @Jay, given that my 33 year old Celica doesn't appear to have much rust that's not surface rust, I think rust is probably the least of my problems.

  The 4L GC is pretty hard to find here, although it would be my preferred engine choice as I already know my way around those engines at least in a basic fashion thanks to my wife's 4L Cherokee.

  I do like the idea of a CJ/YJ/TJ as there's plenty of opportunity for wheeling out here; given that I don't know what I'm doing, I should be able to use a GC on a trail, too, 'cos I won't go on anything that's going to be too hard to start with.

  There is an occasional chance of turning up a Grand Wagoneer and I do like those. Guess it's time to go vehicle shopping again, which isn't going to please Ann very much.

  Sanity is vastly overrated.

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 5:04 p.m. Woody SuperDork

  I've owned two TJ Wranglers. The first was a 2.5 and the second was a 4.0. As you know, they hold their value surprisingly well, but you might be able to get a 97-98 4.0 for $4k.

  I plowed snow with my 2.5 and it was fine, but it was torture to drive on the highway. Also, understand that almost every component on the fours are lighter duty than on the sixes. Try to find one with full doors if possible. They're worth it.

  CJ's are either fully restored or total rust buckets. YJ's are also really rust prone and, of course, they have those shameful square headlights. TJ's ride much better (at least in Jeep terms) with their coil spring suspensions, but they also have fully boxed frames and are much less prone to rust.

  I lift things up and put them down.

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 5:25 p.m. Keith SuperDork

  We have a 2000 GC V8 - I think that's a WJ in cool kid talk. It has fantastic traction in the snow - with a set of snow tires, it's the least fun vehicle in a snowy parking lot ever because it just hooks up instead of sliding around. But it doesn't have a lot of feedback through the wheel, so you really have to remember that 4WD only helps you get going faster.

  It's also a "reverse Tardis". Huge on the outside, surprisingly small on the inside. And apparently not reliable, although the only problems it's had since new are repeated warped rotors until they were replaced with aftermarket parts.

  Not a bad vehicle. I've taken it on light offroading and towed cross-country with a Locost on a trailer. It's our ski vehicle too.

  Square left in 50 caution ocean!

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 5:48 p.m. DrBoost SuperDork

  I've had Jeep, Jeep and more Jeeps. I have had a 4 banger YJ and a few Grand Cherokees (and a CJ-2A, 3 CJ-7s, 4.0L YJ, 2.5L YJ, 4.2L YJ, V-8 WJ, V-8 ZJ, 4.0L ZJ, MJ, SJ, almost picked up a VJ and so on). The 2.5L YJ is a fine vehicle except for rust. The 2.5L will run for a long time and if you keep some weight in the back and drive like you have a brain the SWB will not bite you. I'd go with the YJ, just stay away from the 1987 models unless you do some research first.

  You know you are deep in boost territory when you get tire pressures and boost pressures confused

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 5:52 p.m. DrBoost SuperDork

  Woody wrote: Also, understand that almost every component on the fours are lighter duty than on the sixes. Try to find one with full doors if possible. They're worth it.

  Sorry, that's just not correct. The transmission is lighter duty but the AX-5 is no more trouble prone behind the 2.5L than the AX-15 is behind the 4.0L. The t-case is the same 231 chain-drive that is in nearly EVERY 4.0L Jeep (the only difference between the 231 and 242 is small, they are interchangeable, even the 249 from a WJ/ZJ can be bolted right in.). The axles (Dana 35C in the rear, 30 front) are the same. The rear springs are the same, the fuel tank is the same. There just isn't much difference.

  You know you are deep in boost territory when you get tire pressures and boost pressures confused

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 6:46 p.m. Ignorant SuperDork

  I have no problems with a 4 cylinder wrangler. I owned one and wheeled the hell out of it. My "weak" ax-5 never failed me and the "horrible" Dana 35 never broke. Remember, Wheeling is about gearing more than outright horsepower.
  

  Hard doors and Hard tops on jeeps are for poofs. Unless you got a cool old Koenig Half Cab. Those are some 1960's awesome.

  clubber lang is my friend

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 7:19 p.m. oldtin Dork

  another vote for a YJ - might get to 6 cyl territory with that budget - but a 4 cyl will do the job

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 7:26 p.m. WilberM3 HalfDork

  on every cheap grand cherokee ive test driven the trans slipped a little bit to severely, though i wasnt looking at $4k examples. i think they drive pretty nice, certainly a lot more comfortable than a cherokee. but if i bought a grand (unless its a 93 4.0 w/AW4 trans) i'd have a trans budget set aside.

  i'd buy a 4 banger wrangler for sure, even a really clean YJ... except as woody said, the YJ with its front and rear leaf springs rides very choppy compared to a TJ.

  Dave

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 7:39 p.m. BoxheadTim SuperDork

  Well, I have driven a (lifted) YJ so I sorta have an idea what they ride like.

  I would prefer something a little more substantial than a Wrangler (even though both me and my wife like them) as we'd be back to having a Cherokee as out biggest/most spacious vehicle and more importantly, tow vehicle. That said, I like Wranglers.

  I have been thinking about a Suburban but I'm very reluctant to get one after the experience with the (GM) truck, plus the fuel consumption - then again, a GC is probably going to return 15mpg also. Of course, in 99% of the time we also don't need something that size...

  Sanity is vastly overrated.

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 7:41 p.m. Woody SuperDork

  DrBoost wrote: The t-case is the same 231 chain-drive that is in nearly EVERY 4.0L Jeep (the only difference between the 231 and 249 is small, they are interchangeable). The axles (Dana 35C in the rear, 30 front) are the same.

  Six cylinder transmissions and t-cases have heavier shafts with a higher spline count, though they are otherwise mechanically similar. They will only interchange if you open them up and swap in the necessary pieces with the appropriate spline count.

  Some, but not many, six cylinders have a Dana 44 in the rear.

  I lift things up and put them down.

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 8:05 p.m. Keith SuperDork

  My WJ Grand Cherokee fuel economy: 18-20 according to the trip computer, and I feed it 87 octane without any complaints. It doesn't really feel like a big vehicle, has about the same footprint as the E39. The Dodge 2500 dwarfs it :)

  Square left in 50 caution ocean!

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 8:10 p.m. John Brown SuperDork

  Nothing to add other than I want a Jeep Liberty.

  I think I may have hit my head with these hammers... again.

  Internationally known as The Brown Stig

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 8:18 p.m. joey48442 SuperDork

  Hey. There is nothing wrong with a 4 cylinder dangler. We chance the nazis out of Europe with 4 banger jeeps didn't we???

  Dont buy one for fuel economy though. Ours gets a maximum of 18. (1999 TJ)

  Also, I like my halfdoors. My brother has full doors, and we both like mine better. But I have the cool aftermarket sliding windows.

  Joey

  Oh yes use the longest screwdriver in the toolbox,use my shop voice and wing the rest!

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 8:18 p.m. BoxheadTim SuperDork

  Keith wrote: My WJ Grand Cherokee fuel economy: 18-20 according to the trip computer, and I feed it 87 octane without any complaints. It doesn't really feel like a big vehicle, has about the same footprint as the E39. The Dodge 2500 dwarfs it :)

  18-20 mpg would be nice, given that your are in similar mountainous terrain, 87 is also nice.

  The reverse Tardis effect is a little concerning, the fact that it's not a massive vehicle would actually be a bonus.

  Sanity is vastly overrated.

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 8:46 p.m. DrBoost SuperDork

  Woody wrote:

  DrBoost wrote: The t-case is the same 231 chain-drive that is in nearly EVERY 4.0L Jeep (the only difference between the 231 and 249 is small, they are interchangeable). The axles (Dana 35C in the rear, 30 front) are the same.

  Six cylinder transmissions and t-cases have heavier shafts with a higher spline count, though they are otherwise mechanically similar. They will only interchange if you open them up and swap in the necessary pieces with the appropriate spline count.

  Some, but not many, six cylinders have a Dana 44 in the rear.

  Only on some models. I've interchanged 231's on more than one occasion (ok, 2 occasions). And yes, there are D44 YJ's out there but they are like hen's teeth. The best way to get a D44 is to do a swap from a Comanche.

  You know you are deep in boost territory when you get tire pressures and boost pressures confused

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 8:49 p.m. DrBoost SuperDork

  joey48442 wrote: Hey. There is nothing wrong with a 4 cylinder dangler. We chance the nazis out of Europe with 4 banger jeeps didn't we??? Dont buy one for fuel economy though. Ours gets a maximum of 18. (1999 TJ) Also, I like my halfdoors. My brother has full doors, and we both like mine better. But I have the cool aftermarket sliding windows. Joey

  18 seems to be the magic number. Nearly every one of my Jeeps got 18 mpg, even the CJ-7 with a 360/727. In fact, my wife owned a 4.0L WJ at the same time I owned a 5.2L ZJ and we both got almost the same economy.

  You know you are deep in boost territory when you get tire pressures and boost pressures confused

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 10:10 p.m. joey48442 SuperDork

  DrBoost wrote:

  joey48442 wrote: Hey. There is nothing wrong with a 4 cylinder dangler. We chance the nazis out of Europe with 4 banger jeeps didn't we??? Dont buy one for fuel economy though. Ours gets a maximum of 18. (1999 TJ) Also, I like my halfdoors. My brother has full doors, and we both like mine better. But I have the cool aftermarket sliding windows. Joey

  18 seems to be the magic number. Nearly every one of my Jeeps got 18 mpg, even the CJ-7 with a 360/727. In fact, my wife owned a 4.0L WJ at the same time I owned a 5.2L ZJ and we both got almost the same economy.

  Yeah, I didn't figure I'd get better mileage with the four, but the buy in price was better ($4500, 5 speed, hardtop, some sahara parts the po added)

  Joey

  Oh yes use the longest screwdriver in the toolbox,use my shop voice and wing the rest!

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 10:29 p.m. Cotton Dork

  BoxheadTim wrote: Well, I have driven a (lifted) YJ so I sorta have an idea what they ride like. I would prefer something a little more substantial than a Wrangler (even though both me and my wife like them) as we'd be back to having a Cherokee as out biggest/most spacious vehicle and more importantly, tow vehicle. That said, I *like* Wranglers. I have been thinking about a Suburban but I'm very reluctant to get one after the experience with the (GM) truck, plus the fuel consumption - then again, a GC is probably going to return 15mpg also. Of course, in 99% of the time we also don't need something that size...

  I love Jeeps, but also love my Suburban. I currently own a 99 Cherokee and a 91 Suburban. The Chevy has been great until it recently blew a head gasket at 302k miles. Everything else is good and I love it, so am upgrading to a slightly built 350 with vortec heads. I certainly wouldn't be afraid of a Suburban....mine is a 91 and the last year for the square body. It's fuel injected with overdrive and I get 14-15mpg. I don't think you can go wrong with the Jeeps or Suburbans.....I guess the big question is how much space do you want? One benefit of the Suburban is it's really easy to camp in. Remove the rear seat, fold the middle seat, and the thing swallows a good size air mattress.

• 

  Jan. 13, 2011 11:15 p.m. BoxheadTim SuperDork

  Well, I'm getting around 15mpg on the truck at the moment and a half ton Suburban would be on the same chassis so I can probably tell one end of it from the other...

  I'm just concerned that I'll end up with more of the same that I'm currently experiencing with the truck and I really don't fancy something that needs diagnosing once a month.

  A Suburban would be nice for trips to Ikea or garage sales, but that's probably the only time we need the space (there's only two of us and the cat, and the cat isn't that big).

  I guess it depends if I can find a good one or if a half decent Jeep turns up.

  Sanity is vastly overrated.

1 2  

You'll need to log in to post.