RE: Shed of the Week: Jeep Grand Cherokee
Discussion
GJR68 said:
The yanks never mastered the soft plastics and other superficial quality benchmarks which the car mags use as their marker. They do however engineer their cars where it matters meaning they seem to outlive their european peers on a regular basis.
interesting and realistic. Why are motoring journalists obsessed with soft feel dashboards, damped grab handles and , oh, dear! , cup holders. Autocar is also fixated on I.c.e. which is of interest to a small minority. No one has yet got into any of my extended family's cars or those used in part time job and said " I don't like the trim".rtz62 said:
Heater blend motors are a well known fault and the repair parts are circa £100 (and you don't need the remove the dash, unlike a previous reply suggested),
Yes just to replace the blend doors can be done through the glovebox. But mine had weird faults so Terry replaced the 3 motors, blend doors & the heater matrix. It now finally works.Limpet said:
So much about this is objectively appalling. Only an American engine could take 4 litres to churn out 176 bhp, then there's the pound shop plastics and fake wood, and the fact that each of the two of these I've been in creaked and groaned like a tired minicab even with under 40,000 miles on the clock.
But I quite like it. I actually love the chintzy interiors of big American cars. The shiny plastics, OTT fake wood, the full complement of instruments, and the big squishy armchairs. Somehow so much more welcoming than the clinical black and aluminium German coal house interiors that we have come to think of as benchmarks nowadays.
I like it. If I had even half a use (or space) for a 4.0 SUV, I'd be very tempted.
True you know. In a way it's like Gran's house. You'd never decorate your house like that, but it's just a wonderful place to visit, warm, fuzzy and friendly.But I quite like it. I actually love the chintzy interiors of big American cars. The shiny plastics, OTT fake wood, the full complement of instruments, and the big squishy armchairs. Somehow so much more welcoming than the clinical black and aluminium German coal house interiors that we have come to think of as benchmarks nowadays.
I like it. If I had even half a use (or space) for a 4.0 SUV, I'd be very tempted.
Edited by Limpet on Friday 6th May 10:26
300bhp/ton said:
The XJ Cherokee is a small vehicle though. I think because of it's boxy styling, people always assume it's massive. But it's not, it's about the same size as an e36 BMW, but with a bigger boot. And has similar leg room to said BMW.
The 4.0 litre is very very smooth, makes 190hp and pulls from nothing, which you only get with larger displacement engines. The low end grunt from 1000-1200rpm is very very good. And much more suited to this type of vehicle, rather than having a revy 2.5 V6 with the same PEAK hp output.
Interestingly the Jeep 4.0 makes more power than the Rover V8 4.0, is smoother and better on fuel too. Jap trucks of this period would likely have had a 3.0 or 3.5 V6 with similar HP, but less torque, less low end grunt and actually no better on fuel either.
I agree with everything you said. In fact, the E30 might be more comparable in terms of overall length. The Bimmer and Jeep are characteristic of early 80s design language very well executed.The 4.0 litre is very very smooth, makes 190hp and pulls from nothing, which you only get with larger displacement engines. The low end grunt from 1000-1200rpm is very very good. And much more suited to this type of vehicle, rather than having a revy 2.5 V6 with the same PEAK hp output.
Interestingly the Jeep 4.0 makes more power than the Rover V8 4.0, is smoother and better on fuel too. Jap trucks of this period would likely have had a 3.0 or 3.5 V6 with similar HP, but less torque, less low end grunt and actually no better on fuel either.
The ground clearance also helps disguise how small the actual height of the body is compared to just about everything else.
I had always wondered what one riding on car-height suspension would look like. Finally got to see an example the other day. In 2016 traffic it was tiny. And u fortunately a bit of a disaster as it looked like some mini-70s station wagon devoid of the usual XJ charm.
Power was as good as the detuned engimes in Japanese rivals and it was lighter (and smaller) than most.
Tough little car and for the money I'd take an XJ plus something sporty for the price of a Defender.
I ran a ZJ 4.0 on LPG for about 5 years and it was only replaced because someone ran in to the back of it when it was parked.
It's now only used for green laning or as back up for my replacement WJ
In the time i've owned the ZJ, it's done about 30,000 miles and it hasn't even had an oil change!
The diffs are noisy, it makes some strange noises, but it goes wherever you want it to.
The replacement WJ is also LPG and has done 20,000 miles in the last 12 months, but it has actually had some maintenance work on it.
The gearbox was slipping on up hill left hand turns, so new fluid sorted that, and it's also had an oil change and as set of new Bridgestones.
It does seem to eat front discs though, i've put two sets on and it is desperate for a new set.
It does approx 160 miles to about £26 worth of LPG when towing, and it does a lot of towing!
It also does the off roading quite well, but not as well as the older ZJ
It's now only used for green laning or as back up for my replacement WJ
In the time i've owned the ZJ, it's done about 30,000 miles and it hasn't even had an oil change!
The diffs are noisy, it makes some strange noises, but it goes wherever you want it to.
The replacement WJ is also LPG and has done 20,000 miles in the last 12 months, but it has actually had some maintenance work on it.
The gearbox was slipping on up hill left hand turns, so new fluid sorted that, and it's also had an oil change and as set of new Bridgestones.
It does seem to eat front discs though, i've put two sets on and it is desperate for a new set.
It does approx 160 miles to about £26 worth of LPG when towing, and it does a lot of towing!
It also does the off roading quite well, but not as well as the older ZJ
Pretty much bombproof old sheds.
Been driving mine for 4 years now and here is the money I have spent on it.
Anti-roll bar droplinks
New Tyres
Boot door gas struts
Transfer case (replaced with second hand unit from ebay)
Oils and filters
Brake pads
Other than that nothing has gone wrong. The previous owner had fitted mismatched tyres which burnt out the viscous coupling in the transfer case. Something to watch for and will show up with wheels locking up when making tight maneuvers.
Been driving mine for 4 years now and here is the money I have spent on it.
Anti-roll bar droplinks
New Tyres
Boot door gas struts
Transfer case (replaced with second hand unit from ebay)
Oils and filters
Brake pads
Other than that nothing has gone wrong. The previous owner had fitted mismatched tyres which burnt out the viscous coupling in the transfer case. Something to watch for and will show up with wheels locking up when making tight maneuvers.
I had a ZJ Grand Cherokee. If you want one, I'd advise getting it in Laredo trim. Still crap plastics but no electrical gubbins to go wrong.
Thirsty? Put it this way, the next car I ran was an F150 Lightning and the jeep made that look positively miserly.
It is a good smooth 6 though, the transfer case is s
t - the wheels will hop on tight turns, the seats aren't supportive and there is bugger all boot space. I loved mine though and overall the engine performance vs fuel consumption index was higher than my '96 Discovery ES V8, which was as thirsty but with worse (non existent) performance.
Bought with a literally as new interior and exterior, 80,000 miles on the clock for 1350 quid. The whole car was pristine. All I did was slap decent tyres on it, which transformed the look of it.
Thirsty? Put it this way, the next car I ran was an F150 Lightning and the jeep made that look positively miserly.
It is a good smooth 6 though, the transfer case is s
t - the wheels will hop on tight turns, the seats aren't supportive and there is bugger all boot space. I loved mine though and overall the engine performance vs fuel consumption index was higher than my '96 Discovery ES V8, which was as thirsty but with worse (non existent) performance. 
Bought with a literally as new interior and exterior, 80,000 miles on the clock for 1350 quid. The whole car was pristine. All I did was slap decent tyres on it, which transformed the look of it.
I had one, a £600 ebay special. It was a green Orvis. First thing that died was the alarm. Apparently the UK importer fitted an alarm which fills with water and then dies, which makes the thing unusable. When removed, all was fine. The aircon did actually only need regassing, and was then ice cold. Seats are like comfy armchairs, but the heating elements fail. According to the internet, it's an easy fix, but I couldn't find the break. Tailgate struts give up which resulted in me getting hit on the head. Then the rear axle decided to whine, then scream - a common issue.
In the end I spent about £600 and sold for £600! I would have kept it, but my job changed so I had to do long distances and at 19MPG when trying hard (max 60 MPH, any more and it was 15-16 MPG) with the axle yelling at me and it had to go.
Great workhorses though if you can get one which isn't broken. Super comfy and the kids liked the built-in compass.
In the end I spent about £600 and sold for £600! I would have kept it, but my job changed so I had to do long distances and at 19MPG when trying hard (max 60 MPH, any more and it was 15-16 MPG) with the axle yelling at me and it had to go.
Great workhorses though if you can get one which isn't broken. Super comfy and the kids liked the built-in compass.
Limpet said:
Oh wind your neck in, keyboard warrior.
300 is right. Power outputs for petrol and diesel engines were considerably different in the 1990s and the engines typically used in 4x4s were quite different to those used in saloon cars.Chrysler had more powerful, smaller capacity turbo engines in the 1990s. Much in the same way that at the time Rover Group would sell you a Range Rover or Discovery with a 4.0 litre engine with about 180bhp or a 2.5 V6 with about the same (but in very different vehicles).
Edited by Jimmy Recard on Saturday 7th May 10:05
5ohmustang said:
The 4.0 inline 6 is a much better engine than the regular v8 here. I've never seen a grand cherokee with a i6 in the UD. The cherokee is much more reliable than theis 1st gen grand cherokee. Expect electrical issues.
If I may ask, what is a 'regular V8' and what is 'the UD'?Lester H said:
GJR68 said:
The yanks never mastered the soft plastics and other superficial quality benchmarks which the car mags use as their marker. They do however engineer their cars where it matters meaning they seem to outlive their european peers on a regular basis.
interesting and realistic. Why are motoring journalists obsessed with soft feel dashboards, damped grab handles and , oh, dear! , cup holders. Autocar is also fixated on I.c.e. which is of interest to a small minority. No one has yet got into any of my extended family's cars or those used in part time job and said " I don't like the trim".
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff