Nwgs Jeep'n Thread

Discussion in 'Shiny Things' started by nwgs, May 20, 2007.

  1. XpressCS

    XpressCS Must. Have. Lumens..

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Oddometer:
    1,562
    Location:
    The big box California
    My $0.02, don't waste your time with an 07+. The 3.8L ain't anything to brag about, infact I remember reading something about it regarding oil consumption. Something about it being perfectly normal for that engine to burn 1 quart of oil every 1000 miles.

    Also there's electrical bugs here and there that Chrysler still hasn't seemed to work out.
  2. TheOtherBart

    TheOtherBart Long timer

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Oddometer:
    2,350
    Location:
    DeKalb County, Illinois
    Does the new 3.6L have a better rep in the brief time it's been out? I was playing around on the Jeep website and was able to build a brand new Unlimited Sport with a tow package and "connectivity group" for $28k, which is about the same money I'm finding 2-3 year old models for. Of course I don't think that trim level has power anything...
  3. scarysharkface

    scarysharkface Imbecile

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Oddometer:
    13,815
    Location:
    Vigo
    My '09 has had zero electrical or engine problems. It's pushing 80k miles and burns no oil. It could use more motor, sure, but I love it regardless.

    John

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
  4. (none)

    (none) poser

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2007
    Oddometer:
    2,666
    Location:
    Middle of nowhere Georgia

    I picked up a '11 SWB Rubicon 6-speed a few months at. I've put just shy of 4k miles on it (39k miles ttl now), no oil consumption thus far. As noted, it could use more power, but it's a Jeep...
  5. duck851

    duck851 Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    Oddometer:
    193
    Location:
    Pa
    SO has an '11 unlimited rubicon. Bought it new, has 18k and no issues as of yet.....we love it so much that I might be trading in my EVO 8 on another one.
  6. ducnek

    ducnek Trying not to feel it too hard

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Oddometer:
    1,046
    Location:
    Rooster Poot Tennessee
    :lol3

    I have an 07 with 102K. Purchased it with 9K. The only problem I have had is when I ripped the wires from a wheel sensor while wheeling, and it jacked up the ABS. Simple 5 min. fix. I wheel the shit out of it, daily drive it sometimes, and have been to Big Bend and Colorado in it. I would leave out tomorrow coast to coast without hesitation. It's not fast, but with 33" KM2s will run 85 on the highway in the hills without a problem. It burns zero oil, and runs great. The motor has been around for years, and parts are cheap if the need ever arises. I will never get rid of mine.
  7. ducnek

    ducnek Trying not to feel it too hard

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Oddometer:
    1,046
    Location:
    Rooster Poot Tennessee
    Prentiss Cooper TN

    :D

    [​IMG]
  8. XpressCS

    XpressCS Must. Have. Lumens..

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Oddometer:
    1,562
    Location:
    The big box California
    That's not to say some people haven't had issues with them, I know there's plenty of them, but then again, there seems to be just as many with issues.
  9. scarysharkface

    scarysharkface Imbecile

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Oddometer:
    13,815
    Location:
    Vigo
    Um, considering how many there are out there very few have issues. They are as reliable as any modern car or truck.

    John

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
  10. tslewisz

    tslewisz Long timer

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Oddometer:
    2,394
    Location:
    Bloomington, IL
    The only problem I've had w/ my '10 was a Wireless Control Module, replaced under warranty.

    The gatekeeper to Grizzly Lake, CO.
    [​IMG]
  11. Carlo Muro

    Carlo Muro Supercàzzola

    Joined:
    May 2, 2008
    Oddometer:
    2,545
    Location:
    Mediocristan
    Got my doors blown off by a lifted 33" tired Unlimited today on the SS114 near Siracusa (Sicily). I got behind and paced him in my Volvo S60 rental. 170 kph. That's 105 mph :eek1

    Yeah, it was a diesel.
  12. TheOtherBart

    TheOtherBart Long timer

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Oddometer:
    2,350
    Location:
    DeKalb County, Illinois
    This seems like a KLR doohicky kind of thing, a lot of people who haven't had a problem and yet a significant number who have. I saw a poll on one of the Jeep forums where out of 199 respondents 73 reported oil consumption. And a lot of the narratives seem to involve everything being fine until all of a sudden one day the thing burns two quarts of oil between oil changes. I'm struggling a little bit with taking the gamble on a used vehicle where I can't know the service history for sure.
  13. longtallsally

    longtallsally Yeah I'm a chick

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Oddometer:
    4,665
    Location:
    BACK IN THE STATES!!!
    I think it depends on your needs. If it is a primarily a trail/fun vehicle, I'd get a TJ as the 4.0 is really a known quantity (not that the 3.8L isn't) and is quite easy to fix, while the TJ chassis is pretty simple to modify and cheap to fix if you beat it up.

    For our needs we have the 3.6L JKUR. I've never once thought of taking a step back. I kept my YJ for 14 years and I suspect this one will be around at least that long.

    I personally believe the 3.6L is a WAY better motor from the 3.8s that I drove. However, from a reliability perspective, I think it is a toss up, thus my statement about the 4.0L. The more modern the motor, the less shade tree mechanic it is. And that is just a reality of emissions standards creeping up.

    So coming full circle, if you are getting a trail machine, I'd get the more simple one.
  14. JBADV

    JBADV searching for sanity

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,444
    Location:
    right here,right now
    My last Jeep , back in the 80's , was a '75 CJ5 with a 304 V8 , 3 speed std. shift , the axles under the springs and 35" Super Swamper TSL tires . :huh
    Now I have a '13 JKU Freedom Edition , 3.6L , 5 speed auto . Talk about night and day ! These new Jeeps are pretty nice .
  15. TheOtherBart

    TheOtherBart Long timer

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Oddometer:
    2,350
    Location:
    DeKalb County, Illinois
    Definitely not a trail machine, a daily driver for the wife and kids and something to flat tow behind the RV. And way cooler than any of the other options. :D
  16. XpressCS

    XpressCS Must. Have. Lumens..

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Oddometer:
    1,562
    Location:
    The big box California
    Correct, just because my Doo hasn't bit the dust doesn't mean others haven't. I think that may be one of the numerous reasons they switched to the 3.6L. But ditching the 4.0 altogether was a big mistake.

    YMMV.
  17. ducnek

    ducnek Trying not to feel it too hard

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Oddometer:
    1,046
    Location:
    Rooster Poot Tennessee
    I'm pretty sure it was due to emissions standards. They were great motors, but time marches on.
  18. Jeffy

    Jeffy Hmm...

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Oddometer:
    6,712
    Location:
    SF - East Bay
    There were a number of reasons. The engines (4.2, 4.0 & 2.5) were used for Jeep exclusively. Dodge did share the 2.5L calling it the Magnum for a little while in the Dakota though. Unfortunately it was a dead end design-wise. If they wanted more power and better emissions they would have had to design a new engine from the ground up or pilfer from an existing engine platform. This would consolidate the number of engines they use as well. Most of the Chrysler/Dodge and Jeep line-up had already transitioned to the new Powertech engines by 2002/3. That left the I6 Wrangler the sole vehicle left that was still on the old I6 Powertech. The I4 Wrangler was already using the new 2.4L Powertech. The 3.8L was borrowed from the Pacifica and the Minivans. And while it's an OK engine, in something like the JK Unlimited Rubicon, it was underpowered to say the least. The original 4.0L made 240 ft-lbs and the 3.8L made about the same. Peak torque came up almost 1000 rpm sooner, 3200 rpm vs 4000 rpm (4800 rpm (3.6)). Also the older TJ's weighed less; 3,092-3,832 lbs vs 3760-4129lbs.
  19. Ranger Ron

    Ranger Ron Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Oddometer:
    780
    Location:
    Sonoran Desert, AZ
    Here's my 2004. It's almost due for its 20,000 mile oil change...

    [​IMG]

    Fortunately I don't have to put a lot of commuter miles on it. My bikes are my daily drivers.

    Ron :D
  20. Rogue_Ryder

    Rogue_Ryder

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2005
    Oddometer:
    7,897
    Location:
    Pinewood Springs, Colorado
    I think the 4.0 was available in the WJ Grand Cherokee until 2004 as well. The 4.0 is an unbelievable engine. I sold an Accord to a dude that had an XJ with the 4.0 that decided he needed something new since the XJ was at roughly 375,000 miles; and the only thing wrong was the oil pump needed replacing :huh That kind of longevity is as good or better than anything on the road! I'm amazed that after last weekends trip of over 800miles with about 100 of those being off road my nearly 20 year old 4.0 didn't even use a drop of oil!

    To say ditching the 4.0 was a mistake by many is probably a bit harsh. The basic engine design was 40 years old at the time it was retired. About every bit of power, economy and efficiency was tapped by the time it was retired. I don't think any other auto company was using a design that old at that time. The saddest part was that the plant that manufactured those engines, had been in pretty much continuous operation for like 100years and once Chrysler stopped making the 4.0 the plant only remained open for a few more years making those less than stellar mini-van engines and then closed forever.