Jeep'ers role call. Where ya at?

[jeepinbanditrider]

It's cute to call my XJ a truck because it isn't a "Jeep", but I know it isn't a truck either.

I hate it when people say this. The XJ is just as much a Jeep as any other Jeep and a hell of a lot more Jeep than the crap they are cranking out now. I've seen bone stock XJs crawl over stuff the shortwheelbase crowd has problems with. the wheelbase on the XJ seems to be a perfect compromise between a pickup and a Wrangler.

Remember even the Wrangler had square headlights for a few years

00 XJ sport

[Tally XD]

Definite Jeeper here. Have my own local Jeep club complete with online forum.

http://www.capital-city-jeepers.com/

Here is my 1989 XJ Cherokee 4x4:

[jheady]

I love Jeeps.

99 TJ Sport - rolling 33x10.5, 4.0L, 5spd, 2" springs, 1" BL, armored up

79 CJ - 304, 3 spd, 1 piece axles, 33x12.5s, lots of rust and spare parts.(2nd CJ I have owned)

05 Liberty Limited CRD (wife's buggy bought 06). The VM motor is solid and I love the torque. Probably the best part of the jeep. Now if Chrysler would give us a tranny to hold up to the motor instead of dancing around trying to get out of warranty issues. (4 times in for shop work with 15k on it - all tranny/torque converter problems) I also love the mpgs - average 24 town/ 26-27 hwy.

I have been waiting on the JK diesel model, but was told it would be 2010. With my experience on how they are handling the Liberty issues I wouldn't jump on the first year model either. I would also have to see how the blue tech motor is going to work out. Definitely would not even consider it if they do not offer a manual tranny. They only offer the auto tranny here in the states (for the Liberty) and it is the same model they offer in the gas model. A majority of Europe gets the manual tran and they do not have the issues we have over here.

[jeepinbanditrider]

Is there a manual offred with the CRD models? If so I would have went that route for a Diesel. Chrysler had problems with the autos behind the Cummins diesels for years becuase they were basicly taking the gas auto and putting it behind the diesel. 1) It wasn't designed to take that kind of power 2)the pressures generated by the higher revving gas motor in the tranny made it work properly the diesels spin slower producing lower pressures resulting in an auto trans with less than steller reliablity. They would burn up lots o internalls.

[ArmyGuy45]

Originally Posted by Gravel

I have a foreign jeep, does that count...

77 chassis FJ40 with a 71 tub. It is running a pretty healthy 468 Big Block Chevy, TH350, oe w/lockright axles through a stock transfer case.. The SOA is done on stock softened springs along with a shackle reversal and Rancho RS9000's. Saginaw steering with all rod ends, the front cut and turned. Front and rear disk setup. 37x14.50x15 Toyo MT's with Alcoa's. I still have a fair bit of work to do but I am happy thumping around in it now!

oh... oh.. ..man.. i have to go change my shorts

[jheady]

Originally Posted by jeepinbanditrider

Is there a manual offred with the CRD models? If so I would have went that route for a Diesel. Chrysler had problems with the autos behind the Cummins diesels for years becuase they were basicly taking the gas auto and putting it behind the diesel. 1) It wasn't designed to take that kind of power 2)the pressures generated by the higher revving gas motor in the tranny made it work properly the diesels spin slower producing lower pressures resulting in an auto trans with less than steller reliablity. They would burn up lots o internalls.

That is exactly the same issue with the Liberty CRD. The peak torque is 1800 rpm. The present factory torque converter stall is 2400 rpm which is standard for the gas motors. You should be able to see the problem with longevity of the tranny.
They do have a 5spd manual tranny but it is only offered out of the US. It was not even offered as an option. If it was available we would have one.
The CRD VM motor is getting the bad rap for the problems when it isn't the real culprit. I have been greatly impressed with the 2.8 and I would love to be able to put it in my wrangler, it would be the bomb.

[Powerman]

Originally Posted by jeepinbanditrider

I hate it when people say this. The XJ is just as much a Jeep as any other Jeep and a hell of a lot more Jeep than the crap they are cranking out now. I've seen bone stock XJs crawl over stuff the shortwheelbase crowd has problems with. the wheelbase on the XJ seems to be a perfect compromise between a pickup and a Wrangler.

Remember even the Wrangler had square headlights for a few years

00 XJ sport

No Argument here. I love my XJ. And yes It is a Jeep. When most people say Jeep they mean Wrangler. They don't know any better and I guess I shouldn't perpetuate the stereotype.

The fact that it can carry stuff is why I took it over a Wrangler. More cargo, and the longer wheel base can't be overlooked. I find my XJ to be the perfect size, but I'm biased. I can say that I will never own a Wrangler, or a short wheelbase buggy.

The only thing Jeep has put out in recent years worth a look are the Unlimited. The Rubi editions are nice, but frankly I would like my own built D44s at least. Still would want a 4.0l or better. Maybe in a few years the thought of picking up a stock unlimited to build would be nice.

The only thing that holds back XJs are the wheel wells and space. Yes plenty of people hack them up and tube them out, but from where I'm standing, I would just rather start with a frame, or tube chassis. 35s are as far as you can go without major modifications. Then again, there is not many places a XJ on 35s can't go. Certainly no trail in Colorado.

[jeepinbanditrider]

Originally Posted by Powerman

No Argument here. I love my XJ. And yes It is a Jeep. When most people say Jeep they mean Wrangler. They don't know any better and I guess I shouldn't perpetuate the stereotype.

The fact that it can carry stuff is why I took it over a Wrangler. More cargo, and the longer wheel base can't be overlooked. I find my XJ to be the perfect size, but I'm biased. I can say that I will never own a Wrangler, or a short wheelbase buggy.

The only thing Jeep has put out in recent years worth a look are the Unlimited. The Rubi editions are nice, but frankly I would like my own built D44s at least. Still would want a 4.0l or better. Maybe in a few years the thought of picking up a stock unlimited to build would be nice.

The only thing that holds back XJs are the wheel wells and space. Yes plenty of people hack them up and tube them out, but from where I'm standing, I would just rather start with a frame, or tube chassis. 35s are as far as you can go without major modifications. Then again, there is not many places a XJ on 35s can't go. Certainly no trail in Colorado.

Even the D44s onthe Rubi aren't "real" D44s perse. The centersection is D44. The outer potion of the axleshafts, the unit-hubs, and the knuckles are straight off the ol' D30 front axles they run in the rest of the non-rubi Jeeps. So the weak link in those axles are going to be unit-hubs and the knuckles, and the outer stubshaft.

[Gravel]

35's up here will get you pumpkin centered on a lot of stuff in the mud, hell 37's will do it......

[jeepinbanditrider]

God I hate mud. It's the devils wheeling terrian. I'll go though it if it gets in my way but I try to avoid it unless I get a wild hair to go play in it, or if it happens to be raining the weekend I go wheelin. To much damage caused by something as simple as wet dirt.