|
commissargribb posted:You guys watch BReaking BAd? Yeah I always get a kick out of seeing that. Also Walt's Pontiac with the reappearing spare and what sounds like a glass pack on it.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2012 19:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:48 |
|
|
I love Wagoneers but I hate driving them. FML.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2012 20:27
|
|
|
The Wagoneer in Breaking Bad rules, the interior's in sort of rough shape though
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2012 20:39
|
|
|
Anyone know if Uwharrie (or anywhere in NC) has any good roads for (relatively) higher-speed offroading? I'm not really interested in crawling and mudding anymore; I want a safe, semi-closed course to get a handle on my XJ's rally performance before I start prioritizing upgrades and signing up for SCCA rallycross.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2012 04:19
|
|
|
FreelanceSocialist posted:I love Wagoneers but I hate driving them. FML. I love driving Wagoneers. It's a wonderful magical experience. Everything rattles, it's loud and stinky and bouncy, your inputs are more like suggestions, and no one ever gets in your way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 00:31
|
|
|
SNiPER_Magnum posted:I love driving Wagoneers. It's a wonderful magical experience. Everything rattles, it's loud and stinky and bouncy, your inputs are more like suggestions, and no one ever gets in your way. Now you're making me miss driving my wrangler. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 02:01
|
|
|
My XJ is rattle-y and bouncy and stinky, but it is tiny compared to the Wagoneer and I feel more secure driving it, oddly enough. It's the first vehicle that when I am in the driver's seat, I can almost feel exactly where my vehicle is in space. Probably due to size, comparatively small front/rear overhang, and the greenhouse/glass box design. Nothing like bombing through gaps in the forest at 30mph that are so tight, you're glad to have spring-loaded mirrors (although I actually cracked the passenger side mirror last week on an outcropping). Wagoneers, Ford Broncos, Chevy Blazers, even Wranglers... I just don't feel as "tight" with them.
FreelanceSocialist fucked around with this message at 04:21 on Jan 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 04:19
|
|
|
FreelanceSocialist posted:My XJ is rattle-y and bouncy and stinky, but it is tiny compared to the Wagoneer and I feel more secure driving it, oddly enough. It's the first vehicle that when I am in the driver's seat, I can almost feel exactly where my vehicle is in space. Probably due to size, comparatively small front/rear overhang, and the greenhouse/glass box design. Nothing like bombing through gaps in the forest at 30mph that are so tight, you're glad to have spring-loaded mirrors (although I actually cracked the passenger side mirror last week on an outcropping). Wagoneers, Ford Broncos, Chevy Blazers, even Wranglers... I just don't feel as "tight" with them. The XJ handling is much better than the wrangler. While they're both poo poo, the XJ bucks a lot less than my sisters TJ. Body rolls less too. But comparing jeep handling is like comparing dog poo poo to horse poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 12:36
|
|
|
I'm not saying the XJ has great handling compared to something like a Miata or a C6 Corvette, just that I have a better feeling of spatial awareness and the physical presence of the Jeep than in other SUVs and light trucks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 16:34
|
|
|
FreelanceSocialist posted:My XJ is rattle-y and bouncy and stinky, but it is tiny compared to the Wagoneer and I feel more secure driving it, oddly enough. It's the first vehicle that when I am in the driver's seat, I can almost feel exactly where my vehicle is in space. Probably due to size, comparatively small front/rear overhang, and the greenhouse/glass box design. Nothing like bombing through gaps in the forest at 30mph that are so tight, you're glad to have spring-loaded mirrors (although I actually cracked the passenger side mirror last week on an outcropping). Wagoneers, Ford Broncos, Chevy Blazers, even Wranglers... I just don't feel as "tight" with them. agreed. My fold-in 97-up XJ mirrors are awesome, if I hit a tree they just fold in. Unless I REALLY plow it, which results in bent sheetmetal on the door. As for handling, lovely jeep handling just makes "fast driving" result in exceeding the speed limit by less (vs a sportscar) without reducing the challenge. Most people don't understand my logic on this, but it makes sense to me so  The only truck I have that doesn't have fold-in mirrors or "good" handling is the 5-ton, and it simply doesn't matter. I have knocked over small trees (up to about 2 or 3 inches diameter) with my mirrors before, because it's drat near ten feet wide with the mirrors. kastein fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Jan 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 17:15
|
|
|
So about a week ago I had contacted another guy about a '96 XJ w/ the Up Country package. 130k on it. Factory skid plates, tow hooks, upgraded suspension, LSD. He wanted $1.5k because it needed an exhaust and a windshield to pass and needed to be jumped to get it running. Well, I emailed him and never heard back. Because his emails went to my spam folder  quote:December 28, 2011 16:13 quote:December 29, 2011 23:51 quote:January 04, 2012 09:47 Just called. Sent for scrap yesterday. gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 18:19
|
|
|
FreelanceSocialist posted:Because his emails went to my spam folder
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 18:42
|
|
|
Slow is Fast posted:The XJ handling is much better than the wrangler. While they're both poo poo, the XJ bucks a lot less than my sisters TJ. Body rolls less too. But comparing jeep handling is like comparing dog poo poo to horse poo poo. Yup. I think it makes me subconsciously drive slower than I intend to as well. I do love driving it in the summer, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 18:43
|
|
|
Just called the company that hauled it away, they're not willing to tell me where it went or how much I can bribe them to drop it in front of my place instead of in a crusher (although I bet it is headed to be parted out in some lovely SUV graveyard). At the risk of going further into XJ circlejerk territory (we're already like two hours past the border crossing anyway, right?), the Cherokee seems to be way more calming to drive. Like, just knowing that I am a steel box with steel bumpers and a speedo that tops out at 85 makes me not give a poo poo about getting places quickly or driving aggressively. I'll do the speed limit all day long in mine and be perfectly happy knowing that I'll get where I am going and if I really need to overtake some clown, I have a reasonable enough amount of reserve HP/torque to do so. Put me in my previous car, an Accord, and I'll be chatting with highway patrol within like 5 minutes. My old Acura TL probably cost me more in moving violations than I paid for it. I am just not a good person on the road. I'm doing you all a favor by driving a Jeep.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 19:10
|
|
|
FreelanceSocialist posted:So about a week ago I had contacted another guy about a '96 XJ w/ the Up Country package. 130k on it. Factory skid plates, tow hooks, upgraded suspension, LSD. He wanted $1.5k because it needed an exhaust and a windshield to pass and needed to be jumped to get it running. Well, I emailed him and never heard back. drat, that sucks dude. That's a pretty good deal for $800.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 19:20
|
|
|
God all this jeep talk makes me want one again. Anyways, has any one ever bought an XJ with the crappy 2.8 GM motor in it? The reason I ask is how hard is it to convert to a L6? Costs besides engine purchase involved? I assume you will need a new computer and wiring harness as well... Or would I just be better off finding a 4.0 Jeep to begin with? I have seen people do it on other websites, but to be honest, I *trust* AI more than the other websites out there. At least 90% of the people here have a clue....
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 19:24
|
|
|
Better off finding a 4.0L because you're going to be swapping the transmission, too. I don't think the 2.8L and 4.0L ever shared the same transmissions. edit: hurf durf 2.8 v6 not 2.5 i4. FreelanceSocialist fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Jan 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 19:35
|
|
|
BrokenKnucklez posted:God all this jeep talk makes me want one again. Do not loving do this EVER if you value your sanity or cash. My first XJ had the 2.8 because I didn't know any better at the time, only engine I've ever seen stall when shifting into reverse - with an AUTOMATIC. Anyways, you can't drop in a 4.0 liter because the firewall is different. They actually had to go in and modify the shape to fit the 4.0 liter back in 1986/87, the 2.8's engine bay is simply too short. you could, in theory, fit a 3.4 liter V6 into it, but you'd then have to add in all the electronics and a new transmission as well, they weren't using good transmissions back with the 2.8 liter. I've seen someone TRY and modify it to fit the 4.3 Vortec V6, but it also wouldn't fit into the bay. But all in all, it's really not worth buying one unless you specifically want one of the rare 2.8 liters (rare that it's SURVIVED this long) for collecting purposes or something. You're better off buying an 87 or newer and having it shipped to you (or just drive it home from wherever you bought it from). [edit] I believe both the automatic and standard transmissions behind the 2.8 liter were Peugot or Renault, I can't remember which. Doccers fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Jan 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 19:52
|
|
|
Doccers posted:Do not loving do this EVER if you value your sanity or cash. Oh there is plenty of 4.0s around... Just the guy down the street had one super cheap ($300) and the engine sounds weak. Just kinda figured it would be easier said than done.... Also was kind of banking on if the 2.8 did not fit, that the 4.3 would slip in. At least the 4.3 would be a great alternative to the 4.0. At least I know now, and knowing is half the battle. I think I really need a g/f or wife to suck up money and time. I really have no self control when it comes to vehicles haha.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 20:19
|
|
|
Since there isn't a 4x4 thread in AI, I'll ask this question here: What are the pros and cons of a Jeep Cherokee vs a Toyota 4Runner? I'm thinking of dropping $3000 for a rig that I can use to take my son up to the Sierra Nevadas once or twice a month, and I have pretty much come down to these two vehicles. Is there a major difference between them, or at this point are they pretty much equal and just pick whichever I feel more comfortable in / enjoy aesthetically? Edit: Someone stop my before I buy a Discovery!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
BrokenKnucklez posted:Oh there is plenty of 4.0s around... Just the guy down the street had one super cheap ($300) and the engine sounds weak. Just kinda figured it would be easier said than done... $300 for the engine or for the whole thing? If it's $300 for a 4.0L XJ, buy it and do a quick rebuild. The i6 is really easy to work on and you'll learn a lot. Hell, throw a stroker kit and a flowmaster on it if you have money burning a hole in your pocket and want a ballsy, loud, fun little 4x4.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 21:09
|
|
|
FreelanceSocialist posted:$300 for the engine or for the whole thing? If it's $300 for a 4.0L XJ, buy it and do a quick rebuild. The i6 is really easy to work on and you'll learn a lot. Hell, throw a stroker kit and a flowmaster on it if you have money burning a hole in your pocket and want a ballsy, loud, fun little 4x4. Sorry, its a $300 2.8 XJ. That is why I was asking about the 2.8 -> 4.0 conversion, but sounds like its just easier to find a 4.0 to start with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 21:14
|
|
|
Oxford Comma posted:Since there isn't a 4x4 thread in AI, I'll ask this question here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2755109 4x4 thread. And since we're in the Jeep thread, get a Cherokee.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 21:46
|
|
|
Oxford Comma posted:What are the pros and cons of a Jeep Cherokee vs a Toyota 4Runner? I'm thinking of dropping $3000 for a rig that I can use to take my son up to the Sierra Nevadas once or twice a month, and I have pretty much come down to these two vehicles. Is there a major difference between them, or at this point are they pretty much equal and just pick whichever I feel more comfortable in / enjoy aesthetically? It really depends on the model years if you're only comparing them mechanically and what you expect out of them, but Jeep's 4.0L I6 gets about the same mileage as the Toyota 3.0L V6 and has gobs more torque to boot, plus a solid front axle. And I'm not sure if it's just a regional thing or whatever, but 4Runners seem to be a lot easier to find with a manual trans. I still love the first gen 84-89 4Runners with the removable top though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 22:04
|
|
|
FreelanceSocialist posted:Just called the company that hauled it away, they're not willing to tell me where it went or how much I can bribe them to drop it in front of my place instead of in a crusher (although I bet it is headed to be parted out in some lovely SUV graveyard). that really blows man. Even as a 96-XJ PTSD sufferer I'd probably jump on another for 800 if the body was in non-rusty shape. I've empirically verified that an XJ/MJ *will* do 115, 120 downhill if it's not one of the speedo-limited ones. My 98 tops out at 116 before it cuts fuel injection but I hit 120 in the 96 at one point. Note: professional driver, closed course
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 00:14
|
|
|
MAJOR STRYkER posted:http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2755109 Thanks for the link. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 02:51
|
|
|
FreelanceSocialist posted:
I wont say that I've never jumped a curb to get past a line of cars into a parking lot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 06:22
|
|
|
commissargribb posted:I wont say that I've never jumped a curb to get past a line of cars into a parking lot. So your the clown that I get jealous of 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 07:45
|
|
|
Hey Jeep goona, long time no talk. Quick consensus question for you all: What year range(s) are the best/most reliable XJs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 08:04
|
|
|
VH4Ever posted:Hey Jeep goona, long time no talk. Quick consensus question for you all: 1999--has the most power stock and updated styling, without the potential cracked head issues from 2000-2001 models. Look for one with the Chrysler 8.25" rear instead of a Dana 35 too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 09:00
|
|
|
mod sassinator posted:1999--has the most power stock and updated styling, without the potential cracked head issues from 2000-2001 models. Look for one with the Chrysler 8.25" rear instead of a Dana 35 too. AND MAKE SURE THE COOLANT DOESNT LOOK LIKE CHOCOLATE MILK. Made that mistake.....
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 14:06
|
|
|
95s are pretty good if you like the old body style and interior and OBD-I, 99s are the best otherwise. 99s aren't quite as lift/mod friendly (you'll need an SYE to eliminate driveshaft vibes over 2-3" of lift, the electronics are much better at detecting faults such as disconnected transmission solenoids if you install a manual shift override kit, etc) but they are very close, and the updated interior is pretty nice. Doing 80 in my 98 feels about the same ride/vibration/road noise wise as doing 50 or 60 in my 96 did when it was stock.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 18:59
|
|
|
Any complaints about the NP242? I kind of like the idea of full-time 4WD.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 20:22
|
|
|
Not really, other than there not being as much aftermarket support for it compared to the NP231 (4:1 kits, HD swaps, etc.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 20:31
|
|
|
if you lift one tire and don't have any LSD diffs, all your torque will go to that tire and none to the others. It's great if you are keeping all 4 on the ground though. Agreed on the lack of aftermarket support. If you want an SYE you are pretty much limited to a hack-n-tap (some purists don't like this, I really couldn't care less) and there aren't 4:1 or 2-lo kits for it AFAIK.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
It'll still lock F/R in low, though, right? So no worse than a traditional part-time TC? I actually thought a 242 could be run in both "open centre" 4-hi and "locked centre" 4-hi (but only "locked centre" 4-lo). Is this not the case? Am I misinterpreting what they mean by full and part time? My understanding is that a 242 should leave him no worse off than someone with a part-time TC and open axles, and actually better-off a lot of the time. InitialDave fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Jan 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2012 01:14
|
|
|
Tom Wood cuts down and re-splines stock 242 shafts which is the better alternative to a hack-n-tap. There's a core charge though due to 242 parts being so rare (unless you want to send your own in and wait.) Part-time is the same as what the 231 has...your front and rear end will turn at the same speed no matter what. Full-time lets the 242 act like a LSD and rotates the front and rear at slightly different speeds, which is great in patchy snow/ice/asphalt conditions (which I use all the time heading up passes) as it won't strain your drive line when you get 'too much' traction suddenly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2012 01:29
|
|
|
That's what I thought, re: putting Select-trac in part-time 4wd ^^^ I shouldn't need a SYE in a '95, though, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2012 01:41
|
|
|
That's kind of a small can of worms due to the varying length of components. For example: The model with the best-case for a non-SYE would be a 84-95 with a manual trans, 231 transfer case and Dana 35 rear axle. The worst-case would be a 96+ with an auto trans, 242 case and 8.25 axle as they are all longer components making for a shorter (and more vibration-susceptible) drive shaft. I've heard several reports of people with lifts up to 4" on their 95's with no vibes while anything over 2" is rare with the 96+ crowd.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2012 01:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:48 |
|
|
Yeah, I think my next XJ will be a '95. Don't really care what rear axle I get. 2" will probably be what I aim for, lift-wise, if anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2012 01:51
|
|