ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Fluff > Shiny things
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 99 votes, 4.91 average. Display Modes
Old 07-10-2013, 07:14 AM   #2026
ducnek
Misadventurer
 
ducnek's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Rooster Poot Tennessee
Oddometer: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by XpressCS View Post
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.


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.
__________________
Calmer than you are.
ducnek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 07:20 AM   #2027
ducnek
Misadventurer
 
ducnek's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Rooster Poot Tennessee
Oddometer: 989
Prentiss Cooper TN



__________________
Calmer than you are.
ducnek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 08:16 AM   #2028
XpressCS
Must. Have. Lumens..
 
XpressCS's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2012
Location: The big box California
Oddometer: 1,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by ducnek View Post


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.
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.
__________________
2004 KLR650

My KLR is my therapy session. My quiet time. My deep tissue massage. Me without my KLR is reason enough to be deeply concerned. It is what calms me the most. Soothes my mind. Eases my stress. -Me
XpressCS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 08:26 AM   #2029
scarysharkface
30-125
 
scarysharkface's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Location: Lakland
Oddometer: 12,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by XpressCS View Post
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.
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
__________________

The road to Hell is paved...
Save $5 on a Smugmug subscription when you use my coupon:
yBr7OofIPuOP6
'98 DR350 for sale http://advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1000749
scarysharkface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 08:42 AM   #2030
tslewisz
Beastly Adventurer
 
tslewisz's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Bloomington, IL
Oddometer: 2,344
The only problem I've had w/ my '10 was a Wireless Control Module, replaced under warranty.

The gatekeeper to Grizzly Lake, CO.
tslewisz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 10:33 AM   #2031
Carlo Muro
Supercàzzola
 
Carlo Muro's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2008
Location: Mediocristan
Oddometer: 2,051
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

Yeah, it was a diesel.
__________________
Play some Picasso
Carlo Muro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 03:20 PM   #2032
TheOtherBart
Beastly Adventurer
 
TheOtherBart's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: DeKalb County, Illinois
Oddometer: 1,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarysharkface View Post
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
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.
TheOtherBart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 03:43 PM   #2033
longtallsally
Yeah I'm a chick
 
longtallsally's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Location: BACK IN THE STATES!!!
Oddometer: 4,208
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.
__________________
[quote=Insert witty comment here]
longtallsally is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 04:22 PM   #2034
JBADV
searching for sanity
 
JBADV's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: right here,right now
Oddometer: 3,406
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 .
Now I have a '13 JKU Freedom Edition , 3.6L , 5 speed auto . Talk about night and day ! These new Jeeps are pretty nice .
__________________
The older I grow,the faster life goes.
The more I learn,the less I know.
JBADV is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 04:24 PM   #2035
TheOtherBart
Beastly Adventurer
 
TheOtherBart's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: DeKalb County, Illinois
Oddometer: 1,822
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.
TheOtherBart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 07:22 PM   #2036
XpressCS
Must. Have. Lumens..
 
XpressCS's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2012
Location: The big box California
Oddometer: 1,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarysharkface View Post
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherBart View Post
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.
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.
__________________
2004 KLR650

My KLR is my therapy session. My quiet time. My deep tissue massage. Me without my KLR is reason enough to be deeply concerned. It is what calms me the most. Soothes my mind. Eases my stress. -Me
XpressCS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2013, 05:49 AM   #2037
ducnek
Misadventurer
 
ducnek's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Rooster Poot Tennessee
Oddometer: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by XpressCS View Post
ditching the 4.0 altogether was a big mistake.

YMMV.
I'm pretty sure it was due to emissions standards. They were great motors, but time marches on.
__________________
Calmer than you are.
ducnek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2013, 01:51 PM   #2038
Jeffy
Hmm...
 
Jeffy's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Location: SF - East Bay
Oddometer: 4,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by ducnek View Post
I'm pretty sure it was due to emissions standards. They were great motors, but time marches on.
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.
__________________
"I'm going to shift gears now.... This will involve man touching." - Jeremy Clarkson
Jeffy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2013, 03:54 PM   #2039
Ranger Ron
Studly Adventurer
 
Ranger Ron's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Sonoran Desert, AZ
Oddometer: 676
Here's my 2004. It's almost due for its 20,000 mile oil change...



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

Ron
Ranger Ron is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2013, 06:40 PM   #2040
Dukeryder
 
Dukeryder's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Location: Pinewood Springs, Co
Oddometer: 7,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy View Post
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.
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 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.
__________________


Dukeryder is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 03:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014