A friend has a Cherokee with the 4.0 6 cylinder engine. I don't know if there is much of anything anywhere on his Jeep that is original Jeep beyond the body shell, engine block and head. When it comes to off road fun this Jeep is a mountain goat. To include his Jeep in a comparison with some other vehicle would not exactly be including anything close to a standard Jeep in such a comparison. If you were to ask me about the torque developed by this engine I'd say when I drive it, it feels like it could pull an house off it's foundation. It will creep over rocks at less than a walking pace all day long without a complaint. If I wanted an expedition vehicle I'd certainly consider starting with an older 4 door Cherokee with the 4.0 6 cylinder engine and doing what he did. I would not start with a new Jeep.
Jeep 4.0L I-4 Engine vs. New V-6 Engine
- Thread starter ChrisD46
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Sunnyinhollister
Originally Posted By: Kuato
If your relative wants a new Jeep he should get one; only drawback to the new version is that it is actually smaller inside than the old version. Perhaps smaller is not the right word, but tighter fit for people...if he is not over 6' or so he won't notice the difference.
I've owned both, and I'm 5'11" and find the newer interior to have a lot more room. Is this an issue with headroom or legroom?
I am 6'4", my head is on the sound bar in the newer version(unless I lean the seat way back), and knees are closer to the dash than in the earlier model. Just seems tighter inside.
Originally Posted By: Kuato
If your relative wants a new Jeep he should get one; only drawback to the new version is that it is actually smaller inside than the old version. Perhaps smaller is not the right word, but tighter fit for people...if he is not over 6' or so he won't notice the difference.
I've owned both, and I'm 5'11" and find the newer interior to have a lot more room. Is this an issue with headroom or legroom?
I am 6'4", my head is on the sound bar in the newer version(unless I lean the seat way back), and knees are closer to the dash than in the earlier model. Just seems tighter inside.
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Originally Posted By: Sunnyinhollister
Originally Posted By: Kuato
If your relative wants a new Jeep he should get one; only drawback to the new version is that it is actually smaller inside than the old version. Perhaps smaller is not the right word, but tighter fit for people...if he is not over 6' or so he won't notice the difference.
I've owned both, and I'm 5'11" and find the newer interior to have a lot more room. Is this an issue with headroom or legroom?
I am 6'4", my head is on the sound bar in the newer version(unless I lean the seat way back), and knees are closer to the dash than in the earlier model. Just seems tighter inside.
2 door or 4 door? Or did it matter? I know the 4 door has the seat height adjuster, just not sure about the 2 door.
Originally Posted By: Sunnyinhollister
Originally Posted By: Kuato
If your relative wants a new Jeep he should get one; only drawback to the new version is that it is actually smaller inside than the old version. Perhaps smaller is not the right word, but tighter fit for people...if he is not over 6' or so he won't notice the difference.
I've owned both, and I'm 5'11" and find the newer interior to have a lot more room. Is this an issue with headroom or legroom?
I am 6'4", my head is on the sound bar in the newer version(unless I lean the seat way back), and knees are closer to the dash than in the earlier model. Just seems tighter inside.
2 door or 4 door? Or did it matter? I know the 4 door has the seat height adjuster, just not sure about the 2 door.
I'd take the 4.0. every. single. time.
The 3.8L V6 is garbage. Under powered, and has a reputation for drinking oil. There are many 3.8 Wrangler owners with less than 100k miles who add quarts of oil between changes. Early 3.8 wranglers often spun bearings. It has the power of a 4 cylinder with the fuel mileage of a V8. These models (2007-2011) don't hold their value as well either. There are 4.0 TJs that are much more expensive than newer JKs with the 3.8L.
The 3.6L V6 is worlds ahead in horsepower (285hp), but I feel the 4.0L has a better torque curve. The 3.6L really has to scream to get going, and when it does then it hauls. It makes most of it's power in the higher RPM range. This also has to do with the weight of the JK versus the earlier TJ models.
I want to like the newer Jeeps, but the quality isn't there in my opinion. I was considering a 3.6L Wrangler, but they do have their fare share of issues:
-Tops that leak like crazy on brand new Jeeps
-Manual transmissions that pop out of gear, and won't go into reverse
-Clutches that have issues right off the lot and aren't covered under warranty
-Stalling/no start issues with the 3.6
-Plastic oil coolers cracking, causing massive oil leaks
-Plastic oil filter housings on '12-'13 models loosing bypass springs
-Engine knocking and rod bearing failure on the 3.6
I didn't believe the last one, but a local tech at the dealership said he has seen quite a few 3.6 engines under 90k miles with thrown connecting rods, and the engine was "redesigned" for 2017. Not things that should be happening in a vehicle this new. If I was going to buy a Wrangler, I'd be more likely to buy a $10-15k TJ than a newer $30k JK with the potential issues.
I'm not saying they will all have these issues, but the ones who have dealt with these problems have had quite the experience.
The 3.8L V6 is garbage. Under powered, and has a reputation for drinking oil. There are many 3.8 Wrangler owners with less than 100k miles who add quarts of oil between changes. Early 3.8 wranglers often spun bearings. It has the power of a 4 cylinder with the fuel mileage of a V8. These models (2007-2011) don't hold their value as well either. There are 4.0 TJs that are much more expensive than newer JKs with the 3.8L.
The 3.6L V6 is worlds ahead in horsepower (285hp), but I feel the 4.0L has a better torque curve. The 3.6L really has to scream to get going, and when it does then it hauls. It makes most of it's power in the higher RPM range. This also has to do with the weight of the JK versus the earlier TJ models.
I want to like the newer Jeeps, but the quality isn't there in my opinion. I was considering a 3.6L Wrangler, but they do have their fare share of issues:
-Tops that leak like crazy on brand new Jeeps
-Manual transmissions that pop out of gear, and won't go into reverse
-Clutches that have issues right off the lot and aren't covered under warranty
-Stalling/no start issues with the 3.6
-Plastic oil coolers cracking, causing massive oil leaks
-Plastic oil filter housings on '12-'13 models loosing bypass springs
-Engine knocking and rod bearing failure on the 3.6
I didn't believe the last one, but a local tech at the dealership said he has seen quite a few 3.6 engines under 90k miles with thrown connecting rods, and the engine was "redesigned" for 2017. Not things that should be happening in a vehicle this new. If I was going to buy a Wrangler, I'd be more likely to buy a $10-15k TJ than a newer $30k JK with the potential issues.
I'm not saying they will all have these issues, but the ones who have dealt with these problems have had quite the experience.
I miss my TJ daily. If I could have tackled a rebuild in my driveway I would have. A 2006 Rubicon is a very capable vehicle and I would make it a daily driver. It's not for everyone, but if you can keep it they are fun beyond measure. I agree with earlier posts, avoid the 3.8 if possible (still a decent engine) and the 3.6 is truly a modern engine that should be a keeper too. I liked the 4.0 and found it easy to work on and good aftermarket support.
I vote TJ all the way!
I vote TJ all the way!
Originally Posted By: Sunnyinhollister
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Originally Posted By: Sunnyinhollister
Originally Posted By: Kuato
If your relative wants a new Jeep he should get one; only drawback to the new version is that it is actually smaller inside than the old version. Perhaps smaller is not the right word, but tighter fit for people...if he is not over 6' or so he won't notice the difference.
I've owned both, and I'm 5'11" and find the newer interior to have a lot more room. Is this an issue with headroom or legroom?
I am 6'4", my head is on the sound bar in the newer version(unless I lean the seat way back), and knees are closer to the dash than in the earlier model. Just seems tighter inside.
2 door or 4 door? Or did it matter? I know the 4 door has the seat height adjuster, just not sure about the 2 door.
IIRC both versions, and the seat height adjustment is with different trim levels.
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Originally Posted By: Sunnyinhollister
Originally Posted By: Kuato
If your relative wants a new Jeep he should get one; only drawback to the new version is that it is actually smaller inside than the old version. Perhaps smaller is not the right word, but tighter fit for people...if he is not over 6' or so he won't notice the difference.
I've owned both, and I'm 5'11" and find the newer interior to have a lot more room. Is this an issue with headroom or legroom?
I am 6'4", my head is on the sound bar in the newer version(unless I lean the seat way back), and knees are closer to the dash than in the earlier model. Just seems tighter inside.
2 door or 4 door? Or did it matter? I know the 4 door has the seat height adjuster, just not sure about the 2 door.
IIRC both versions, and the seat height adjustment is with different trim levels.
- Status
