StandardShift.com

I found a pretty decent Cherokee in my area. 2Dr, 2WD, 2.5 Cherokee. Seems like it is rust free. Thing I fear is the car might be a dog on power. Sure would be bulletproof though. I wonder how the seats are. Makes decent torque it seems though, especially for a 4 cylinder.

Thoughts?

bk7794 wrote:I found a pretty decent Cherokee in my area. 2Dr, 2WD, 2.5 Cherokee. Seems like it is rust free. Thing I fear is the car might be a dog on power. Sure would be bulletproof though. I wonder how the seats are. Makes decent torque it seems though, especially for a 4 cylinder.

Thoughts?

what year?? 2wd and rust free?? might be a southern car. my stepmom had a 2wd cherokee which was nice but that was a 6 banger (and 4 doors and auto) and down in florida. even the 6 banger models aren't that fast, at least the automatic ones. don't remember ever hearing about the 4 banger being a dog though. i also would imagine the seats would be very comfy.

Anything that old that wasn't extremely hot in its day will be "a dog on power" by modern standards. Expectations have evolved that fast.

You're not wrong that it's quite heavy and draggy for such a small engine, even in its day. My XJ experience was a 4.0L/5 speed and my most vivid recollection of it is having to double-downshift to maintain 60 while climbing a moderate hill and towing a utility trailer full of a bundle of dog kennels (which admittedly were not light but were very draggy).

Speed is not the point of these. Their on-road handling is also unremarkable at best. If power is a priority and you're not prepared to shift it a fair bit to keep it in the powerband almost like a British roadster and consider that part of the experience it's likely to frustrate you.

Do not get the 2.5 motor. The 4.0 is more robust, more reliable, more power and more torque with about the same gas mileage. The 4.0 motor really is very durable.

I've had a '94 Cherokee with 5-speed, 4.0 and 4WD. It had 225k miles and drove strong. I've also had a Wrangler with the 4.0.

Jeep should have kept the boxy Cherokee. Think they called it the Cherokee Classic at the end. Don't know if it came in a manual, but the discontinued Jeep Commander looked pretty good and you could get it with a V8. They should have not dumped the manual in the Grand Cherokee after 97 or 98. Not sure what the Grand Cherokee sales were with a manual, but they could probably count the number of sales nationwide on their fingers. Only ever saw one Grand Cherokee with a manual.

Jeep should have kept the boxy Cherokee. Think they called it the Cherokee Classic at the end. Don't know if it came in a manual, but the discontinued Jeep Commander looked pretty good and you could get it with a V8. They should have not dumped the manual in the Grand Cherokee after 97 or 98. Not sure what the Grand Cherokee sales were with a manual, but they could probably count the number of sales nationwide on their fingers. Only ever saw one Grand Cherokee with a manual.

XJs had their advantages and disadvantages compared to other models.

Disadvantages were that they were flexy-fliers - their body structure left something to be desired. That didn't help their on-road handling, cross-wind sensitivity, etc. Also, the 4.0 engine wasn't efficient or clean enough to be kept in production any longer. Also, the spare tires were stored inside, which displaced cargo space.

Advantages were that their live axle suspensions at both ends were relatively easier and less expensive to modify for more serious off-road usage compared with other models that had independent suspensions at one or both ends. They were also hunnertz of pounds lighter, which helped with fuel smileage and performance.

I would agree with regard to steering clear of the 4 cylinder engine unless you really have no pretenses of towing or highway cruising through mountain ranges. It doesn't really show fuel smileage improvement compared to the 6 cylinder.

Bill B wrote:Jeep should have kept the boxy Cherokee. Think they called it the Cherokee Classic at the end. Don't know if it came in a manual, but the discontinued Jeep Commander looked pretty good and you could get it with a V8. They should have not dumped the manual in the Grand Cherokee after 97 or 98. Not sure what the Grand Cherokee sales were with a manual, but they could probably count the number of sales nationwide on their fingers. Only ever saw one Grand Cherokee with a manual.

Agreed with you on keeping the Cherokee, but the Commander was and is a pile of junk. Just from a reliability perspective, it's the very last modern Jeep I'd even consider.

I do have a spoft spot for Cherokees in general. The automatics in them are very strong and durable, which isn't to be used lightly when we're talking about automatics in the 90s. The AX15 manuals were also good, but had the expected long throws of a truck-ish shifter.

What I like about them the most is their blunt ruggedness and durability. The boxy look is appealing to me as well. Additionally, they are easy to work on, easy to diagnose and parts are cheap.

In a weird way, I really enjoyed driving my '94 with a ton of miles when I lived up north and used it was a winter beater. It was a hell of a good SUV.

Wonder what's the origin of "dog-slow". Because most dogs I know are pretty damn fast.

AHTOXA wrote:Agreed with you on keeping the Cherokee, but the Commander was and is a pile of junk. Just from a reliability perspective, it's the very last modern Jeep I'd even consider.

The Bromander is just an overdressed Grand Cherokee. Nothing much different. No real issues that arent shared with the WK.