I like my XJ for one very simple reason. I literally got it for free (Ok, so I traded a Taurus for it, but I actually MADE money on the Taurus before I traded it...) and I can do the water pump in the parking lot at my apt in an hour with a cheap hand tool set from Harbor Freight. No lifting, no jackstands no nothin. Plus it's a limited so it has the SWEET meshie wheels. I dare anyone to do that with an Astro.
Osterkraut wrote:92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Hrmmm.... Makes about the same power, is heavier (by about 1000lbs). I AM jealous of the optional 27 gallon fuel tank, though.Is the 27 gallon tank optional? I don't think it is. But oh yeah, 400+ miles in between fillups is excellent.
That was ASSumption on my part. The smallish tank on the XJ doesn't bother us so much considering it's driven maybe 8 miles a day most of the time. But it does kindof suck a bit when i'm driving a state or two over to pick up a motor.
Javelin wrote:MG Bryan wrote:Do you own a home with a standard garage? THAT's the difference between a Full-Size Van and an XJ. XJ fit, FSV does not. Sorry man, but in the real world (any suburban or urban area), the smaller vehicle wins every time.Javelin wrote: In reply to 93EXCivic: You can also park an XJ in the back of a full size van, which is the point. Also, real 4x4 full size vans are way more money than the XJ. You *might* find a 300K mile turd though...Full size vans are still pretty easy to park though. Unless you live in Boston, the size difference seems like a non-issue to me.
Full size vans have fit in the garages at both of the homes I've lived in. (I've never owned a home, I'm 20 
)
The rent's crew cab GMC 2500 fits in the garage with room to walk around it. So, there's a bit of disconnect for me as far as what is supposed to fit in a garage.
For me, personally, there's nothing difficult about driving and parking a large vehicle in a city. I'll concede that it's apparently a problem for some people, which makes widely recommending a smaller vehicle like the XJ pretty logical.
DrBoost wrote:Bobzilla wrote: NEver understood it when my full size crew cab truck hauls more people,Yeah, a F/S truck can haul 6 (if the guys up front are REAL friendly) and the Cherokee hauls 5. Slim victory.Bobzilla wrote: more cargo, tows moreYeah, that's what it's made for.Bobzilla wrote: and gets better gas mileage, is just as reliable, will run as many if not more miles and is actually COMFORTABLE to drive and ride in.If it's a diesel it's possibly better, just as realiable? Gotta name the truck but I'm going to call B/S on that one. The comfort is subjective, but the XJ is quite comfy for me. And nobody buys a XJ for max towing/hauling capability. That's like me saying your F/S truck sucks because my miata will out-handle it, by Honda Insight get's better mileage, and my Ferrari is faster. The XJ is the best compromise out there, and you can pick one up for $2,000 that'll run for 5 more years and ask little more than a crank position sensor and some oil.
I've never seen an XJ get over 20mpg. We're back to 20mpg AROUND TOWN in th truck right now. Highway is back up to 22-24 again. Reliable? Yep. I'm sure I'll have this truck for another 400k+ miles. It'll rust in two before it is worn out. Not to mention that rack and pinion steering in the truck takes all the wandering out of highway drives unlike the XJ, and the length lets it tow better and handle high crosswinds without wearing you out. The seats are wider, not as cramped up front, better switch gear....
It's a subjective thing, no doubt. Some people like having a short wheelbase, buckboard ride, narrow seats and mediocre power/mileage. I don't.
Automobile listed the XJ Cherokee as one of the 20 best vehicles of all time. 
In reply to Osterkraut:
Way to be a jerk. 
I don't even have a horse in this race, I'm out.
OK? So? Who cars what a bumch of crappy writers think?
Bobzilla wrote:DrBoost wrote:I've never seen an XJ get over 20mpg. We're back to 20mpg AROUND TOWN in th truck right now. Highway is back up to 22-24 again. Reliable? Yep. I'm sure I'll have this truck for another 400k+ miles. It'll rust in two before it is worn out. Not to mention that rack and pinion steering in the truck takes all the wandering out of highway drives unlike the XJ, and the length lets it tow better and handle high crosswinds without wearing you out. The seats are wider, not as cramped up front, better switch gear.... It's a subjective thing, no doubt. Some people like having a short wheelbase, buckboard ride, narrow seats and mediocre power/mileage. I don't.Bobzilla wrote: NEver understood it when my full size crew cab truck hauls more people,Yeah, a F/S truck can haul 6 (if the guys up front are REAL friendly) and the Cherokee hauls 5. Slim victory.Bobzilla wrote: more cargo, tows moreYeah, that's what it's made for.Bobzilla wrote: and gets better gas mileage, is just as reliable, will run as many if not more miles and is actually COMFORTABLE to drive and ride in.If it's a diesel it's possibly better, just as realiable? Gotta name the truck but I'm going to call B/S on that one. The comfort is subjective, but the XJ is quite comfy for me. And nobody buys a XJ for max towing/hauling capability. That's like me saying your F/S truck sucks because my miata will out-handle it, by Honda Insight get's better mileage, and my Ferrari is faster. The XJ is the best compromise out there, and you can pick one up for $2,000 that'll run for 5 more years and ask little more than a crank position sensor and some oil.
I have actually gotten over 20mpg with mine. It wasn't MUCH over 20mpg, but it's there. I would expect a 2wd XJ with someone with a less heavy highway foot than myself to do a bit better.
I'm narrow, i like narrow seats. I'm not going to apologize for my slim figure.
I find the ride extremely comfortable, but that's obviously subjective considering the other vehicles i own.
As for mediocre power... I'll put $10 down that you won't bring the truck to the drag strip this summer and put more than a half second on me. 
YEEEEEEEE HAWWWW
The biggest question is.... how much could someone buy your truck for these days? (i'm genuinely curious, i have no idea.)
Nobody is saying the truck is the wrong choice. Just that most of us have no need or desire for a full sized truck.
Bobzilla wrote: OK? So? Who cars what a bumch of crappy writers think?
Notice the "" at the end of that. Don't be so srs.
I don't have a use for an XJ since my DD is a full-size truck, but I can see the appeal of a cheap go-anywhere vehicle that can do some towing and hauling. But I must ask, are they that much simpler or more reliable than say, a first-gen Explorer, similar vintage Blazer, 4Runner, etc? Seems to me that when you are looking that cheap, it's best to select a type of vehicle, then pick the one that's in the best condition that you can find. And there's a lot of vehicles in that type (small-midsize truck-based SUV that can tow). Exploders in particular were one of the best-selling vehicles of the 90s, so they have to be even easier to find than the Jeeps.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Automobile listed the XJ Cherokee as one of the 20 best vehicles of all time.
I refuse to believe automotive writers in general are capable of a subjective thought. Hell, we're all probably biased here. I guarantee most of us arguing FOR the XJ own one or have owned one.
That being said, I still want a v10 Excursion. YES I WANT THE GAS ONE.
Tom_Spangler wrote: I don't have a use for an XJ since my DD is a full-size truck, but I can see the appeal of a cheap go-anywhere vehicle that can do some towing and hauling. But I must ask, are they that much simpler or more reliable than say, a first-gen Explorer, similar vintage Blazer, 4Runner, etc? Seems to me that when you are looking that cheap, it's best to select a type of vehicle, then pick the one that's in the best condition that you can find. And there's a lot of vehicles in that type (small-midsize truck-based SUV that can tow). Exploders in particular were one of the best-selling vehicles of the 90s, so they have to be even easier to find than the Jeeps.
Simpler and more reliable than an Explorer: Yes.
Blazer: Yes.
4runner: Debatable. Certainly cheaper, though.
I actually hardly ever see the early 90s Exploders on the road anymore. I'm convinced most of them are gone. I see XJs constantly.
Of course, i'm never sure if they're a 1984 or 2001 model, though.
Tom_Spangler wrote: I don't have a use for an XJ since my DD is a full-size truck, but I can see the appeal of a cheap go-anywhere vehicle that can do some towing and hauling. But I must ask, are they that much simpler or more reliable than say, a first-gen Explorer, similar vintage Blazer, 4Runner, etc? Seems to me that when you are looking that cheap, it's best to select a type of vehicle, then pick the one that's in the best condition that you can find. And there's a lot of vehicles in that type (small-midsize truck-based SUV that can tow). Exploders in particular were one of the best-selling vehicles of the 90s, so they have to be even easier to find than the Jeeps.
Aside from the 4runner, I'd break any of the other compact SUVs you listed LONG before my XJ would even know I was being a dope. 4runners at least in my area, are worth their weight in gold,underpowered, and are SERIOUSLY prone to rust. Anything remotely in XJ range is about as ragged as possible. YMMV.
Javelin wrote: In reply to Osterkraut: Way to be a jerk.
"Put up or shut up" as they say.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:Bobzilla wrote:I have actually gotten over 20mpg with mine. It wasn't MUCH over 20mpg, but it's there. I would expect a 2wd XJ with someone with a less heavy highway foot than myself to do a bit better. I'm narrow, i like narrow seats. I'm not going to apologize for my slim figure.DrBoost wrote:I've never seen an XJ get over 20mpg. We're back to 20mpg AROUND TOWN in th truck right now. Highway is back up to 22-24 again. Reliable? Yep. I'm sure I'll have this truck for another 400k+ miles. It'll rust in two before it is worn out. Not to mention that rack and pinion steering in the truck takes all the wandering out of highway drives unlike the XJ, and the length lets it tow better and handle high crosswinds without wearing you out. The seats are wider, not as cramped up front, better switch gear.... It's a subjective thing, no doubt. Some people like having a short wheelbase, buckboard ride, narrow seats and mediocre power/mileage. I don't.Bobzilla wrote: NEver understood it when my full size crew cab truck hauls more people,Yeah, a F/S truck can haul 6 (if the guys up front are REAL friendly) and the Cherokee hauls 5. Slim victory.Bobzilla wrote: more cargo, tows moreYeah, that's what it's made for.Bobzilla wrote: and gets better gas mileage, is just as reliable, will run as many if not more miles and is actually COMFORTABLE to drive and ride in.If it's a diesel it's possibly better, just as realiable? Gotta name the truck but I'm going to call B/S on that one. The comfort is subjective, but the XJ is quite comfy for me. And nobody buys a XJ for max towing/hauling capability. That's like me saying your F/S truck sucks because my miata will out-handle it, by Honda Insight get's better mileage, and my Ferrari is faster. The XJ is the best compromise out there, and you can pick one up for $2,000 that'll run for 5 more years and ask little more than a crank position sensor and some oil.
I couldn't tell you what they go for now. We got ours the way we wanted it new 6 years ago and plan on keeping it the next 20. We paid $19k for it in 2006. So I'd say,with typical GM resale values in the high $8-low teens depending on condition. No idea.
I know Dave's 2wd XJ got 18-19mpg on the way to and from Nelson Ledges on the highway slog. I was completely surpised. Our old Grand Vitara, which is quite similar in interior room would have gotten 25-26 and was quicker off the line AND 4wd. Is it dead nuts reliable? Sure. unless you start talking about the silly stuff like door switches, locks, window switches, shift lock solenoids, etc than no. They wear out like all the others.
I wanna see this dragstrip throwdown.
Tuesday night at IRP.... I mean ORP.... I mean LORI. damnit, pick a friggin name!
Bobzilla wrote:92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:I couldn't tell you what they go for now. We got ours the way we wanted it new 6 years ago and plan on keeping it the next 20. We paid $19k for it in 2006. So I'd say,with typical GM resale values in the high $8-low teens depending on condition. No idea. I know Dave's 2wd XJ got 18-19mpg on the way to and from Nelson Ledges on the highway slog. I was completely surpised. Our old Grand Vitara, which is quite similar in interior room would have gotten 25-26 and was quicker off the line AND 4wd. Is it dead nuts reliable? Sure. unless you start talking about the silly stuff like door switches, locks, window switches, shift lock solenoids, etc than no. They wear out like all the others.Bobzilla wrote:I have actually gotten over 20mpg with mine. It wasn't MUCH over 20mpg, but it's there. I would expect a 2wd XJ with someone with a less heavy highway foot than myself to do a bit better. I'm narrow, i like narrow seats. I'm not going to apologize for my slim figure.DrBoost wrote:I've never seen an XJ get over 20mpg. We're back to 20mpg AROUND TOWN in th truck right now. Highway is back up to 22-24 again. Reliable? Yep. I'm sure I'll have this truck for another 400k+ miles. It'll rust in two before it is worn out. Not to mention that rack and pinion steering in the truck takes all the wandering out of highway drives unlike the XJ, and the length lets it tow better and handle high crosswinds without wearing you out. The seats are wider, not as cramped up front, better switch gear.... It's a subjective thing, no doubt. Some people like having a short wheelbase, buckboard ride, narrow seats and mediocre power/mileage. I don't.Bobzilla wrote: NEver understood it when my full size crew cab truck hauls more people,Yeah, a F/S truck can haul 6 (if the guys up front are REAL friendly) and the Cherokee hauls 5. Slim victory.Bobzilla wrote: more cargo, tows moreYeah, that's what it's made for.Bobzilla wrote: and gets better gas mileage, is just as reliable, will run as many if not more miles and is actually COMFORTABLE to drive and ride in.If it's a diesel it's possibly better, just as realiable? Gotta name the truck but I'm going to call B/S on that one. The comfort is subjective, but the XJ is quite comfy for me. And nobody buys a XJ for max towing/hauling capability. That's like me saying your F/S truck sucks because my miata will out-handle it, by Honda Insight get's better mileage, and my Ferrari is faster. The XJ is the best compromise out there, and you can pick one up for $2,000 that'll run for 5 more years and ask little more than a crank position sensor and some oil.
Gotcha.
Not a fair comparison because i'm talking about a 12 year old vehicle at this point, but ours was $3k, and i plan on keeping it the next 10 years. Haven't had an issue with any of the switches or locks or any of that jazz yet.
I got 21.3mpg going back and forth from Terre Haute. On the way back, i had about 400lbs of motor and stuff in the back. It didn't do so well this winter hauling ~750 worth of motor and trans in the back to Louisville and back, but i blame winter E36 M3ty gas for giving me 19.6mpg.
That said, it does TERRIBLE around town on her 4 mile commute never going over 40mph. 14mpg is about normal, which doesn't surprise me since the damn thing never really even gets a chance to warm up completely.
About my only complaint is that the driver's front speaker is on the fritz. I probably blew it cranking the stereo too much. Excuse to upgrade!
Bobzilla wrote: Tuesday night at IRP.... I mean ORP.... I mean LORI. damnit, pick a friggin name!
LULZ!!!!
I still call it IRP.
Your truck has an exhaust, right? Intake as well?
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: I actually hardly ever see the early 90s Exploders on the road anymore. I'm convinced most of them are gone. I see XJs constantly.
I see early '90s Exploders all the time.
Just to me the XJ offers too many compromises compared to a full sized van or any sized truck and not enough advantages to a station wagon which can tow for it to be the "answer".
K&N FIPK, MAgnaflow catback but no tune yet. I HAVE to get a tune.... I know we're not getting everyting out of this truck that we should be. just haven't plopped down the cash yet.
Bobzilla wrote: K&N FIPK, MAgnaflow catback but no tune yet. I HAVE to get a tune.... I know we're not getting everyting out of this truck that we should be. just haven't plopped down the cash yet.
No tune allowed until after the dragstrip throwdown. That's not fair. I'd like to see stock vs. stock but this is close enough.
I have an XJ. It handles really well for an SUV. I am 6'2", ~300 lbs, and I'm completely comfortable driving it. It has good road manners along with being capable of trudging through the wilderness if need be (with good A/Ts)
It totally suits my needs: 4WD for the Winter and occasional mud, enough power to get through most situations, easy to work on, enough space in back to pack my camping gear, and takes a beating and asks for more.
For as many 80s and 90s E36 M3 Chrysler products that were out there, the XJ Cherokee was the one thing they did right. I would get another one, but it would be one of the last couple year models.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:Bobzilla wrote: K&N FIPK, MAgnaflow catback but no tune yet. I HAVE to get a tune.... I know we're not getting everyting out of this truck that we should be. just haven't plopped down the cash yet.No tune allowed until after the dragstrip throwdown. That's not fair. I'd like to see stock vs. stock but this is close enough.
no prob, I think I gave up some bottom end torque with the 3" ID Mandrel bent exhaust.
Also everytime I see XJ written I get all excited and think we are talk about Jaguar XJs and then I find out we mean Jeeps and I go 
You'll need to log in to post.
