4cyl. that bad???? - Page 7 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Wrangler Forums > YJ Wrangler Technical Forum > 4cyl. that bad????

The Original 3/8" Ruffstuff Diff Cover!Building a Bumper?Introducing MONSTALINER™ UV Permanent DIY Roll On Bed Line

Reply
Unread 08-19-2011, 03:04 PM   #91
oldtime_ironman
Web Wheeler
1991 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: 14304 Niagara Falls, NY
Posts: 2,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by little_Jeep View Post
It's all about the OP having the information needed to make an informed decision about what is best for him.
True. Just yesterday I told another new guy to get the 4.0 because he needs to haul trailers. Going back to the OP here, he was wondering if a 2.5 is OK for the occasional fire road or something on a weekend - very light wheeling. I said yeah a 2.5 is fine for that. He doesn't plan on going highway with it.

oldtime_ironman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2011, 03:09 PM   #92
Que89YJ
Web Wheeler
1989 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 14,566
I was joking LittleJeep. You made a good point about the dollar value difference between the 2 as well. You should pay less for the 2.5L. Kelly prices out at about $1000 didifference. I never would have thought the 2.5L was that much cheaper.
Que89YJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2011, 03:10 PM   #93
oldtime_ironman
Web Wheeler
1991 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: 14304 Niagara Falls, NY
Posts: 2,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdewit View Post
True. My 4L is used on mainly on the farm, hauling trailers with wood up and down, hunting season, snow plowing etc. Hard work, but never missed a beat. Would the 2.5L be able to do that? I doubt it very much. On the other hand, as a DD, the 2.5L is perfect. Sure, you have to switch between 4 and 5th gear now and then, but other then that, no complaints.
No way would I plow a 2.5 - that's just insane. a 4L is better for that. But believe it or not, I help my buddy clear some land with my 2.5 but I sure don't do that very often.
oldtime_ironman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2011, 04:18 PM   #94
jvallery
Registered User
1992 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Posts: 142
Just to add in my $0.02. I have had my YJ for about 11 years now and it has the 2.5l 4cyl. I been generally happy with it however the biggest downside is of course the limited horsepower. The engine has started giving me some trouble recently though and instead of swapping it out with another 2.5l I decided it was time for my Jeep to go to the next level. I just picked up the 5.3l Gen III Chevy motor out of a Silverado that I plan to put in it shortly.

The problems I had with my 2.5l were mostly around highway driving. I'm not a speed demon by any means but it really sucks to be stuck in the right lane on the interstate all the time. If I need to pass a big rig I'm pretty much screwed as top speed is about 60 mph for me.

On the trail I never had any problems that were related to lack of power thanks to the super low gearing of the NP231 and the 4.11 diff.
jvallery is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2011, 06:32 AM   #95
Jeep4L1fe
Registered User
1995 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 201
I've had my 1994 Wrangler S 2.5L YJ since October of 1993. It's a great vehicle, but as mentioned countless times in this thread, it doesn't have a lot of power. There is a large hill near my home that if I don't keep on the throttle pretty hard the Jeep has a hard time making it up. I can't really comment on it's performance with a lift and tires as I'm running slightly larger that stock tires. I honestly think for a trail rig that isn't going to see the most extreme terrain, the 2.5L should be adequate. That's just my opinion.
Jeep4L1fe is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2011, 08:14 AM   #96
3jarrells
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3
Just to stir the pot.

60 hp stormed the beach at Normandy

Seriously I'm in the same boat as the OP. Power is a very objective feel between you and your right foot. My Frontier has the 3.3 gets 17 mpg and is gutless. So if I can get 17 out of the 4.0 I would be happy. I honestly, don't like to drive over 65 so the slow I'm ok with. I have plans of towing a bantam with a very light load of camping gear, so the 4cyl may be out for us.
3jarrells is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2011, 12:05 PM   #97
3jarrells
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3
I’ve been thinking about this a little more. I was curious to how the Wrangler compared to our Forester since they both have a 2.5

“2.5 liter DOHC EJ25D four-cylinder boxer engine from the Outback, making 165 hp (123 kW) at 5600 rpm and 162 lb•ft (220 N•m) of torque at 4000 rpm” from wiki

“2.5L I4 MPI (multi-port injection) - 130 hp @ 5250 rpm, 139 ft lb @ 3250 rpm - used in '91-'95” from JeepForum

I realize I am comparing apples and oranges here as far as the intended purpose of these vehicles. Though, our Forester has seen a lot of gravel and dirt in its 10 year career. The crazy thing is they weigh about the same and have the same rated towing capacity. We also consistently get 28 mpg. Could that all be in aerodynamics? The Forester is pretty much a box too. I’m not knocking Jeeps here. Don’t get the wrong idea. I had a CJ7 I loved, years ago, and I’m here to kick around the idea of getting a Wrangler to play with. We are running out of ground clearance and low gears in the Scooby!
3jarrells is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2011, 12:32 PM   #98
oldtime_ironman
Web Wheeler
1991 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: 14304 Niagara Falls, NY
Posts: 2,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3jarrells View Post
I’ve been thinking about this a little more. I was curious to how the Wrangler compared to our Forester since they both have a 2.5

“2.5 liter DOHC EJ25D four-cylinder boxer engine from the Outback, making 165 hp (123 kW) at 5600 rpm and 162 lb•ft (220 N•m) of torque at 4000 rpm” from wiki

“2.5L I4 MPI (multi-port injection) - 130 hp @ 5250 rpm, 139 ft lb @ 3250 rpm - used in '91-'95” from JeepForum

I realize I am comparing apples and oranges here as far as the intended purpose of these vehicles. Though, our Forester has seen a lot of gravel and dirt in its 10 year career. The crazy thing is they weigh about the same and have the same rated towing capacity. We also consistently get 28 mpg. Could that all be in aerodynamics? The Forester is pretty much a box too. I’m not knocking Jeeps here. Don’t get the wrong idea. I had a CJ7 I loved, years ago, and I’m here to kick around the idea of getting a Wrangler to play with. We are running out of ground clearance and low gears in the Scooby!
There are a few differences which explain it. Yes aerodynamics is one thing. The other thing is the Subaru was designed for performance and fuel economy. The jeep wasn't - it was designed to be a tractor, using as many existing off-the-shelf- parts as possible. One key area is the cylinder head. The jeep head design dates clear back to the 1950's in its general principles and it shares a lot in common with tractor and towing engines. Another thing is that Subaru used much more advanced manufacturing, with precision and CNC machines etc.

On the other hand, guess which one is easier for Joe Average to work on? Yep, the Jeep. Its simple like a lawnmower, and you can get parts for them anywhere quite literally.
oldtime_ironman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.