looking into a 5.9L limited - Page 2 - 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 Grand Cherokee & Commander Forums > ZJ Grand Cherokee Forum > looking into a 5.9L limited

Labor Day Sale!FS: 2007-2013 Jeep Wrangler "HALO" Angel Eye KitFS: Wranger BRIGHT License Plate LED! Just $3! Great value

Reply
Unread 10-04-2009, 10:45 AM   #16
5.9 ANDY
zj tractor
 
5.9 ANDY's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: southern afganistan
Posts: 5,228
i love my 5.9.

__________________
hard working private first class in the United States Marine Corps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shift_grind View Post
It's threads like this that make me wonder why people lift there jeeps
its comments like this that make me wonder why some people are jerks.

build thread:http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f197/...ndard-1056365/
5.9 ANDY is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-04-2009, 06:40 PM   #17
IslandManMitch
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inavacuum View Post
I don't think he was saying that is the better of the options, he was just pointing out that just because the VC is toast, doesn't mean the whole TC is bad.
Correct. Bad VC DOES NOT mean TC HAS TO BE REPLACED.
If the option is good, bad or indifferent is not the point. The point is that it is an option. Some people actually like their full-time 249. I have a hundred and thirty thousand mostly interstate miles on mine and is still fine. When it fails it will be a good time to do a TC swap.
IslandManMitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-04-2009, 06:59 PM   #18
chromedisguise
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by IslandManMitch View Post
Correct. Bad VC DOES NOT mean TC HAS TO BE REPLACED.
If the option is good, bad or indifferent is not the point. The point is that it is an option. Some people actually like their full-time 249. I have a hundred and thirty thousand mostly interstate miles on mine and is still fine. When it fails it will be a good time to do a TC swap.
I now I'm a newb to this whole thing, but what is better about the 242 vs the 249? And to verify, I have the 249 stock on my '98 5.9?
__________________
'98 Grand Cherokee 5.9
chromedisguise is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-04-2009, 07:45 PM   #19
-Shoey-
Registered User
2003 KJ Liberty 
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Harrisville, West Virginia
Posts: 1,672
242 has a 2wd option, while the 249 does not. Also as previously posted, the viscous coupler in the 249 goes bad easily.
__________________
2003 KJ Limited
USN Jeep Club #115
-Shoey- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-04-2009, 08:18 PM   #20
chromedisguise
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Shoey- View Post
242 has a 2wd option, while the 249 does not. Also as previously posted, the viscous coupler in the 249 goes bad easily.
By easily, do you mean it doesn't take much abuse? Or it doesn't take much mileage? I ask because I used to have a 1994 ZJ and I'm not sure if it had the 249 but I do know it was full time 4WD and it had 250,000 with no VC problems I was aware of.
__________________
'98 Grand Cherokee 5.9
chromedisguise is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-05-2009, 04:28 AM   #21
comptiger5000
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Stamford, CT / Rochester, NY
Posts: 4,295
It depends on how it was driven, how often it spun tires in snow, etc. If it was ever run with differently worn tires. If well cared for and not abused, I can believe 250,000 out of one. For an average owner, 100,000 to 150,000 is more common. Some fail earlier. Luck plays in here as well.
comptiger5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-05-2009, 06:40 AM   #22
Zwildm30
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: chattanooga TN.
Posts: 41
My 249 has 204k miles on the clock and still doesnt bind. Guess it all depends on alot of variables.
__________________
1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee 5.9 Limited

http://www.proshooter.org/cgi/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi
Zwildm30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-05-2009, 08:07 AM   #23
IslandManMitch
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 107
The 249 is not a weak TC. I have pulled a 18' tandem trailer loaded with a tractor that weighs in just under 6,000# total load for the past 3 years for long distances has to prove something. Granted the only time I offroad is during hunting season. In Florida that is a little mud and a lot of deep sand. I run stock tires. The fact that the VC will fail one day is not really a problem. The cost of a replacement VC is the problem to me. When mine dies I will look into changing to a non VC TC. But then again trying to find a different TC, trying to match up drive shafts and joint connections, I may go back to a simple VC replacement. This one has over 130,000 and still works fine. I may not live long enough to wear out another one?
IslandManMitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-05-2009, 01:47 PM   #24
chromedisguise
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by comptiger5000 View Post
It depends on how it was driven, how often it spun tires in snow, etc. If it was ever run with differently worn tires. If well cared for and not abused, I can believe 250,000 out of one. For an average owner, 100,000 to 150,000 is more common. Some fail earlier. Luck plays in here as well.
I know whichever one was on my old '94 ZJ was rock solid because I abused the heck out of that Jeep. I regret not taking care of her, ever. Let's just say that in the time I owned her (nearly 2 years), I probably changed the oil once? Twice maybe? lol
__________________
'98 Grand Cherokee 5.9
chromedisguise 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.