[duckduke]

Thought I would make all (most) JK owners feel really great about their 3.8L.

A friend of mine had a 75/76 Jeep Renegade CJ-5 with an 8 cyl. He bought it new and I was in college at the time driving a 1970 Mustang and swore that a Jeep would be my first new vehicle purchase.

It was.

In 1985 I bought a Jeep Cherokee (XJ) Pioneer. It had the 2.8L V6 GM engine. I drove the auto which seemed somewhat sluggish, but when I drove the stick (5 spd w/ OD) it was much quicker. I settled on the stick and got a number of options, power door locks, sunroof, roof rack, trailer tow pkg, etc. Sticker ended up around $18,xxx and I paid about $15,xxx. I sold it in 1993 with the original motor and transmission for $1,500 (the transmission had died).

I drove this XJ for over 300,000 miles and kept a log of every tank of gas. In the first 10,000 - 20,000 miles I averaged 18-19 miles per gallon. Somewhere in that period my MPG improved and for the remainder of the life of the vehicle, I averaged 20-21 MPG.

I used the vehicle as a daily driver and did some offroading mainly hunting related. I pretty much drove it stock except for tires (size and traction). I hauled countless loads, many overloads, etc. The engine and overall performance always seemed to put out as good or better than expected.

Most people did not think much of the 2.8L GM but it always met or exceeded my expectations in fuel economy and performance. I pretty much drove the heck out of it and thought it was pretty enjoyable to drive with the stick. I usually far exceeded the speed limits everywhere I drove except when trailering but it always pulled the load with no problems.

I could tell lots of stories..............but........

Out of curiosity, I just checked in the "Cherokee" forum on the engine specks.......believe it or not:

GM 2.8L V6 - 115 hp @ 4800 rpm, 145 ft lb @ 2400 rpm - used in 84-86


I am totally amazed that I did what I did with my XJ with this engine. It is almost unbelievable.

I've been reading all the threads/posts concerning the JK 3.8L as I am planning a purchase in the near future. I can only say..................... for myself.......... I don't think that I will be disappointed.

I guess I pretty well dated myself

[Prot]

For all the threads complaining about the JK's lack of power, I was really surprised when I finally got my mine. It's an automatic and of course has the 4.10 gears. It's a Sahara so it had 18" wheels on 32" tires. It actually seemed sort of peppy. It certainly felt like it had better acceleration than my F150 which had a 4.2L V6 and 3.73 gears. I changed the wheels and tires on it. I went with 17" wheels and 315/70-17 BF Goodrich all terrains (basically 35"). I took a performance hit with that and it isn't peppy anymore, but it is on par with my previous F150. In summary, gearing makes all the difference between an enjoyable vehicle and a dog. Later on, I probably will regear to 4.88 or possibly 5.13 to restore acceleration and pulling. I originally ordered a six speed but after waiting a ridiculous amount of time with no answers at all I went to a different dealer and bought this automatic and canceled my original order. From what I hearing about the 08's, the 4.10 gears will only be available on the Rubicon, so you may want to factor that into your purchase decision. On the other hand, if an X or Sahara is good for you except for the gears, get it and then regear because that is cheaper than getting a Rubicon.

[Podedwards]

My 2007 Sahara Unlimited has the 4:10 rear end and the six speed manual transmission & 32 inch tires. It has plenty of power and I frequently start in 2nd gear on a flat or down hill-somethimes up-hill and it handles it fine. Sixth gear is perfect for highway driving-keeps the rpm's low and mileage good.

[BlaineWasHere]

While I do enjoy the V8 in my WJ it is a Jeep not a sports car, the 3.8 is plenty to move the JK and with the rubicon 4:1 low I am sure it is plenty of power on the trail as well...

[woody_k]

Originally Posted by BlaineWasHere

While I do enjoy the V8 in my WJ it is a Jeep not a sports car, the 3.8 is plenty to move the JK and with the rubicon 4:1 low I am sure it is plenty of power on the trail as well...

I believe you hit the nail on the head. As a guy I always say "more power" but in reality the JK fits my needs. I mainly ride a motorcycle but need a vehicle for those bad weather days and thise days when I need to take more stuff to work than will fit in my backpack on the back of the bike. I also wanted something I could go off roadf with. The JK just fit the bill. Sure I could have gone all out with mods or a Rubicon etc...just didn't need to.

If the 3.8 isn't enough power for you, then don't get it. There are plenty of other things out there that will fit what you want.

[T-man]

duckduke,

It's nice to hear and see the improvements in engine efficiency over the generations. The JK's engine is about 60 pounds lighter than the TJ's engine, but creates more horsepower and torque, albeit in a different power band. The JK is less torquey in the lower gears (but I think plenty enough) comparitivly and maintains more torque and horsepower over the mid to upper RPMs which may seem smoother.

I don't know how this compares to the CJ-5, but I think you'll be happy -- all over again.

Enjoy! Welcome back -- and remember to post your pictures when you get your Jeep.

[Grimscale]

BlainWasHere is right. If you want super-power, build your own.
I bought the Jeep as a daily driver for bad weather, and to haul the bike to the Adirondacks for some rallies. I was initially worried that the 3.8 might have a problem on the hills up there.
Until I helped a buddy pick up his first motorcycle from down near Philly.

the Jeep pulled my 700lb trailer and his 500lb bike with no problems whatsoever.

[KrasnayaZnamya]

I just got back from a thousand mile road trip from Virginia to Ohio thru the mountains (well, hills, actually) and never had a problem at all with power. I'm very happy with the JK, even after 8000 miles I'm still feeling like the first day I got it!!