I'm a future first time jeep owner. I am (supposedly) getting a 2000 grand Cherokee 4.0 with 160,000 miles on it from a relative(they have 2 other vehicles). I wanted a smaller 4x4 to plow my driveway and clean off a pond for our bikes. I aquired a 7'6" light plow for this. The jeep is loaded with new rocker panels installed the rest of the undercarraige is ok. The tranny was done years ago . u-joints all that is good and it's being sold saftied. It has an issue with not recognizing the the key to start it and the heater fan is acting up. Both are random and will work just can be a pain in the *** if they act up at the wrong time. The vehicle is also 6 hours away and has never been e-tested. In Southern Ontario that can be a royal pain in the a$$ for a car newer than 98.
Just recently a 95 grand cherokee 5.2 laredo came up for sale locally(around corner). Same mileage and is a southern truck and rarely driven the last 4 years. I'm going to look at it tomorrow when you do a walk around it's mint but I'll slide under it tomorrow. If the money is similar what would be the better vehicle for me. This vehicle will probably never be used for real off roading. I'll be surprised if it goes camping because I have a p/u to drive in the summer. I might pull a 6x12 trailer occasionally. Thanks for any thoughts on this.
Just recently a 95 grand cherokee 5.2 laredo came up for sale locally(around corner). Same mileage and is a southern truck and rarely driven the last 4 years. I'm going to look at it tomorrow when you do a walk around it's mint but I'll slide under it tomorrow. If the money is similar what would be the better vehicle for me. This vehicle will probably never be used for real off roading. I'll be surprised if it goes camping because I have a p/u to drive in the summer. I might pull a 6x12 trailer occasionally. Thanks for any thoughts on this.
Senior Member
Neither will be good for plowing. The plow will destroy the unibody. Id use the pickup for plowing
Member
Quote:
I have no advice to offer on the plow. But just out of curiosity, would frame stiffeners help at all? I know they're not the bee's knees on a DD because it affects the way the Jeep is designed to crumble in a collision to protect the driver.Originally Posted by dnuccio
Neither will be good for plowing. The plow will destroy the unibody. Id use the pickup for plowing
CF Veteran
I would agree that a vehicle with an actual frame is a better platform for a plow.
My p/u is a summer 2 wheel drive. I'm not worried about plowing with it. If it plows 10 times over the winter I'll be surprised. As I said it's a light plow and I plan to be careful with it. I'm wondering more about fuel mileage , driveline issues and general quality levels between the two body styles. I have a soft spot for the the 5.2 only because I had a 94 5.2 dakota p/u that consistently got over 20mpg but it sounds like the six may be a tougher engine with high mileage than the 5.2.
CF Veteran
Both engines are equal in terms of reliability. The fuel mileage is about the same too.
Old fart with a wrench
I'm with Busted on this. Either GC has a "frame" capable of supporting a plow but the 95 is a lot stronger than the 2000. Also, think about the weight on the front end. Even my Chevy K10's front leaf springs wound up with a reverse curve after 1 year plowing. My uncle used a wrangler CJ7 and had to put weight in the back to make it turn well.
As far as a DD is concerned, I owned a 97 and now own a 2000, both with the 4.0. I was a lot more confident driving the ZJ (97) off road than the WJ (2000). The WJ seems to be more of a family street machine than the WJ. They both are very good in snow.
I can just imagine you hitting a rock or tree stump with the plow and bending your jeep.
As far as a DD is concerned, I owned a 97 and now own a 2000, both with the 4.0. I was a lot more confident driving the ZJ (97) off road than the WJ (2000). The WJ seems to be more of a family street machine than the WJ. They both are very good in snow.
I can just imagine you hitting a rock or tree stump with the plow and bending your jeep.
Senior Member
5.2 is just as reliable as the 4.0 if its maintained. definitely dont count on 20 mpg though. i average around 12 in my 5.2 ZJ. a 4.0 might get 2 mpg better, but IMO its underpowered for the grand cherokee platform.
Went and looked at the 95 tonight. Beautiful truck no rust that I could see anywhere and everything works. He's not 100% sure he selling it but says he'll contact me if he decides to. He says he gets about 16 mpg canadian which would be close to your numbers. He said it's full time four wheel drive with only a high and low range. I'm pretty new to jeeps so is that right? I thought it would have a disconnect/neutral in the transfer case or on the front axle. I thought the 2000 did or are they all like that.Its not a deal breaker I'm just curious.
CF Veteran
It has the NP249 transfercase, 4hi-N-4Lo, there is no 2wd. It's not the best case out there and it does have issues with the viscous coupler.
Senior Member
Quote:
aside from the VC, its not a bad case. it is actually the strongest of the 3 cases available in the ZJ. Originally Posted by Bustedback
It's not the best case out there and it does have issues with the viscous coupler.
that said, i am running a 242 in my rig
CF Veteran
Do some figure eights in a parking lot, if you feel any binding or weirdness, or hear strange noises, you may need a VC.
CF Veteran
Between the two the older one that has no rust would be better,And like said plowing is hard on anything find a cheap older 4x4 pickup to plow with.