Cherokee Chat General non-tech Cherokee chat
XJ/MJ/ZJ/WJ

2000 cherokee vs 2015 Wrangler Unlimited

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 01:24 AM
  #16  
andrewmp6's Avatar
CF Veteran
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,014
Likes: 17
From: Louisville,KY
Model: Cherokee
Default

The fastest xj numbers i found is 1996 Jeep Cherokee Sport 0-60 mph 8.2 Quarter mile 16.2 and was probably 2wd.And the slowest 1996 Jeep Cherokee SE 0-60 mph 10.5 Quarter mile 17.5.On the jk i found 2013 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon (Auto) 0-60 mph 7.7 Quarter Mile 16.1 and 2012 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon Xplore (Auto) 0-60 mph 8.7 Quarter Mile 16.6
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 07:20 AM
  #17  
helmut's Avatar
CF Veteran
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,385
Likes: 1
From: Frankfort IL
Year: 2000
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
Default

One of the most significant reasons your butt dyno was off is that an xj is a lot louder, more uncomfortable and just more "theatrical". So it seems like your going fast when really your really almost catching up to the newest minivan or a Prius. Wrangler seems slower because your suppose to be more cozy and separated from the elements while driving it. Just like old muscle cars that are slower then a modernday golf gti. But if you take a ride in both it feels the other way around

Last edited by helmut; Nov 19, 2014 at 07:25 AM.
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 07:45 AM
  #18  
madmanmarty's Avatar
CF Veteran
 
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,052
Likes: 1
From: PA
Year: 1994
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 HO
Default

Helmut makes a great point.
Ive driven both, & the wrangler is quieter, faster with better on & off-road manners. Im just not going to spend $40k for one.
Also remember you need to take into account whether each truck was modified in any way (suspension, engine, interior).
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 07:52 AM
  #19  
cherokee001's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
From: Central NJ
Year: 2000
Model: Cherokee
Default

i guess my butt dyno must be off. I floored the Wrangler and it felt like it just wasn't moving. It was a 6sp so i'm curious if the autos are quicker due to gearing. I wasn't looking for a sports car, but i was looking for a noticeable improvement over my XJ. Quite possibly the torque in my XJ is what enthuses me and the wrangler is missing low end torque. However the Wrangler is much louder than my XJ by a lot. My ears work fine (I think) and I was surprised to hear the engine as much as I did. I think i need to take an auto wrangler out to feel the difference.
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 08:04 AM
  #20  
helmut's Avatar
CF Veteran
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,385
Likes: 1
From: Frankfort IL
Year: 2000
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
Default

Originally Posted by cherokee001
i guess my butt dyno must be off. I floored the Wrangler and it felt like it just wasn't moving. It was a 6sp so i'm curious if the autos are quicker due to gearing. I wasn't looking for a sports car, but i was looking for a noticeable improvement over my XJ. Quite possibly the torque in my XJ is what enthuses me and the wrangler is missing low end torque. However the Wrangler is much louder than my XJ by a lot. My ears work fine (I think) and I was surprised to hear the engine as much as I did. I think i need to take an auto wrangler out to feel the difference.
I didn't think the wrangler was louder . but then again my xj is far from pristine so everything is quieter then that. And by loud I didn't mean the engine noise. I meant the wind noise and a hundred other noises on mine. The engine itself is actually surprisingly quiet now that I think about it. Lol
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 05:42 PM
  #21  
GooseJeep's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
From: LONG ISLAND
Year: 1991
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L I6
Default

I almost bought a 2014 Wrangler Rubicon, ALMOST. I backed off because of a few reasons

1.) The price, even though I talked them down, I felt I was paying too much for something I sort of already had

2.)The shape, Im not a fan of the JK look.. unless its got the slant top..then it reminds me of the cherokee <3

3.)Wouldnt be able to modify it as much as I want due to high payments

I did love the interior though, and everything about the JK, the pick up speed, the suspension, etc etc.

If I can have all of that in my XJ..I would never need to buy a car again.

EDIT: Also the Wrangler is DEFINITELY NOT Louder than the XJ.
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 07:57 PM
  #22  
s346k's Avatar
CF Veteran
Premium Member
10 Year Member
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,282
Likes: 18
From: central IN
Year: 1997
Engine: 4.0
Default

Originally Posted by black label
2001 XJ 0-60 9.1 seconds.
I have a video of my stock xj doing 0-60 in what appears to be about 5.5 seconds. I have no idea how they timed that one to 9+. and I'd put it up against any jk, even after the lift and larger tires.

Last edited by s346k; Nov 19, 2014 at 08:01 PM.
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 09:41 PM
  #23  
black label's Avatar
Seasoned Member
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Year: 1993
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 Litre
Default

Originally Posted by s346k
I have a video of my stock xj doing 0-60 in what appears to be about 5.5 seconds. I have no idea how they timed that one to 9+. and I'd put it up against any jk, even after the lift and larger tires.
The numbers I posted were manufacturer claims. I seriously doubt your XJ does 0-60 as fast as a 2014 base model porsche boxster.

Think about the logistics of your claim. You're saying your minimum of 13 year old SUV accelerates as quickly as a 2014 sports car that has a top speed of 164 mph.

No way a stock XJ is even close to 5.5 seconds. A 1969 COPO camaro (COPO 9560) had an aluminum block 427, 500hp, 450 ft/lbs of torque and did 0-60 in 5.3.

No way a stock XJ does it in less than 8. It's not possible without dropping it out of an airplane.
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 09:56 PM
  #24  
MonacaYankee's Avatar
CF Veteran
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,441
Likes: 9
From: Georgia
Year: 99 94
Model: Cherokee (XJ)
Engine: I6
Default

Originally Posted by black label
The numbers I posted were manufacturer claims. I seriously doubt your XJ does 0-60 as fast as a 2014 base model porsche boxster. Think about the logistics of your claim. You're saying your minimum of 13 year old SUV accelerates as quickly as a 2014 sports car that has a top speed of 164 mph. No way a stock XJ is even close to 5.5 seconds. A 1969 COPO camaro (COPO 9560) had an aluminum block 427, 500hp, 450 ft/lbs of torque and did 0-60 in 5.3. No way a stock XJ does it in less than 8. It's not possible without dropping it out of an airplane.
I think he forgot a 1 in front of the 5. Xjs are not fast at all.
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 10:28 PM
  #25  
crabmushrooms5's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
From: Fayetteville, NC
Year: 1996
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
Default

Turbo XJ has a turbo XJ right? And what about all those super charged XJs on YouTube? Choose the XJ

Edit: drove a jku one time, like the low end torque xj better. Jku had lift 35s & 6spd. Felt like a car though

Last edited by crabmushrooms5; Nov 19, 2014 at 11:01 PM.
Reply
Old Nov 19, 2014 | 10:44 PM
  #26  
black label's Avatar
Seasoned Member
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Year: 1993
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 Litre
Default

Originally Posted by crabmushrooms5
Turbo XJ has a turbo XJ right? And what about all those super charged XJs on YouTube? Choose the XJ
With enough money and will power anything is possible. The original claim was that a stock XJ was faster than a new wrangler.

I'm guessing the turbo'd and supercharged xj's out there are probably still geared more for off road prowess than track/street performance.
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2014 | 06:55 AM
  #27  
salad's Avatar
Herp Derp Jerp
Premium Member
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 18,251
Likes: 17
From: Parham, ON
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L OBD-II
Default

Originally Posted by black label
The wrangler makes 285hp at 6400 rpms, if you aren't getting to at least 4000-5500 rpms before shifting you are shifting too soon to get the power.
What the **** is the point of that in a Jeep? Rock bouncers and mud racing?

Isn't the JK slated to get the little diesel the half-ton Ram just got? Or was that all rumour?
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2014 | 03:27 PM
  #28  
black label's Avatar
Seasoned Member
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Year: 1993
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 Litre
Default

Originally Posted by salad
What the **** is the point of that in a Jeep? Rock bouncers and mud racing? Isn't the JK slated to get the little diesel the half-ton Ram just got? Or was that all rumour?
Not once have I said it's a "good thing" I've gone as far to say the 4.0 and an XJ's stock gearing are probably better off road.

All I'm saying is it's faster.

I'm not sure how the new wrangler 6 speed manual is geared but I'm guessing it's more to keep the cafe regulators happy than the off road enthusiasts.

Adding a diesel would probably help keep both sides happy. Better fuel economy for cafe, gobs of low end torque for off roaders.
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2014 | 04:37 PM
  #29  
salad's Avatar
Herp Derp Jerp
Premium Member
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 18,251
Likes: 17
From: Parham, ON
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L OBD-II
Default

Originally Posted by black label
Not once have I said it's a "good thing"
I didn't imply that you did lol.
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2014 | 04:54 PM
  #30  
s346k's Avatar
CF Veteran
Premium Member
10 Year Member
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,282
Likes: 18
From: central IN
Year: 1997
Engine: 4.0
Default


idk you time it lol
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:10 AM.