So thinkin of buying a jeep wrangler - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 10-11-2012, 07:39 PM   #1
Registered Member
 
VetteOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,546
Country: United States
So thinkin of buying a jeep wrangler

Yea i know im lookin at like 20mpg but for as little as i would drive it i dont mind.

Im looking strictly at the 04-06 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited (10" longer wheelbase still 2 door version of the smaller wrangler that was from like the 80's to 2006 - not that new 4 door wide as all getout POS)

They all came with the 4.0 and im looking for a manual version. They had a 5 speed NV3550 for the 2004 year only and a 6 speed NSG370 for 05-06. Im wondering if one has a higher end gear than the other and why they went to a 6 speed.

Has anyone on here owned or owning a 97+ jeep wrangler with the 4.0 straight 6 with a manual trans? How do they do MPG wise? EPA rates them at 13/17 but they cant be that bad in the real world if driven right correct? My 4.3 blazer gets like 18-19 on a good day driving around where im at so im not too far off on it.

Also the 5 speed jeep epa says 14/18... Im wondering if 1st gear in the 05-06 is rediculously low for climing up trees haha. meaning i could always start off in 2nd or somehting.
__________________

VetteOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 03:39 AM   #2
Registered Member
 
theholycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,624
Country: United States
Send a message via ICQ to theholycow Send a message via AIM to theholycow Send a message via MSN to theholycow Send a message via Yahoo to theholycow
I've heard from plenty of happy Wrangler drivers, but two things they NEVER say are that it gets more than 12mpg and that it's comfortable. If anybody can beat the EPA estimate it'd be one of us but based on all reports I've heard I wouldn't plan on 20mpg and I wouldn't compare them to a 4.3 Blazer.

Have you tried googling for the gear ratios in the rear ends and transmissions? Not that I'm sure how much taller gears could help that particular vehicle...
__________________

__________________
This sig may return, some day.
theholycow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 03:58 AM   #3
Registered Member
 
IndyFetch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 627
Country: United States
Location: Indianapolis
A few comments on a Wrangler: Very impractical, uncomfortable interior. Very noisy at speed, even with the optional hard top. Gear whine, engine noise, etc. Terrible mileage. I know several people with them, and even my neighbor with a 4-cylinder, 5-speed cannot get better than 17 mpg.

But oh so much fun...
IndyFetch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 12:59 PM   #4
Registered Member
 
VetteOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,546
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fetch View Post
A few comments on a Wrangler: Very impractical, uncomfortable interior. Very noisy at speed, even with the optional hard top. Gear whine, engine noise, etc. Terrible mileage. I know several people with them, and even my neighbor with a 4-cylinder, 5-speed cannot get better than 17 mpg.

But oh so much fun...
Impractical? oh yea Uncomfy interior? Im not sure i test drove an 04 with an auto and felt pretty comfy in it. It had a bit of noise at speed but i gave that to the aftermarket way to wide of tires. it wasnt any louder than my chevette or s10. Now compared to a new car - yea it has alot. I didnt hear much gear whine but i drove an auto, engine noise was prevalent but i could tolerate that. EPA rates the 04-06 ones about what my blazer gets.

But oh yes ive ridden in a few and boy are they fun. Nothing beats no roof or doors also easy as hell to get to anything in/on the engine
VetteOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 03:41 PM   #5
Registered Member
 
IndyFetch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 627
Country: United States
Location: Indianapolis
By impractical, I mean that the rear seat is short and narrow and it has very little cargo space with the seat up. I drive a del Sol, which is also somewhat impractical (but it gets me 40+ mpg). I found the Wrangler to be uncomfortable. I have ridden in a few and driven one, could not get comfortable in the seat. The ride was bouncy and the ergonomics were not up to my standards. Little things like the outdated switchgear. I have not been in an Unlimited. I know that will add to the rear set room and cargo space. I forgot to take that into account.
IndyFetch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 09:21 PM   #6
Registered Member
 
VetteOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,546
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fetch View Post
By impractical, I mean that the rear seat is short and narrow and it has very little cargo space with the seat up. I drive a del Sol, which is also somewhat impractical (but it gets me 40+ mpg). I found the Wrangler to be uncomfortable. I have ridden in a few and driven one, could not get comfortable in the seat. The ride was bouncy and the ergonomics were not up to my standards. Little things like the outdated switchgear. I have not been in an Unlimited. I know that will add to the rear set room and cargo space. I forgot to take that into account.
yea i test drove a standard ol 2003 wrangler x today (had the 4.0 and 5 speed) i loved the trans and way it handled, gear changes were like butter clutch was a tad firm but not as bad as my blazer. It felt like a cable clutch where you press down with some force, get past the hard point with the pressure plate springs and takes alot less force to hold it to the floor. Pretty forgiving too. Pretty good get up and go and i wasnt really hard on it.

ride was insanely rough but it had some aftermarket rims and tires on it. I have yet to be in one with standard rims and tires... once we got on smooth pavement it was exactly like my truck and chevette - just floated along.

I want to try an unlimited on some rough roads and see if it is less bumpy due to a different weight distribution and wheelbase.

i got comfortable in it relatively quick. one thing i noticed is im relatively tall and the 3 ive sat in you seem like your looking out the windshield rather low...first one i accounted for a really worn out seat but thier all about the same...but yea the standard wranglers have nearly no leg room in the back and NO cargo area. Unlimiteds have maybe a 3x4x5 foot cargo area with the rear seat in its normal position. rear legroom is MUCH better in the unlimited. with the rear seat folded up i have nearly 5x4 x5 cargo area.

BUT to be fair, ill never be riding in the back of MY jeep haha

yea switches and such are rather dated but hey id rather have robust and slightly splashproof stuff than fancy knobs and switches.
VetteOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 06:51 AM   #7
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 256
Country: United States
A Jeep is a different animal, being built for off-road capabilities at the expense of fuel economy. They will get you anywhere and back (usually-but you can get anything stuck). The pre-07 models with the 4.0 ride well for what they are (it's not a car)

The 07+ has more room inside that the older ones. Comfortable seat and rides well on the highway and gets 18-19 highway lifted with 35's so it's not stock. Got it high-centered once and had to winch it off. Bought new with 118,000 miles on it now and it never broke down.

When looking at them, get a "build sheet" either from the dealer or on-line to see what options were in it when it left the factory. They are all different and it depends what you want.

Fun vehicles.
__________________
Dave
GasSavers_GasUser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 07:01 AM   #8
Site Team
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 317
Country: United States
Location: Dallas, Tx
I love Jeep Wranglers, iconic and amazing off-road vehicles. I think most people buy them for the the fun factor (take the top and doors off) not for the MPG or practicable use.

More data on MPG at Fuelly:
Jeep Wrangler MPG Reports | Fuelly
andyrobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 04:45 PM   #9
Registered Member
 
VetteOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,546
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by GasUser View Post
A Jeep is a different animal, being built for off-road capabilities at the expense of fuel economy. They will get you anywhere and back (usually-but you can get anything stuck). The pre-07 models with the 4.0 ride well for what they are (it's not a car)

The 07+ has more room inside that the older ones. Comfortable seat and rides well on the highway and gets 18-19 highway lifted with 35's so it's not stock. Got it high-centered once and had to winch it off. Bought new with 118,000 miles on it now and it never broke down.

When looking at them, get a "build sheet" either from the dealer or on-line to see what options were in it when it left the factory. They are all different and it depends what you want.

Fun vehicles.
yea im not a fan at all on the new ones - too much suv like and i feel they lost thier simplistic jeep heritage

i test drove another an 05 jeep wrangler unlimited. this one had stock tires and suspension and everything. rode just as good as my blazer does (similar in nearly all dimensions. the others someone musta put stiff shocks or something on it along with the wider tires so it rode like crap. But stock, they ride about how i was expecting them to ride.

umiliteds (LJ's) vs standard wrangler (TJ's) gives the rear seat 2" inches of knee space (doesnt sound like much but a world of difference) and about 10" inches of cargo space. (about as much space behind the rear seat as an extended cab truck) unlike the standard TJ's that have about as much space as a regular cab truck does behind the seat haha.

Andy:

Neat website you linked but i feel there's too many variables. alot of those jeeps have non factory tires - whos to say they recalibrated their spedo? and since thier toys are some of them including thier miles off roading?

neat website tho and gives a general idea. I saw how most of them say like 52% city driving so yea i expect like 16 mpg haha
VetteOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 05:53 PM   #10
Registered Member
 
VetteOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,546
Country: United States
FYI:
Gear Ratios for the 6 speed manual

1st 4.459
2nd 2.614
3rd 1.723
4th 1.000
5th 0.838
Reverse 4.06
Axle Ratio 3.73 - 4.0L
__________________

VetteOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best Low Rolling Resistance tire AlainB7 Hypermiling 16 07-20-2009 08:56 PM
For Sale- 2001 Honda Insight- 79.9 Lifetime MPG! whychug For Sale 5 06-23-2009 06:09 PM
air wings for motorcycle mikehallbackhoe Aerodynamics 0 05-15-2009 09:46 AM
Using EFIE with 5-wire 02 sensor vfentress1 HHO and Hydrogen 0 04-19-2009 03:08 PM
Shorten the recent threads on the home page zpiloto Fuelly Web Support and Community News 0 08-02-2006 04:11 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.