The Jeep Cherokee is leaving production after 2023, after Stellantis reduced the vehicle’s trim levels to two before idling the Belvidere assembly plant in Illinois. The current-gen Cherokee has been on the market for about a decade, so it makes sense for it to finally bow out, especially as Stellantis focuses on electrification. Sad news, some say; our friends over at The Drive wrote the headline “” and Road & Track’s headline states” Jeep Cherokee Axed After Nearly 50 Years.” It all sounds so tragic until you realize that actually, the Jeep Cherokee isn’t just now dying after half a century — it’s been dead since 2001.
I’m not going to get all sentimental like our friends at The Drive did with its lede:
The Jeep Cherokee has been discontinued after 49 years in production, a Jeep official confirmed to The Drive. It brings to an end an SUV that not only made Jeep what it is today but also changed automobiles forever…
The article then goes into the Cherokee’s history, mentioning that it started off as a body-on-frame machine on the Wagoneer’s “SJ” platform (which was developed in the early 1960s), then for the 1984 model year became the unibody “XJ” that everyone knows and loves before morphing into a “KJ” with independent front suspension, then the boxy KK, then the current Fiat-based “KL” with fully independent suspension.
All of it’s true and well-written, but let’s all be honest with ourselves: Nobody is mourning the death of the Jeep Cherokee in 2023. Nobody.
View this post on Instagram
Some people mourned the Cherokee when it went unibody in 1984, but I’d say the majority of those folks eventually came around to the “downsized” Cherokee, especially after the mighty 4.0-liter AMC inline-six entered the fray in 1987.
The Cherokee XJ improved in almost every way over its predecessor (my 1979 Jeep Cherokee is shown in the Instagram clip above), without really sacrificing much. The smaller, boxier Jeep didn’t look as cool in some people’s eyes, but it was more powerful, quicker, more efficient, more capable off-road, quieter, better-riding, better handling, and on and on. The XJ made its SJ predecessor look downright prehistoric, and if you still don’t believe me, read my article “It’s Incredible How Big Of A Quantum Leap The Cherokee Cherokee XJ Was Over Its SJ Predecessor“:
In my story, I quote Patrick Foster, author of Jeep: The History of America’s Greatest Vehicle, who wrote about the Cherokee:
“Everything about [XJs] was new, and they introduced more new technology to the SUV market than any vehicle before or since,” he goes on. The new XJ Jeep (which came in “Wagoneer” trim) was 1,200 pounds lighter, 21 inches shorter, six inches narrower and four inches lower than the Cherokee SJ it replaced, and yet—thanks to unibody construction—the XJ kept 90 percent of its predecessor’s interior volume.
The XJ was an absolute masterpiece.
When it left, it was replaced by a vehicle that wasn’t nearly as compelling overall, which is why, if we’re being honest with ourselves, it was 2001 when everyone capable of mourning the Jeep Cherokee shed their tears. This was the final model year of the XJ, and the beginning of KJ Liberty production (The Liberty continued the Cherokee name in other markets).
The new Cherokee (called Liberty in the U.S.) did improve upon the XJ’s ride, on-road handling, NVH, and interior volume, but whereas its predecessor was revolutionary and stood out among its peers, the new Cherokee didn’t bring that much more to the table, and blended in with its competitive set. Here’s what Patrick Foster writes about the KJ Liberty in his book:
“At least one valid complaint could be made about the Liberty. Unlike the Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, or the original Wagoneer, Liberty didn’t introduce any new innovations to the market, and its style, while pleasant enough, didn’t set any standard either.”
The biggest controversy about the KJ when it debuted was its styling; it looks happy and dorky, not chiseled and tough like its forebear. While I personally have come around to the KJ’s looks — particularly in the rear since I love rear-mounted tire carriers — the biggest issues I have with the KJ are mechanical. Its powertrain, drivetrain, and suspension are vastly inferior to that of the XJ.
Forget the four-cylinders, because XJ and KJ owners didn’t buy them; let’s compare the volume-engines: The Jeep XJ’s 4.0-liter straight six and the Jeep Liberty’s 3.7-liter V6. They both produce the same amount of torque, while the Liberty’s V6 cranks out about 20 more horsepower at 210:
But the Liberty KJ weighed about 300-400 pounds more than a similarly-equipped XJ, and though power was up, that power delta really only shows itself towards the top of the rev range. Down low — where the engine spends most of its time — the 4.0 made as much torque (and thus power) as the 3.7. Zero to 60 mph acceleration tests by major automotive publications indicate that the Liberty KJ was actually slower than its XJ predecessor.
View this post on Instagram
And in general, when you ask Jeep Liberty, Grand Cherokee, and Commander (the WK-generation Grand Cherokee and the XK Commander shared this base engine) owners what they think about that 3.7-liter V6, most will say “it’s okay.” It’s not known to be unreliable, but it’s also not a torquey, silky-smooth stalwart like the AMC inline-six. The V6 is know for being a bit louder, requiring a bit more maintenance, and a bit harder to work on. It’s an unremarkable internal combustion engine that never had a chance to be loved, because it had to go on stage after the 4.0-liter spent 15 years winning hearts.
It’s not just the AMC 4.0-liter straight-six that makes the boxy Cherokee more desirable from a mechanical standpoint, it’s also the fact that the mill was bolted to an unkillable Aisin-Warner AW4 four-speed auto; the KJ’s boring and slightly-less-reliable 3.7-liter V6 got hooked to an also-slightly-less-reliable Chrysler four-speed automatic (actually, the 45RFE and 545RFE were among the better of the typically-plagued Chrysler automatics; still, it was no AW4). And then there was the suspension.
The Jeep Cherokee XJ featured a solid front axle (shown in the bottom photo of the two above), which one could lift for $20 and a few hours worth of wrenching. The rear solid axle could be jacked up using junkyard leaf springs; this entire lift kit you see below cost me $120, and look at how beautifully it articulates:
The Jeep Liberty (shown in the top of that pair of pics) is not straightforward to lift, limiting its aftermarket potential. What’s more, it’s just not as robust:
There’s a reason why KJs never caught on in the aftermarket like XJs have, and why you rarely see them at off-road parks. Both XJs and KJs initially sold to suburbanites, and were driven around concrete jungles, taking kids to school, picking up groceries, and commuting to work. But when XJs got old and lost their value, they became the ultimate off-road platforms; when KJs started getting old, they became on-road beaters (with, of course, some exceptions; some folks do modify their KJs and take them off-road).
Anyway, I’ll admit that the later Jeep Liberty Renegades, particularly when equipped with the JK Wrangler’s NSG-370 six-speed manual, were pretty cool. And I like the idea of the diesels, too, even if I would never wat to maintain one.
I would absolutely pay $7,050 for this 100,000 mile example that sold on Bring a Trailer three years ago:
Still, the KJ Liberty/Cherokee wasn’t nearly as cool as the XJ, and you can see that when you look at message boards online; the community surrounding the KJ is tiny compared to that surrounding the XJ. Even smaller than both is the KK community:
The KK is the KJ’s replacement. It came out just as Chrysler entered bankruptcy around 2008. It was not a good car. Even 17 year-old-me at the Kansas City Auto Show knew that:
Just read this Car and Driver comparison of 2008 SUVs, and see how the Liberty KK ends up in dead last — ninth place!
The KK kept the same 210 horsepower 3.7-liter V6 as the KJ Liberty — a vehicle that was already underpowered compared to the XJ — and added more heft. In fact, a well-equipped 4×4 KK Liberty weighed over 4,400 pounds! It was inefficient, featured a poor-quality interior endemic to Daimler-era Chrysler products, had footwells that were oddly too small, and just generally underperformed compared to its competitive set.
Despite that, I actually think that, like the KJ from Bring a Trailer, a KK with a moderate lift like this one below owned by an Autopian reader could make for a decent budget daily-driven Jeep for moderate off-road use:
Despite my appreciation for the KK, it suffered from all the same issues as the KJ, but added weight and worse interior quality. On the plus side, when it debuted Jeep was offering a Lifetime Powertrain Warranty! (This actually became rather controversial):
Anyway, moving on, let’s look at the final iteration of the Jeep Cherokee, the KL:
The photo just above shows me 10 years ago at age 21 doing some off-road thermal testing on a Jeep Cherokee KL prototype. The vehicle did a solid job off-road thank to its decent approach and departure angles, but more importantly, thanks to its locking rear axle (developed by American Axle):
The problem with the Cherokee KL is that it’s hideous. Just downright hideous (it later received a refresh, though this did not get rid of its giant nose that jutted out ahead of the front axle):
What’s more, as decent as the Trailhawk trim was in Moab (non-Trailhawks are unimpressive off-road), it still couldn’t hold a candle to the original XJ when I put the two head-to-head at a Michigan off-road park:
And because the KL was the first Cherokee with fully independent suspension, lifting it even a little bit is borderline impossible.
The KL is more comfortable on-road than its predecessors, and it’s safer, but it’s basically a car on stilts with an okay 4×4 system, okay underbody protection, and short enough overhangs to be fairly decent off-road in stock form when in Trailhawk guise. It has very little aftermarket potential for modifications, and is far, far more complex than its predecessors, making for a questionable long-term ownership experience. In stock form, the Trailhawk is fairly fun off-road, but overall, the KL will go down in history as being unremarkable.
The KJ, KK, and KL all pale in comparison to the XJ, which revolutionized the off-road world, bringing unibody construction and true off-road capability to the masses (none of its successors could do what you see in the video below as smoothly and with as few/cheap modifications). It was beautiful, capable, easily modifiable, reliable, easy to work on, and at the time of its release, surprisingly comfortable. When it bowed out in 2001, the car world shed tears. Now it’s 2022, and the Jeep KL Cherokee is bowing out of the market, and — relative to that departure 22 years ago — nobody really cares.
(Some notes: In some ways, you could argue that the Grand Cherokee is the more authentic successor to the original Cherokee, and to the XJ. In fact, the first-gen Grand Cherokee “ZJ” was meant to replace the XJ. Also, it’s worth mentioning that Cherokee XJ production continued beyond 2001 in China. I’ll also mention that I think the Wrangler Unlimited is the true spiritual successor to the XJ. -DT).
I had the 2001 as my first car ever, well me and 3 siblings shared it.
I had the Liberty too right after it came out after graduating and getting my “first new car” to match a new job. Really liked it tbh, it did a lot of 12 hour trips up and down 95 in comfort.
I always told myself when I got older I’d buy a 2001 again and put leather seats, a nice system in it and it would be my forever car. That teal blue/green color they had, OG cement.
I guess I’m older now, but trying to find clean examples a few years ago for a decent price was tough. I dunno, my modern dream cars arent practical where I live, but a 2001 sure would be. Maybe its time to “live the dream”.
Story time over, get off my lawn and all that.
Great article DT- I’ve only had Wranglers and Cj’s but my 2 cents is that you see these things modded to high heaven at Mud parks here in TX- You see tons of SXS and a stray Samurai, but there’s always a few XJs, usually with their backs and fenders gone- I think if I could find one here unmolested, id buy it for my son to wrench on next year when he gets his license. I loved my old pre Wrangler Jeeps- easy to modify, easy to work on. I think the death of the XJ was a turning point for all jeeps- Prior to 2001 all jeeps were still cheaply moldable and easy to work on- after 2001- they made the Wrangler and the rest – became SUVs or Badge engineered crossovers……
Hey, the Lifetime Powertrain Warranty is the reason why I’m keeping my 2008 Grand Caravan. Fourteen years and 170,000 miles (plus one free transmission replacement) later, it’s still chugging along. Also, my wife wishes she could have her Patriot Blue 2000 Cherokee Classic Selec-Trac back.
A silly, irrational dislike I developed over the years – being behind a pre-facelift current gen Cherokee (before they moved the license plate up on the tailgate) at a stoplight – not because of their taillights being in my face, but because the sort of concave tailgate shape reflected the front of my car upside down. Dunno why, just something about it got bothersome to me for no real reason.
Wife and I were hunting for an SUV during the KK’s heyday (if you can call it that. (Hey, it rhymes!). Gas was expensive, Cash for Clunkers was a thing, and dealers were practically giving away trucks and SUVs. You could get a KK for basically the same price as a base model Patriot/Compass. Even at that price, we didn’t want it.
I giggle when I saw David mentioned in the comments on The Drive article yesterday asking if “anyone has checked on David Tracy?”
I just thought to myself, “He’s fine.” This article further proves DT shed no tears this week…..except for the candy-ass crying about LA traffic being mean, that is.
I test drove a kk. Needless to say I didn’t buy it. I felt it should be killed with fire
Last year, I bought a ’92 XJ. From 2014-2019, I daily drove a KK. A relative had a KJ I’ve driven dozens of times.
While most of what you wrote is spot-on, let me tell you: the KJ is painfully bad. The hardest of hard plastics everywhere. I have no idea how its calculated to have more interior room than the XJ, because sitting in it, that is not at all close to being true. Virtually zero cargo room in the back. Rear seat legroom was nonexistent.
The KK had awful fuel economy and a rough ride, but it was MUCH roomier on the inside.
I wish they would just say the nameplate, not the model.
Besides that, that 3.7 is woefully underpowered in general. It was great for an early 90’s engine, and passible when it debuted. But it lived way too long after it should’ve debuted.
The only great memory I had with it is, throughout owning a 2006 Dakota with it (and a 42RE), it recorded its best ever gas mileage, under my 1-and-a-half-year ownership of it, hauling my stuff to college.
I’m pretty certain it got 17mpg on that drive?
Otherwise, I don’t think I ever bested 13mpg with that sucker. And that’s with me NOT driving it like I drive my Compass.
I really wish I got the PT Cruiser GT that was right next to it when I bought it…. betcha that 5 speed PT would’ve gotten worlds better MPG then that Dakota ever could!
I’ve owned 4 jeeps: 1945 MB, 1974 CJ5, 1982 CJ8 and 1987 MJ. The MB was, hands down, the most fun of the group, perhaps because I was in my 20s living in a third world country with very few rules. The CJ5 had a hot rod V8 and scared the piss out of me every time the road got damp. So, fun like a bungee jump is fun. The CJ8 was my sentimental favorite, predictable, utilitarian and competent and all with CJ style. The MJ was everthing the CJ8 wished it was. Though not my favorite, the Cherokee-derived Comanche was the best of all my jeeps and though the MJ died an earlier death than the XJ (thanks to Chrysler “economizing” in favor of its Dakota), I’d have to agree the XJ/MJ models were the best.
Ugh. KJ’s… I had one passed down from my kids when it acted like it had a head gasket leak. Turned out to be water pump failing. (How the hell does a failing water pump let coolant seep into the oil?? Apparently Chrylser engineers found a way…) If you put your foot in it, it was fairly fun to drive. Until the next time you visited the gas pump, entirely too soon. Driven more sedately, it was a wholly, agonizingly bland and boring commuter vehicle with 4-wheel drive to adequately deal winter snow and ice. It’s as if the ride, handling and performance were all perfectly fine-tuned for a life of government fleet car service. (Oh, and the kid who’d last been driving it got a nice Subaru Forester out of the whole deal…)
I had a KL as a rental last year, and while it wasn’t nearly as miserable as the KJ, it was still nothing I’d pick to buy myself. Bland, neither under- nor over-powered. Handling that was perfectly adequate but not particularly inspiring. It was just yet another largely anonymous and ubiquitous small SUV. It was so good at being just like any other small SUV, it did it so well that apparently, it’s made itself obsolete along the way.
I wonder if Jeep is going to end up using it again as more of a trim level differentiator on the Grand Cherokee, similar to what they’re doing with the Wagoneer/Grand Wagoneer these days.
“What’s a ZJ?” “If you have to ask, you can’t afford it.”
“Rest in PISS”-DT
…but really though, you’re right. This is the exact timeline of this namesake’s fall from grace. The XJ is a legend and has earned its icon status. After that it got bastardized into a world of cheaply but still overpriced badge engineering nonsense to appeal to posers.
I never want to be a gatekeeper or anything but when it comes to JEEP PEOPLE who buy these just for a badge to try to look cool in the Starbucks parking lot I feel no shame. Liberties lined the parking lots of every sorority house on campus when I was in college. I know several people who own the current Cherokee and every single one of them bought it solely for the badge.
It’s a JEEP! I’m HIP AND OUTDOORSY! No you aren’t. You paid 40 grand for a Fiat with a 7 slit grille tacked on. Shoulda just bought a RAV-4 or CRV instead like a normal person. And don’t get me started on the goddamn Renegade…these are dumb cars for suburbanites who want to look cool.
Picked up a purple 99 Cherokee with 250,000 miles 5 years ago for $1200 that only needed a little work. It lived down in VA most of its life so no real rust, which is a hard find here in MA. It’s retired now living at my parents house on Cape Cod as a beach mobile and dump runner, getting maybe 500 miles a year.
Puts a smile on my face every time I visit, make excuses to use it. 15 year old son is learning to drive it on the dirt roads. Hoping it follows me into old age!
the off road aftermarket was slow to realize and make aftermarket stuff for the XJ until they were nearly out of production. I remember looking for lifts, armor and stuff in the mid 90s and there was hardly anything (compared to the wrangler)
My worst XJ memory was seeing hundreds junked out for the cash for clunkers program when I went to get xj parts for my buddies XJ in the junk yards.
I’ve driven several XJs, and my only real beef with any of them was that the P.R. people spec’ed them all with automatics. With a five-speed, they would have been ideal for me; never wanted to take one on the Rubicon Trail, but they were just dandy for any other use.
To this day, I still jones for a 4.0/manual/4wd Cherokee, preferably in Forest Service Green, which is a really cool color on those boxy beasts. Sadly, every XJ I’ve seen for sale is either one (short) step away from the Crusher or hideously expensive.
Drove a Liberty when it came out and thought: “Nuh-uh.”
Bought a navy blue 4.0 5spd 4×4 2 door for $3200 in 2014. I got it just in time before the prices went crazy.
My buddy had a 4.0 manual 2-door. Most of the plastic interior had been rattled out by two punch 15″s I think. It was downright fast on the low end. Quite a few 5.0 Mustangs of the day got jumped off the line thanks to the torque and 4wd. You weren’t winning any long haul drags but you definitely were beating them to the next stop light most of the time.
“At least one valid complaint could be made about the Liberty. Unlike the Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, or the original Wagoneer, Liberty didn’t introduce any new innovations to the market”
Is being a Holy Grail an innovation? Because other than that, I’m not sure what innovations the ZJ brought to the table – like you say, it was rather evolutionary, just meant to replace the XJ.
Also, I’m not sure I’d cite the Liberty losing a Car & Driver comparison test as a knock against it, it’s not as if they were overwhelmingly fond of the XJ either (it placed midpack in a test against a bunch of MY91 SUV’s, and second last ten years later once the field had gone more crossover).
Also, as much as I don’t think the KJ is an exceptional vehicle, I really like that it is a sort of cheerful looking little thing, especially now that everything is angry looking.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison-test/a15138816/ford-escape-vs-honda-cr-v-hyundai-santa-fe-jeep-cherokee-and-seven-more-compact-suvs-comparison-tests/
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison-test/a15141516/1991-top-suvs/
The ZJ — 1993’s Motor Trend Truck of The Year — was the very first vehicle ever to offer a five-link suspension front and rear. It was the first Jeep with standard rear discs, the first Jeep with standard airbags, the first Jeep with a CHMSL, the first Jeep with automatic headlights, the first Jeep with a CD player, the first Jeep with a fuel injected V8, the first Jeep with non-sealed-beam headlights, the first Jeep with cupholders (!) and on and on.
Wasn’t as revolutionary as the XJ on which it was based, but it definitely changed the game in many ways for the Jeep brand.
Hold up, hold up David.
First Jeep with a CHMSL? Negative, my friend.
(Also not the cupholders. That was an XJ innovation! No, seriously! More on that in a second.)
The first Jeep with a CHMSL was, in fact, the 1987 Jeep Cherokee! Not 1997. 1987. Because the SJ was unchanged, AMC got away with it. But federal law started requiring them in 1987. And the XJ was new enough.
PN 55054967. Used from 1987 until they moved to the one mounted on the outside hatch in 1996. It mounts to the headliner, center rear, behind the glass (and is laughably ineffective thanks to a single bulb which is basically impossible to replace.) I think everyone just ripped them out either accidentally or intentionally.
Seriously! Look it up by part number!
Now, the CUPHOLDERS… that’s a bit of a thing. Because are we going to insist on factory installed, or are we going to accept factory accessories? Because in the ~89-90 factory brochures, there are photos of the interior which include available accessories.
One of those accessories? A two receptacle cupholder which is mounted longitudinally on the passenger side of the center console, just to the right of the shifter.
Mopar part number 55115020. Still in production. I believe there’s also an earlier part number, but that one explicitly covers ’91 XJ.
CHMSLs weren’t required for light trucks until 1994, passenger cars were required starting 1986.
Correct! The SJ was old enough (and unrevised) so was able to continue being classified as a truck, even though it was very obviously not a pickup.
The Jeep Cherokee XJ was quite knowingly and deliberately classified as a station wagon making it a passenger car. The Grand Cherokee is also classified as a station wagon and therefore a passenger car.
The fun thing is: despite the requirement going in in 1986, 1986 XJs do not have a CHMSL or the provision for one. You can check. Harness runs across the top. The 1986 goes over the top of the hatch and into the hatch for the license plate lamp, but does not have the 2 pin connector for the CHMSL.
How they got away with it, I assume is down to getting MY86 done before the rule went into effect. Or they were able to get a one year waiver based on MY87 getting all new electrical. MY86 was last year of the 2.8L V6, and also a one-year-only Renix 2.5 TBI. 1987 got all new electrical and the Renix MPI for both the 2.5 as a TBI config and the 4.0 as an MPI config.
The XJ Cherokee, ZJ, Grand Cherokee, and SJ Grand Wagoneer were all classified as special purpose vehicles (see: EPA fuel economy site) or multipurpose vehicles (NHTSA), aka light trucks, and thereby exempt from the same passenger car laws. If they were classified as passenger cars, the XJ would have required a passive restraint system by 1990, but didn’t need any of the motorized/door mount belts and a driver’s airbag didn’t arrive until 1995; the ZJ had a driver airbag but no passenger one until 1996.
Not saying they didn’t offer it or have a part for it, certainly makes sense they would have wired it up in expectation to offer it earlier or because many of the laws were in flux then like the passive restraint laws, but a search of used XJs for sale shows no CHMSL in the back window into the early 90s MYs. Certainly they could have all been ripped out like you said, but I’d think at that scale would have potentially messed with passing state safety inspections.
Similarly, the AMC Eagle doesn’t appear to have had a CHMSL, and was built through calendar year 1987 for the final ’88 models so it certainly fit the timeline – but it too was classified as a special purpose vehicle so it didn’t need one.
Nope, accessories don’t count.
And XJs didn’t get CHMSLs stateside until 1994. ZJs got them when they first debuted for the 1993 model year.
I’m impressed (although not surprised) you can rattle those off by memory.
The five link suspension is a good one, I feel like the rest are a bit more minor, a bit more evolutionary (nothing wrong with taking something great like the XJ and making it a little bigger and more refined). The Liberty’s IRS would have to count as revolutionary by those standards though, as it paved the way for the rest of the brand, with even the Grand Cherokee having fully independent suspension now (yes, I know the SJ was available with IRS for a couple early years). Plus, there was that cool brushed chrome the KJ had on some interior bits that apparently took some special treatment. Everybody loves that, and totally remembers that was something special about the Liberty, right?
My heartfelt condolences DT. ( ͡ᵔ ͜ʖ ͡ᵔ )
The real successor to the Cherokee is the 4 door Wrangler
I truly mourned the XJ in 2001, when it was announced they were replacing it with the Liberty. I did still like the Liberty and was even a bit excited about it, being 13 and having all that youthful naivety.
But the modern cherokee could have been so much more than what it was left with. The bones still had a lot of life left in them! I truly think the Cherokee was a New body and interior away from having a revival. Just look at what a success the 2nd gen compass has been! If they would have aped the new Grand Cherokee body language, even if they kept the decade-old suspension and drivetrain, they would have had a winner.
I really hope they replace it with something closer to the spirit of the XJ. Use the wrangler Frame and powertrains, and put a tidy square body on it! It would match the current cherokee in size and could surpass it in fuel mileage.
COME ON JEEP
Something the size of the original Brooks Stevens Wagoneer (please find the digitial equivalent of tracing paper, then use it extensively). Split tailgate and tow friendly but without the NHV of a barn in a wind storm.
I’ve owned probably a dozen xjs, my family has driven them since they came out. I currently use a jdm rhd to deliver mail as a rural carrier. No other model is even remotely fit to carry that hallowed name plate. With current emission laws and customer expectations nothing ever will again.
What do emissions have to do with the XJ? You can get like 40 MPG with a modern engine trying to hit those power numbers
I have owned two XJs (a 94 and a 98) over the years. I would give my right arm to have either one of them back.
“the XK Commander shared this base engine”
I had no idea you could get a V6 Commander, that must have been an absolutely miserable drive (in more ways than one)
Also, it’s “Belvidere”, not “Belvedere”.
Christopher Hewitt agrees.
The 3.7 is without question one of the worst engines Chrysler ever designed or produced. It was supposed to be the ‘revolutionary’ part, since the 4.0 was deemed to expensive to get through increasingly stringent emissions. And they couldn’t very well launch a Cherokee that wasn’t revolutionary in some way, right?
Yeah. Except the PowerTrash’s horsepower claims were already inflated and laughably optimistic. And within months of release, it had already become downright notorious. Within the first year, everyone knew it was an absolute failure that had more design defects than good parts.
Problem one, killing coils and plugs. All the time. Several PCM flashes trying to fix that, never did. It was not uncommon to have to do all 6 new-fangled (and expensive) Iridium plugs every 40,000 miles or less. Because they were also specced at way too low a temperature.
Problem two started showing up after they started hitting 9,000 miles. Dumber-Chrysler specified a 7,000 mile oil change interval initially, as I recall. Yeah, well, too late it’s already got sludge. Reducing the interval to 5,000 didn’t help, because the sludge was ultimately the result of the engine literally cooking it. Sludge isn’t just unavoidable, it’s quite literally guaranteed, no matter your oil change intervals.
Which brings us to design defect number three. The oil pressure range on the PowerTrash is nothing short of insane. 4psi idle, 25-110psi acceptable range during normal operation, with a single stage pump. (The Pentastar 3.6 is a dual stage 35-50psi, and 80-100psi high mode which includes idle.) This is part of what guaranteed the engine would cook the oil.
Design defect number four? Bad cylinder heads. Very bad. You think 331’s were bad, if you went past dead center of a 3.7’s temp gauge, those heads were gone. That’s assuming you didn’t drop a valve seat or four first due to bad design. Which ties neatly into number five…
Absolutely horrifying noise, vibration, and harshness. People who complain the 4.0 is ‘rough’ have never driven a 3.7. It’s a 90 degree V6. Already a big NVH problem due to fundamental physics. But the balance shafts on the 3.7 were basically completely ineffective. This led to a lot of motor mount failures predictably, and when the engine got too hot (which was always,) easily shaking valve seats loose. Which conveniently brings us to number six…
THE FUCKING PISTONS. Somebody decided that reducing friction was a dirty word, so the 3.7 has ridiculously tight piston rings and badly designed ring lands with insufficient drainback. Which lead to increased heat and oil coking. See also guaranteed sludging. The heat is so excessive, you would pray for valve seat failure on knock because option two was typically cracked pistons.
Remember that oil sludging? That’s number seven on our list – constant hydraulic lash problems. Because guess what? Filling a hydraulic lash adjuster with sludge means it doesn’t work. It just binds up. This frequently was ignored by owners because it couldn’t be heard or felt over the harshness and general lack of power, and often led to valve to piston contact. Which you guessed it, broke the cylinder head every time.
Oh! And the PCV system. Nothing like a 10,000 mile car that has you hosing it down with brake cleaner to try and find how many oil leaks you have. (A lot.) And the EGR system, which didn’t like all that excessive heat. Oh, and also the head bolts were too weak for several model years.
I mean seriously, this list just goes on forever.
And these were common WARRANTY failures. Aside from the Cummins ISB, the PowerTrash is the only engine I have seen covered by warranty for a fractured block or piston multiple times. I saw Dumber-Chrysler try to deny people with spun bearings who had gotten their oil changed at the dealer every 3,000 miles. I more than had my fill of explaining to people that the only way to fix their atrocious fuel mileage was to change their oil, air filter, and spark plugs on absurdly shortened schedules and that still wasn’t going to make it all that much better.
And boy howdy am I tired of people who blame it on AMC. AMC didn’t design the 3.7. They designed the 4.7 (which had it’s own problems, but far fewer of them at least,) and Chrysler decided they could make it a V6 to replace the 4.0 by chopping two cylinders off it.
That’s also why it’s a 90 degree engine. It was never intended to be a V6.
That engine never, ever should have been allowed to see production. Much less in the 4,500lbs+ (minimum weight!) Commander XK. There’s a reason the XH (export) was only offered with the OM642 at 261HP and 457ft/lbs versus the 3.7’s 210, 235ft/lbs and the 4.7’s maximum 235, 290ft/lbs. (The 5.7 is 370-390ft/lbs.)
I’d love to know more about your statement that the 3.7 was a Chrysler idea on AMC’s original 4.7 idea.
I’m sure the way I remember reading and being told about the duo is the same idea you probably get very annoyed at: AMC wanted to replace the 2.5 and 4.0, so they decided the best way and to increase sales was go to bigger motors etc. etc.
I would like to add in a please and thank you to be a bit more kind and bring some courtesy to you as well!
They weren’t going to replace the 4.0 when AMC was working on that design. Simple as that. They didn’t need to. They got bought out long before the 4.0 was even forecast to become an issue.
The 4.7 was started as a replacement for the AMC Gen3 360ci V8 (circa 1967 and about as likely to get computerized as my cat’s bed) and intended for use in the Grand Wagoneer and later Grand Cherokee as the upgrade option from the 4.0. With the ZJ, Chrysler apparently instead said ‘we have a perfectly good 318 that’s cheaper, let’s use that instead and spend some more time getting it right.’ At least that’s the rumor. Obviously the ‘getting it right’ part of the memo was never circulated, if true. (Conversely it’s been said by some that the ZJ wasn’t going to get a V8 only the 4.0, others have said there were plans to fuel inject the Gen-3 that got cancelled, and so on. Unless you bring a necromancer and a list of questions to Lee Iacocca’s grave, we probably will never know for certain.)
But this is also why the WJ from 1999 to 2005 was offered with either the 4.0 or the 4.7. The 4.0 did not die with the XJ, but it was already known in ’01 that it’s time would soon be up. By the time the WK landed (’05,) the 3.7 was well known to be an irredeemable pile of shit that was racking up horrific warranty costs, but they didn’t have anything but that, the 4.7, the 5.7, and the 3.0 OM642 (a more than cromulent engine) in Europe.
The 3.7 was literally so bad of an engine that development on the completely unrelated 3.6 Pentastar started even before the WK launch. There’s confirmed prototypes and intended use lists from 2006, and a clean sheet design with all-alloy construction? That’s a 6+ year effort. (Borne out by the 2010 start of production.)
It’s also why the 3.7 and 4.7 are literal worlds apart in reliability. The 4.7’s a bad engine by all metrics, objectively, but it’s mostly not unreliable. The 3.7 was never anything but that. (4.7’s had some even worse head manufacturing defects for some years, and if you popped a head gasket, don’t bother with less than a longblock. But otherwise, they were reasonably stout.) It was clear by 2006, they had no confidence in the 3.7 because the JK was never offered with it and instead got a heavily modified 3.8 based on the one introduced in 1991 and taken from the minivans. (The 3.8 had to get major revisions as it had never been used in a longitudinal application, only transverse!)
Woof, talk about some info.
Honestly, I think a lot of applications could’ve gotten away with the Chrysler 3.5/4.0 V6 instead of the 3.7: they may have made torque at a much higher RPM, but we’re talking V6’s here. People wanting to do real towing had the 4.7/5.7 to buy and use. That’s besides the fact both motors made more torque in general, so they could make up revving a bit more for torque by just offering more torque to begin with. Probably would’ve been much more fuel efficient too.
Anyways, that is quite the wisdom there! Good to learn a thing or two.
Thanks Rootwyrm
These came out with good timing to be a used car for daughter’s college. I soon heard about oil sludging and spun bearings. Then the plan was a diesel one with a stick-until she was hit in front of my house and tipped over in the Jimmy my ex bought her, so suvs were Right Out.
Be glad. You dodged a bullet on both counts.
The KJ’s didn’t get the cromulent OM462, or any of it’s siblings. No, no, no.
They got the absolute worst version of the VM Motori, related to the one in Project Krassler. The R425/R428 DOHC. Krassler has a 425 OHV. Which is terrible, but at least they tried. Even if individual heads for each cylinder was massively stupid in hindsight.
The DOHC is orders of magnitude worse. Completely insane cylinder head setup requiring a jig and torque plate because it’s still a multi-piece nightmare, but now horizontally split? Check.
Deletion of reliability by switching from timing chain to timing belt? Big check.
Further deletion of reliability by enlarging wet cylinder bores but not the cooling system? Oh hell yeah.
Saving money by not updating any of the components on the OHV shortblock either? You got it.
At least with the Commander and Grand Cherokee, you could get an extra gear then the Liberty’s and Dakota’s!
I don’t think it really matters though.
*died in 2013, the XJ carried on in production in China until just a decade ago, though with Mitsubishi-derived 4-cylinders instead of the I6
You didn’t think I, of all people, was going to leave that out?