And my `96 Cherokee 4.0L usually gets 20 MPG highway, the same mileage
as my `89 Cherokee 4.0L got. Running in Full-time 4WD reduces it a bit.

Among other useful things that "pond jumper" might do is to sniff near
the left rear wheel for gas fumes. If he smells any at all he should
check his long-neglected fuel filter for rust-through and leaks.


Jack Carter wrote:
> Let's face it. That engine has seen better days and is very inefficient.
> (It's being dumped by Chrysler.) My I-6 Wrangler, which is a few hundred
> pounds lighter than your Cherokee, does well to average 14-15 mpg. And my
> Dodge Magnum RT (Hemi V-8) averages 19-21!!!
>
>
> "Grumman-581" <grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:t48Gf.6$7y1.2@tornado.texas.rr.com...
>
>>"pond jumper via CarKB.com" <u18385@uwe> wrote in message
>>news:5b899de7a637c@uwe...
>>
>>>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
>>
>>Are the brakes dragging? I had that happen once...
>>
>>
>
>
>

 

The reason for it's discontinuation has nothing to do with efficiency,
or suitability to purpose. The I6 is the consummate Jeep engine for long
reliable life with high torque at low speeds. It's all about materials
and machining. The I6 weighs in at almost double that of today's current
production V6's. In addition, production machinery wears out. The large
transfer line machining systems that produce the I6 are at their end of
life. It is cheaper to just grab some current production piece of DC
crap and slap it in.

--
jeff


Jack Carter wrote:
> Let's face it. That engine has seen better days and is very inefficient.
> (It's being dumped by Chrysler.) My I-6 Wrangler, which is a few hundred
> pounds lighter than your Cherokee, does well to average 14-15 mpg. And my
> Dodge Magnum RT (Hemi V-8) averages 19-21!!!
>
>
> "Grumman-581" <grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:t48Gf.6$7y1.2@tornado.texas.rr.com...
>
>>"pond jumper via CarKB.com" <u18385@uwe> wrote in message
>>news:5b899de7a637c@uwe...
>>
>>>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
>>
>>Are the brakes dragging? I had that happen once...
>>
>>
>
>
>

 

The reason for it's discontinuation has nothing to do with efficiency,
or suitability to purpose. The I6 is the consummate Jeep engine for long
reliable life with high torque at low speeds. It's all about materials
and machining. The I6 weighs in at almost double that of today's current
production V6's. In addition, production machinery wears out. The large
transfer line machining systems that produce the I6 are at their end of
life. It is cheaper to just grab some current production piece of DC
crap and slap it in.

--
jeff


Jack Carter wrote:
> Let's face it. That engine has seen better days and is very inefficient.
> (It's being dumped by Chrysler.) My I-6 Wrangler, which is a few hundred
> pounds lighter than your Cherokee, does well to average 14-15 mpg. And my
> Dodge Magnum RT (Hemi V-8) averages 19-21!!!
>
>
> "Grumman-581" <grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:t48Gf.6$7y1.2@tornado.texas.rr.com...
>
>>"pond jumper via CarKB.com" <u18385@uwe> wrote in message
>>news:5b899de7a637c@uwe...
>>
>>>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
>>
>>Are the brakes dragging? I had that happen once...
>>
>>
>
>
>

 

The reason for it's discontinuation has nothing to do with efficiency,
or suitability to purpose. The I6 is the consummate Jeep engine for long
reliable life with high torque at low speeds. It's all about materials
and machining. The I6 weighs in at almost double that of today's current
production V6's. In addition, production machinery wears out. The large
transfer line machining systems that produce the I6 are at their end of
life. It is cheaper to just grab some current production piece of DC
crap and slap it in.

--
jeff


Jack Carter wrote:
> Let's face it. That engine has seen better days and is very inefficient.
> (It's being dumped by Chrysler.) My I-6 Wrangler, which is a few hundred
> pounds lighter than your Cherokee, does well to average 14-15 mpg. And my
> Dodge Magnum RT (Hemi V-8) averages 19-21!!!
>
>
> "Grumman-581" <grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:t48Gf.6$7y1.2@tornado.texas.rr.com...
>
>>"pond jumper via CarKB.com" <u18385@uwe> wrote in message
>>news:5b899de7a637c@uwe...
>>
>>>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
>>
>>Are the brakes dragging? I had that happen once...
>>
>>
>
>
>

 

noneyabusiness wrote:

> On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 19:49:55 GMT, "pond jumper via CarKB.com"
> <u18385@uwe> wrote:
>
>>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
>
> My 95 (owned since last October) gets about 13 mpg if I try, and about
> 11 mpg if I leadfoot it :(
> Although, on ONE tank, where I tried to use as much of the tank as
> possible, I actually got 15 mpg!! (And I still only had to put 18 gal.
> back into it!?!)

There's something wrong there. You should be getting better than that.

Worse, you're wasting your money. If you drive 15,000 miles/year at 13
MPG you're burning about 1,154 gal. a year. At 20 MPG you're burning
750 gal. At $2.40 (roughly the current national average) that's a $970
annual difference. Put it another way, that's nearly $20 a week falling
out of your pocket.

Other fixes aside, religiously check your tire pressure -- it _does_
make a difference and you can't tell by eyeballing a radial -- and
carefully track your tank-to-tank mileage, noting which station you buy
at. A pain in the ***? Perhaps, but it will cost you all of two
minutes every time you fill up. You /might/ find that a particular
brand of gas gives better mileage than another, and even enough to
offset the price difference. Yes, pretty much all of the gasoline base
comes out of the same tap, but what the seller adds to it may make a
difference in your mileage.

 

noneyabusiness wrote:

> On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 19:49:55 GMT, "pond jumper via CarKB.com"
> <u18385@uwe> wrote:
>
>>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
>
> My 95 (owned since last October) gets about 13 mpg if I try, and about
> 11 mpg if I leadfoot it :(
> Although, on ONE tank, where I tried to use as much of the tank as
> possible, I actually got 15 mpg!! (And I still only had to put 18 gal.
> back into it!?!)

There's something wrong there. You should be getting better than that.

Worse, you're wasting your money. If you drive 15,000 miles/year at 13
MPG you're burning about 1,154 gal. a year. At 20 MPG you're burning
750 gal. At $2.40 (roughly the current national average) that's a $970
annual difference. Put it another way, that's nearly $20 a week falling
out of your pocket.

Other fixes aside, religiously check your tire pressure -- it _does_
make a difference and you can't tell by eyeballing a radial -- and
carefully track your tank-to-tank mileage, noting which station you buy
at. A pain in the ***? Perhaps, but it will cost you all of two
minutes every time you fill up. You /might/ find that a particular
brand of gas gives better mileage than another, and even enough to
offset the price difference. Yes, pretty much all of the gasoline base
comes out of the same tap, but what the seller adds to it may make a
difference in your mileage.

 

noneyabusiness wrote:

> On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 19:49:55 GMT, "pond jumper via CarKB.com"
> <u18385@uwe> wrote:
>
>>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
>
> My 95 (owned since last October) gets about 13 mpg if I try, and about
> 11 mpg if I leadfoot it :(
> Although, on ONE tank, where I tried to use as much of the tank as
> possible, I actually got 15 mpg!! (And I still only had to put 18 gal.
> back into it!?!)

There's something wrong there. You should be getting better than that.

Worse, you're wasting your money. If you drive 15,000 miles/year at 13
MPG you're burning about 1,154 gal. a year. At 20 MPG you're burning
750 gal. At $2.40 (roughly the current national average) that's a $970
annual difference. Put it another way, that's nearly $20 a week falling
out of your pocket.

Other fixes aside, religiously check your tire pressure -- it _does_
make a difference and you can't tell by eyeballing a radial -- and
carefully track your tank-to-tank mileage, noting which station you buy
at. A pain in the ***? Perhaps, but it will cost you all of two
minutes every time you fill up. You /might/ find that a particular
brand of gas gives better mileage than another, and even enough to
offset the price difference. Yes, pretty much all of the gasoline base
comes out of the same tap, but what the seller adds to it may make a
difference in your mileage.

 

Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> noneyabusiness wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 19:49:55 GMT, "pond jumper via CarKB.com"
> > <u18385@uwe> wrote:
> >
> >>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
> >
> > My 95 (owned since last October) gets about 13 mpg if I try, and about
> > 11 mpg if I leadfoot it :(
> > Although, on ONE tank, where I tried to use as much of the tank as
> > possible, I actually got 15 mpg!! (And I still only had to put 18 gal.
> > back into it!?!)
>
> There's something wrong there. You should be getting better than that.

I'll say!

We would have dumped our Jeeps years ago if that is all the mileage we
could get.

I get a nice 23 mpg in my old CJ7 and way better than that in our
Cherokee. The 'worst' we ever got on the highway in our Cherokee had 4
adults and winter camping gear to the roof inside with 3 duffel bags on
the roof rack. We 'only' got 23 mpg on that trip.

The Cherokee does really short trips in the city, not enough to warm up
or fully defrost the windows before being shut down and it only gets 14
mpg driving like that. 24-26 mpg on the highway makes for about an 18
or 19 'combined' mpg.

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

 

Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> noneyabusiness wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 19:49:55 GMT, "pond jumper via CarKB.com"
> > <u18385@uwe> wrote:
> >
> >>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
> >
> > My 95 (owned since last October) gets about 13 mpg if I try, and about
> > 11 mpg if I leadfoot it :(
> > Although, on ONE tank, where I tried to use as much of the tank as
> > possible, I actually got 15 mpg!! (And I still only had to put 18 gal.
> > back into it!?!)
>
> There's something wrong there. You should be getting better than that.

I'll say!

We would have dumped our Jeeps years ago if that is all the mileage we
could get.

I get a nice 23 mpg in my old CJ7 and way better than that in our
Cherokee. The 'worst' we ever got on the highway in our Cherokee had 4
adults and winter camping gear to the roof inside with 3 duffel bags on
the roof rack. We 'only' got 23 mpg on that trip.

The Cherokee does really short trips in the city, not enough to warm up
or fully defrost the windows before being shut down and it only gets 14
mpg driving like that. 24-26 mpg on the highway makes for about an 18
or 19 'combined' mpg.

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

 

Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> noneyabusiness wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 19:49:55 GMT, "pond jumper via CarKB.com"
> > <u18385@uwe> wrote:
> >
> >>my 93 cherokee i-6 only get about 10 mpg. HELP!
> >
> > My 95 (owned since last October) gets about 13 mpg if I try, and about
> > 11 mpg if I leadfoot it :(
> > Although, on ONE tank, where I tried to use as much of the tank as
> > possible, I actually got 15 mpg!! (And I still only had to put 18 gal.
> > back into it!?!)
>
> There's something wrong there. You should be getting better than that.

I'll say!

We would have dumped our Jeeps years ago if that is all the mileage we
could get.

I get a nice 23 mpg in my old CJ7 and way better than that in our
Cherokee. The 'worst' we ever got on the highway in our Cherokee had 4
adults and winter camping gear to the roof inside with 3 duffel bags on
the roof rack. We 'only' got 23 mpg on that trip.

The Cherokee does really short trips in the city, not enough to warm up
or fully defrost the windows before being shut down and it only gets 14
mpg driving like that. 24-26 mpg on the highway makes for about an 18
or 19 'combined' mpg.

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)