Green Weenie SUV ratings
I think this may have some bearing on the demise of the I-6. My wife's 04
WJ was the last year the I-6 was used and there is some hints of the I-6 demise in the TJs starting in 06. http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/suv-05.htm -- HarryS My 2¢ |
Re: Green Weenie SUV ratings
The poor mileage in the TJ, IMHO, has more to do with the areodynamics (or
lack thereof) of the TJ, not the engine. Put the 3.7L V6 in the TJ and I bet a 3.73 ring and pinion set that the fuel economy won't improve, all other things being equal. I had an opprotunity to drive a Liberty last week as a rental, 2wd, with the 3.7L engine. Actually not a particularly bad engine, it had more pickup than I expected, even in the low end. <flamesuit>I think it will be adequate for the TJ. </flamesuit> However, it was noisy and vibrated worse than the 4.0L in my TJ. And, I really disliked the way the Liberty rode...the front end would bottom out going over lane-wide bumps, and was very squirrely at highway speeds, more so than my (sniff) no-longer-owned XJ. And, though it seemed to have enough room I felt cramped...I'm 6'4", 260lb and my other car is an '02 Superduty. "HarryS" <NoSpam@nospam.net> wrote in message news:eL6dnQ9_h83dlM3fRVn-pw@comcast.com... >I think this may have some bearing on the demise of the I-6. My wife's 04 > WJ was the last year the I-6 was used and there is some hints of the I-6 > demise in the TJs starting in 06. > > http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/suv-05.htm > > -- > HarryS My 2¢ > > |
Re: Green Weenie SUV ratings
The poor mileage in the TJ, IMHO, has more to do with the areodynamics (or
lack thereof) of the TJ, not the engine. Put the 3.7L V6 in the TJ and I bet a 3.73 ring and pinion set that the fuel economy won't improve, all other things being equal. I had an opprotunity to drive a Liberty last week as a rental, 2wd, with the 3.7L engine. Actually not a particularly bad engine, it had more pickup than I expected, even in the low end. <flamesuit>I think it will be adequate for the TJ. </flamesuit> However, it was noisy and vibrated worse than the 4.0L in my TJ. And, I really disliked the way the Liberty rode...the front end would bottom out going over lane-wide bumps, and was very squirrely at highway speeds, more so than my (sniff) no-longer-owned XJ. And, though it seemed to have enough room I felt cramped...I'm 6'4", 260lb and my other car is an '02 Superduty. "HarryS" <NoSpam@nospam.net> wrote in message news:eL6dnQ9_h83dlM3fRVn-pw@comcast.com... >I think this may have some bearing on the demise of the I-6. My wife's 04 > WJ was the last year the I-6 was used and there is some hints of the I-6 > demise in the TJs starting in 06. > > http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/suv-05.htm > > -- > HarryS My 2¢ > > |
Re: Green Weenie SUV ratings
The poor mileage in the TJ, IMHO, has more to do with the areodynamics (or
lack thereof) of the TJ, not the engine. Put the 3.7L V6 in the TJ and I bet a 3.73 ring and pinion set that the fuel economy won't improve, all other things being equal. I had an opprotunity to drive a Liberty last week as a rental, 2wd, with the 3.7L engine. Actually not a particularly bad engine, it had more pickup than I expected, even in the low end. <flamesuit>I think it will be adequate for the TJ. </flamesuit> However, it was noisy and vibrated worse than the 4.0L in my TJ. And, I really disliked the way the Liberty rode...the front end would bottom out going over lane-wide bumps, and was very squirrely at highway speeds, more so than my (sniff) no-longer-owned XJ. And, though it seemed to have enough room I felt cramped...I'm 6'4", 260lb and my other car is an '02 Superduty. "HarryS" <NoSpam@nospam.net> wrote in message news:eL6dnQ9_h83dlM3fRVn-pw@comcast.com... >I think this may have some bearing on the demise of the I-6. My wife's 04 > WJ was the last year the I-6 was used and there is some hints of the I-6 > demise in the TJs starting in 06. > > http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/suv-05.htm > > -- > HarryS My 2¢ > > |
Re: Green Weenie SUV ratings
It's both factors, isn't it ? The BMW X5 has a larger frontal area and a
larger 4.4 litre engine. But, it is also higher compression. The I6 has a low compression engine to give it torque, not fuel economy. As you point out, however, the real difference is due to the frontal area -the engine difference can only be good for a few mpg. Dave Milne, Scotland '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message news:tbWdnR53V-MpG83fRVn-jA@comcast.com... > The poor mileage in the TJ, IMHO, has more to do with the areodynamics (or > lack thereof) of the TJ, not the engine. Put the 3.7L V6 in the TJ and I bet > a 3.73 ring and pinion set that the fuel economy won't improve, all other > things being equal. > > I had an opprotunity to drive a Liberty last week as a rental, 2wd, with the > 3.7L engine. Actually not a particularly bad engine, it had more pickup than > I expected, even in the low end. <flamesuit>I think it will be adequate for > the TJ. </flamesuit> However, it was noisy and vibrated worse than the 4.0L > in my TJ. And, I really disliked the way the Liberty rode...the front end > would bottom out going over lane-wide bumps, and was very squirrely at > highway speeds, more so than my (sniff) no-longer-owned XJ. And, though it > seemed to have enough room I felt cramped...I'm 6'4", 260lb and my other car > is an '02 Superduty. > > "HarryS" <NoSpam@nospam.net> wrote in message > news:eL6dnQ9_h83dlM3fRVn-pw@comcast.com... > >I think this may have some bearing on the demise of the I-6. My wife's 04 > > WJ was the last year the I-6 was used and there is some hints of the I-6 > > demise in the TJs starting in 06. > > > > http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/suv-05.htm > > > > -- > > HarryS My 2¢ > > > > > > |
Re: Green Weenie SUV ratings
It's both factors, isn't it ? The BMW X5 has a larger frontal area and a
larger 4.4 litre engine. But, it is also higher compression. The I6 has a low compression engine to give it torque, not fuel economy. As you point out, however, the real difference is due to the frontal area -the engine difference can only be good for a few mpg. Dave Milne, Scotland '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message news:tbWdnR53V-MpG83fRVn-jA@comcast.com... > The poor mileage in the TJ, IMHO, has more to do with the areodynamics (or > lack thereof) of the TJ, not the engine. Put the 3.7L V6 in the TJ and I bet > a 3.73 ring and pinion set that the fuel economy won't improve, all other > things being equal. > > I had an opprotunity to drive a Liberty last week as a rental, 2wd, with the > 3.7L engine. Actually not a particularly bad engine, it had more pickup than > I expected, even in the low end. <flamesuit>I think it will be adequate for > the TJ. </flamesuit> However, it was noisy and vibrated worse than the 4.0L > in my TJ. And, I really disliked the way the Liberty rode...the front end > would bottom out going over lane-wide bumps, and was very squirrely at > highway speeds, more so than my (sniff) no-longer-owned XJ. And, though it > seemed to have enough room I felt cramped...I'm 6'4", 260lb and my other car > is an '02 Superduty. > > "HarryS" <NoSpam@nospam.net> wrote in message > news:eL6dnQ9_h83dlM3fRVn-pw@comcast.com... > >I think this may have some bearing on the demise of the I-6. My wife's 04 > > WJ was the last year the I-6 was used and there is some hints of the I-6 > > demise in the TJs starting in 06. > > > > http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/suv-05.htm > > > > -- > > HarryS My 2¢ > > > > > > |
Re: Green Weenie SUV ratings
It's both factors, isn't it ? The BMW X5 has a larger frontal area and a
larger 4.4 litre engine. But, it is also higher compression. The I6 has a low compression engine to give it torque, not fuel economy. As you point out, however, the real difference is due to the frontal area -the engine difference can only be good for a few mpg. Dave Milne, Scotland '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message news:tbWdnR53V-MpG83fRVn-jA@comcast.com... > The poor mileage in the TJ, IMHO, has more to do with the areodynamics (or > lack thereof) of the TJ, not the engine. Put the 3.7L V6 in the TJ and I bet > a 3.73 ring and pinion set that the fuel economy won't improve, all other > things being equal. > > I had an opprotunity to drive a Liberty last week as a rental, 2wd, with the > 3.7L engine. Actually not a particularly bad engine, it had more pickup than > I expected, even in the low end. <flamesuit>I think it will be adequate for > the TJ. </flamesuit> However, it was noisy and vibrated worse than the 4.0L > in my TJ. And, I really disliked the way the Liberty rode...the front end > would bottom out going over lane-wide bumps, and was very squirrely at > highway speeds, more so than my (sniff) no-longer-owned XJ. And, though it > seemed to have enough room I felt cramped...I'm 6'4", 260lb and my other car > is an '02 Superduty. > > "HarryS" <NoSpam@nospam.net> wrote in message > news:eL6dnQ9_h83dlM3fRVn-pw@comcast.com... > >I think this may have some bearing on the demise of the I-6. My wife's 04 > > WJ was the last year the I-6 was used and there is some hints of the I-6 > > demise in the TJs starting in 06. > > > > http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/suv-05.htm > > > > -- > > HarryS My 2¢ > > > > > > |
Re: Green Weenie SUV ratings
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> The poor mileage in the TJ, IMHO, has more to do with the areodynamics (or > lack thereof) of the TJ, not the engine. Put the 3.7L V6 in the TJ and I bet > a 3.73 ring and pinion set that the fuel economy won't improve, all other > things being equal. > I agree. A brick flies like a brick, no matter how your throw it! Barry |
Re: Green Weenie SUV ratings
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> The poor mileage in the TJ, IMHO, has more to do with the areodynamics (or > lack thereof) of the TJ, not the engine. Put the 3.7L V6 in the TJ and I bet > a 3.73 ring and pinion set that the fuel economy won't improve, all other > things being equal. > I agree. A brick flies like a brick, no matter how your throw it! Barry |
Re: Green Weenie SUV ratings
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> The poor mileage in the TJ, IMHO, has more to do with the areodynamics (or > lack thereof) of the TJ, not the engine. Put the 3.7L V6 in the TJ and I bet > a 3.73 ring and pinion set that the fuel economy won't improve, all other > things being equal. > I agree. A brick flies like a brick, no matter how your throw it! Barry |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:33 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands