Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

So who gave them a terrible reliablity rating? And what exactly was used to
determine that rating? I've seen nothing but bulletproof 4.0L XJs running
around everywhere.

I had issues with the front end of my wife's, but that was my own fault
after botching a lift.

Eric
99 TJ SE
00 XJ LTD

"Handywired" <handywired@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041229011700.23417.00002581@mb-m03.aol.com...
>I need a good family camping/skiing/adventure rig. My TJ has been good
>enough
> to me that I am considering a Cherokee even though they have a terrible
> reliability rating (but then, so does the TJ and mine has been great). I
> see
> decent ones from the mid-90's for as cheap as $3000 or so; considering
> that
> this rig will be rode hard and put away wet, with dogs, food, gear, kids,
> etc
> in and out, I am leaning towards just such a cheap "beater" for this
> purpose,
> rather than a probably more reliable but much more expensive Toyota or
> Nissan
> or other Japanese SUV.
>
> So... how do cherokees hold up once they get some miles piled on 'em? I'd
> get
> the 4.0L with the auto tranny most likely.
>
> -jeff
>
> -jeff

Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

So who gave them a terrible reliablity rating? And what exactly was used to
determine that rating? I've seen nothing but bulletproof 4.0L XJs running
around everywhere.

I had issues with the front end of my wife's, but that was my own fault
after botching a lift.

Eric
99 TJ SE
00 XJ LTD

"Handywired" <handywired@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041229011700.23417.00002581@mb-m03.aol.com...
>I need a good family camping/skiing/adventure rig. My TJ has been good
>enough
> to me that I am considering a Cherokee even though they have a terrible
> reliability rating (but then, so does the TJ and mine has been great). I
> see
> decent ones from the mid-90's for as cheap as $3000 or so; considering
> that
> this rig will be rode hard and put away wet, with dogs, food, gear, kids,
> etc
> in and out, I am leaning towards just such a cheap "beater" for this
> purpose,
> rather than a probably more reliable but much more expensive Toyota or
> Nissan
> or other Japanese SUV.
>
> So... how do cherokees hold up once they get some miles piled on 'em? I'd
> get
> the 4.0L with the auto tranny most likely.
>
> -jeff
>
> -jeff

Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

So who gave them a terrible reliablity rating? And what exactly was used to
determine that rating? I've seen nothing but bulletproof 4.0L XJs running
around everywhere.

I had issues with the front end of my wife's, but that was my own fault
after botching a lift.

Eric
99 TJ SE
00 XJ LTD

"Handywired" <handywired@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041229011700.23417.00002581@mb-m03.aol.com...
>I need a good family camping/skiing/adventure rig. My TJ has been good
>enough
> to me that I am considering a Cherokee even though they have a terrible
> reliability rating (but then, so does the TJ and mine has been great). I
> see
> decent ones from the mid-90's for as cheap as $3000 or so; considering
> that
> this rig will be rode hard and put away wet, with dogs, food, gear, kids,
> etc
> in and out, I am leaning towards just such a cheap "beater" for this
> purpose,
> rather than a probably more reliable but much more expensive Toyota or
> Nissan
> or other Japanese SUV.
>
> So... how do cherokees hold up once they get some miles piled on 'em? I'd
> get
> the 4.0L with the auto tranny most likely.
>
> -jeff
>
> -jeff

Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

I remember Consumer Report's auto issue a few years back, it listed the
Cherokee with a poor reliability rating even though the majority of its
member-reported system by system ratings were average or better than
average. In contrast, one of the Toyota models had worse than average system
by system ratings but a better than average overall reliability rating.

"Eric" <gymrat@baileyscorner.com> wrote in message
news:ykMAd.20258$3v5.12085@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> So who gave them a terrible reliablity rating? And what exactly was used
to
> determine that rating? I've seen nothing but bulletproof 4.0L XJs running
> around everywhere.
>
> I had issues with the front end of my wife's, but that was my own fault
> after botching a lift.
>
> Eric
> 99 TJ SE
> 00 XJ LTD
>
> "Handywired" <handywired@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20041229011700.23417.00002581@mb-m03.aol.com...
> >I need a good family camping/skiing/adventure rig. My TJ has been good
> >enough
> > to me that I am considering a Cherokee even though they have a terrible
> > reliability rating (but then, so does the TJ and mine has been great).
I
> > see
> > decent ones from the mid-90's for as cheap as $3000 or so; considering
> > that
> > this rig will be rode hard and put away wet, with dogs, food, gear,
kids,
> > etc
> > in and out, I am leaning towards just such a cheap "beater" for this
> > purpose,
> > rather than a probably more reliable but much more expensive Toyota or
> > Nissan
> > or other Japanese SUV.
> >
> > So... how do cherokees hold up once they get some miles piled on 'em?
I'd
> > get
> > the 4.0L with the auto tranny most likely.
> >
> > -jeff
> >
> > -jeff
>
>

Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

I remember Consumer Report's auto issue a few years back, it listed the
Cherokee with a poor reliability rating even though the majority of its
member-reported system by system ratings were average or better than
average. In contrast, one of the Toyota models had worse than average system
by system ratings but a better than average overall reliability rating.

"Eric" <gymrat@baileyscorner.com> wrote in message
news:ykMAd.20258$3v5.12085@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> So who gave them a terrible reliablity rating? And what exactly was used
to
> determine that rating? I've seen nothing but bulletproof 4.0L XJs running
> around everywhere.
>
> I had issues with the front end of my wife's, but that was my own fault
> after botching a lift.
>
> Eric
> 99 TJ SE
> 00 XJ LTD
>
> "Handywired" <handywired@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20041229011700.23417.00002581@mb-m03.aol.com...
> >I need a good family camping/skiing/adventure rig. My TJ has been good
> >enough
> > to me that I am considering a Cherokee even though they have a terrible
> > reliability rating (but then, so does the TJ and mine has been great).
I
> > see
> > decent ones from the mid-90's for as cheap as $3000 or so; considering
> > that
> > this rig will be rode hard and put away wet, with dogs, food, gear,
kids,
> > etc
> > in and out, I am leaning towards just such a cheap "beater" for this
> > purpose,
> > rather than a probably more reliable but much more expensive Toyota or
> > Nissan
> > or other Japanese SUV.
> >
> > So... how do cherokees hold up once they get some miles piled on 'em?
I'd
> > get
> > the 4.0L with the auto tranny most likely.
> >
> > -jeff
> >
> > -jeff
>
>

Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

I remember Consumer Report's auto issue a few years back, it listed the
Cherokee with a poor reliability rating even though the majority of its
member-reported system by system ratings were average or better than
average. In contrast, one of the Toyota models had worse than average system
by system ratings but a better than average overall reliability rating.

"Eric" <gymrat@baileyscorner.com> wrote in message
news:ykMAd.20258$3v5.12085@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> So who gave them a terrible reliablity rating? And what exactly was used
to
> determine that rating? I've seen nothing but bulletproof 4.0L XJs running
> around everywhere.
>
> I had issues with the front end of my wife's, but that was my own fault
> after botching a lift.
>
> Eric
> 99 TJ SE
> 00 XJ LTD
>
> "Handywired" <handywired@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20041229011700.23417.00002581@mb-m03.aol.com...
> >I need a good family camping/skiing/adventure rig. My TJ has been good
> >enough
> > to me that I am considering a Cherokee even though they have a terrible
> > reliability rating (but then, so does the TJ and mine has been great).
I
> > see
> > decent ones from the mid-90's for as cheap as $3000 or so; considering
> > that
> > this rig will be rode hard and put away wet, with dogs, food, gear,
kids,
> > etc
> > in and out, I am leaning towards just such a cheap "beater" for this
> > purpose,
> > rather than a probably more reliable but much more expensive Toyota or
> > Nissan
> > or other Japanese SUV.
> >
> > So... how do cherokees hold up once they get some miles piled on 'em?
I'd
> > get
> > the 4.0L with the auto tranny most likely.
> >
> > -jeff
> >
> > -jeff
>
>

Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

Hi Matt,
Consumer magazine is bought and paid for. I've never read an
unbiased report by them. And the few products I am knowledgeable of,
they were totally WRONG! It's sometimes fun to see how quickly we can
spot which side their toast is buttered on.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I remember Consumer Report's auto issue a few years back, it listed the
> Cherokee with a poor reliability rating even though the majority of its
> member-reported system by system ratings were average or better than
> average. In contrast, one of the Toyota models had worse than average system
> by system ratings but a better than average overall reliability rating.

Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

Hi Matt,
Consumer magazine is bought and paid for. I've never read an
unbiased report by them. And the few products I am knowledgeable of,
they were totally WRONG! It's sometimes fun to see how quickly we can
spot which side their toast is buttered on.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I remember Consumer Report's auto issue a few years back, it listed the
> Cherokee with a poor reliability rating even though the majority of its
> member-reported system by system ratings were average or better than
> average. In contrast, one of the Toyota models had worse than average system
> by system ratings but a better than average overall reliability rating.

Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

Hi Matt,
Consumer magazine is bought and paid for. I've never read an
unbiased report by them. And the few products I am knowledgeable of,
they were totally WRONG! It's sometimes fun to see how quickly we can
spot which side their toast is buttered on.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I remember Consumer Report's auto issue a few years back, it listed the
> Cherokee with a poor reliability rating even though the majority of its
> member-reported system by system ratings were average or better than
> average. In contrast, one of the Toyota models had worse than average system
> by system ratings but a better than average overall reliability rating.

Re: opinions on cheap, older, high-miles Cherokees
 

OK, that's two agreements on the same day. Prepare for the Rapture.

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:41D48D8F.EF5182B0@cox.net...
> Hi Matt,
> Consumer magazine is bought and paid for. I've never read an
> unbiased report by them. And the few products I am knowledgeable of,
> they were totally WRONG! It's sometimes fun to see how quickly we can
> spot which side their toast is buttered on.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > I remember Consumer Report's auto issue a few years back, it listed the
> > Cherokee with a poor reliability rating even though the majority of its
> > member-reported system by system ratings were average or better than
> > average. In contrast, one of the Toyota models had worse than average
system
> > by system ratings but a better than average overall reliability rating.