"Generic" <generic@scientist.com> wrote in message
news:412aad50$0$95602$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.co m...
> There's room for improvement. Here's a pretty direct comparison between a
> Wrangler SE and the Honda CR-V.
>
> Wrangler SE: Curb weight 3235, 147 HP @ 5200 RPM, 165 lb-ft @ 4000 RPM,
EPA
> city 18, highway 20-21.
>
> CR-V: Curb weight 3258, 160 HP @ 6000 RPM, 162 lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, EPA city
> 21, highway 25.
>
>
> The Honda makes more horsepower and the same torque (at lower RPM), but
gets
> 4-5 more miles per gallon on the highway. When you load one up with huge
> tires and offroad gear the mileage would certainly drop, but that's almost
> certainly not what the OP had in mind with his Jeep.


First off, the SE is a 4 cylinder engine and this discussion was related to
the 4.0L six cylinder (tractor) engine we all know and love.

Secondly, 3 mpg difference is not that much. Especially considering the
Jeep running gear will allow you to actually go *off-road* and the Honda
running gear is designed for cruising the local mall. With that in mind,
the 3 mpg advantage of the Honda does not seem big enough to me...

-Fred W

 

"Generic" <generic@scientist.com> wrote in message
news:412aad50$0$95602$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.co m...
> There's room for improvement. Here's a pretty direct comparison between a
> Wrangler SE and the Honda CR-V.
>
> Wrangler SE: Curb weight 3235, 147 HP @ 5200 RPM, 165 lb-ft @ 4000 RPM,
EPA
> city 18, highway 20-21.
>
> CR-V: Curb weight 3258, 160 HP @ 6000 RPM, 162 lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, EPA city
> 21, highway 25.
>
>
> The Honda makes more horsepower and the same torque (at lower RPM), but
gets
> 4-5 more miles per gallon on the highway. When you load one up with huge
> tires and offroad gear the mileage would certainly drop, but that's almost
> certainly not what the OP had in mind with his Jeep.


First off, the SE is a 4 cylinder engine and this discussion was related to
the 4.0L six cylinder (tractor) engine we all know and love.

Secondly, 3 mpg difference is not that much. Especially considering the
Jeep running gear will allow you to actually go *off-road* and the Honda
running gear is designed for cruising the local mall. With that in mind,
the 3 mpg advantage of the Honda does not seem big enough to me...

-Fred W

 

"Fred W." <Fred.Wills@allspam myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:7uudncI01uBfUbHcRVn-hg@adelphia.com...
>
> "Generic" <generic@scientist.com> wrote in message
> news:412aad50$0$95602$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.co m...
> > There's room for improvement. Here's a pretty direct comparison between
a
> > Wrangler SE and the Honda CR-V.
> >
> > Wrangler SE: Curb weight 3235, 147 HP @ 5200 RPM, 165 lb-ft @ 4000 RPM,
> EPA
> > city 18, highway 20-21.
> >
> > CR-V: Curb weight 3258, 160 HP @ 6000 RPM, 162 lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, EPA
city
> > 21, highway 25.
> >
> >
> > The Honda makes more horsepower and the same torque (at lower RPM), but
> gets
> > 4-5 more miles per gallon on the highway. When you load one up with
huge
> > tires and offroad gear the mileage would certainly drop, but that's
almost
> > certainly not what the OP had in mind with his Jeep.
>
>
> First off, the SE is a 4 cylinder engine and this discussion was related
to
> the 4.0L six cylinder (tractor) engine we all know and love.

Well, yeah... You can do a similar exercise by comparing the Ford Escape 6
cyl to the Jeep 6 cyl.

> Secondly, 3 mpg difference is not that much. Especially considering the
> Jeep running gear will allow you to actually go *off-road* and the Honda
> running gear is designed for cruising the local mall. With that in mind,
> the 3 mpg advantage of the Honda does not seem big enough to me...

Again, yeah... 3 MPG is better than 10%, 5 MPG is close to 25%. The
vehicles are obviously meant for different purposes--but the CR-V and Escape
get better on-road mileage with the baggage of full-time 4wd.

What is WRONG about selling them with newer engines? Especially if you can
get more power and better mileage at the same time.

-John

 

"Fred W." <Fred.Wills@allspam myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:7uudncI01uBfUbHcRVn-hg@adelphia.com...
>
> "Generic" <generic@scientist.com> wrote in message
> news:412aad50$0$95602$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.co m...
> > There's room for improvement. Here's a pretty direct comparison between
a
> > Wrangler SE and the Honda CR-V.
> >
> > Wrangler SE: Curb weight 3235, 147 HP @ 5200 RPM, 165 lb-ft @ 4000 RPM,
> EPA
> > city 18, highway 20-21.
> >
> > CR-V: Curb weight 3258, 160 HP @ 6000 RPM, 162 lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, EPA
city
> > 21, highway 25.
> >
> >
> > The Honda makes more horsepower and the same torque (at lower RPM), but
> gets
> > 4-5 more miles per gallon on the highway. When you load one up with
huge
> > tires and offroad gear the mileage would certainly drop, but that's
almost
> > certainly not what the OP had in mind with his Jeep.
>
>
> First off, the SE is a 4 cylinder engine and this discussion was related
to
> the 4.0L six cylinder (tractor) engine we all know and love.

Well, yeah... You can do a similar exercise by comparing the Ford Escape 6
cyl to the Jeep 6 cyl.

> Secondly, 3 mpg difference is not that much. Especially considering the
> Jeep running gear will allow you to actually go *off-road* and the Honda
> running gear is designed for cruising the local mall. With that in mind,
> the 3 mpg advantage of the Honda does not seem big enough to me...

Again, yeah... 3 MPG is better than 10%, 5 MPG is close to 25%. The
vehicles are obviously meant for different purposes--but the CR-V and Escape
get better on-road mileage with the baggage of full-time 4wd.

What is WRONG about selling them with newer engines? Especially if you can
get more power and better mileage at the same time.

-John

 

"Fred W." <Fred.Wills@allspam myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:7uudncI01uBfUbHcRVn-hg@adelphia.com...
>
> "Generic" <generic@scientist.com> wrote in message
> news:412aad50$0$95602$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.co m...
> > There's room for improvement. Here's a pretty direct comparison between
a
> > Wrangler SE and the Honda CR-V.
> >
> > Wrangler SE: Curb weight 3235, 147 HP @ 5200 RPM, 165 lb-ft @ 4000 RPM,
> EPA
> > city 18, highway 20-21.
> >
> > CR-V: Curb weight 3258, 160 HP @ 6000 RPM, 162 lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, EPA
city
> > 21, highway 25.
> >
> >
> > The Honda makes more horsepower and the same torque (at lower RPM), but
> gets
> > 4-5 more miles per gallon on the highway. When you load one up with
huge
> > tires and offroad gear the mileage would certainly drop, but that's
almost
> > certainly not what the OP had in mind with his Jeep.
>
>
> First off, the SE is a 4 cylinder engine and this discussion was related
to
> the 4.0L six cylinder (tractor) engine we all know and love.

Well, yeah... You can do a similar exercise by comparing the Ford Escape 6
cyl to the Jeep 6 cyl.

> Secondly, 3 mpg difference is not that much. Especially considering the
> Jeep running gear will allow you to actually go *off-road* and the Honda
> running gear is designed for cruising the local mall. With that in mind,
> the 3 mpg advantage of the Honda does not seem big enough to me...

Again, yeah... 3 MPG is better than 10%, 5 MPG is close to 25%. The
vehicles are obviously meant for different purposes--but the CR-V and Escape
get better on-road mileage with the baggage of full-time 4wd.

What is WRONG about selling them with newer engines? Especially if you can
get more power and better mileage at the same time.

-John

 

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:03:15 -0700, "Generic" <generic@scientist.com>
wrote:

>
>"Fred W." <Fred.Wills@allspam myrealbox.com> wrote in message
>news:7uudncI01uBfUbHcRVn-hg@adelphia.com...
>>
>> "Generic" <generic@scientist.com> wrote in message
>> news:412aad50$0$95602$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.co m...
>> > There's room for improvement. Here's a pretty direct comparison between
>a
>> > Wrangler SE and the Honda CR-V.
>> >
>> > Wrangler SE: Curb weight 3235, 147 HP @ 5200 RPM, 165 lb-ft @ 4000 RPM,
>> EPA
>> > city 18, highway 20-21.
>> >
>> > CR-V: Curb weight 3258, 160 HP @ 6000 RPM, 162 lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, EPA
>city
>> > 21, highway 25.
>> >
>> >
>> > The Honda makes more horsepower and the same torque (at lower RPM), but
>> gets
>> > 4-5 more miles per gallon on the highway. When you load one up with
>huge
>> > tires and offroad gear the mileage would certainly drop, but that's
>almost
>> > certainly not what the OP had in mind with his Jeep.
>>
>>
>> First off, the SE is a 4 cylinder engine and this discussion was related
>to
>> the 4.0L six cylinder (tractor) engine we all know and love.
>
>Well, yeah... You can do a similar exercise by comparing the Ford Escape 6
>cyl to the Jeep 6 cyl.
>
>> Secondly, 3 mpg difference is not that much. Especially considering the
>> Jeep running gear will allow you to actually go *off-road* and the Honda
>> running gear is designed for cruising the local mall. With that in mind,
>> the 3 mpg advantage of the Honda does not seem big enough to me...
>
>Again, yeah... 3 MPG is better than 10%, 5 MPG is close to 25%. The
>vehicles are obviously meant for different purposes--but the CR-V and Escape
>get better on-road mileage with the baggage of full-time 4wd.
>
>What is WRONG about selling them with newer engines? Especially if you can
>get more power and better mileage at the same time.
>
>-John
>

It's not wrong really, but there's a lot to consider when actually
comparing the vehicles side by side (even if you stick with the 4cyl
SE vs. say the 4cyl CR-V). For starters, the stock SE comes with
P215/75R15 tires along with a 4.11 gearing. CR-V comes with P205/70R15
tires, and I can't find *any* info on gearing.

Now leaving the gearing aspect out of the equation (although I would
pretty much assume that the CR-V is geared for street use, not
off-road), you're comparing mileage of a Jeep with ~27.7" tires vs. a
CR-V pushing ~26.3's. That right there would probably account for the
'superior' CR-V mileage. If not, give the CR-V a tranny and gearing
actually suitable for off-road use, and I think you'll for sure see
its mileage spec drop, perhaps even lower than that of the 4cyl stock
Jeep.

Newer quite often isn't better. :)
'Specially as hard as it is to work on those damn foreign engines that
are designed to be completely dis-assembled just to change the oil
filter (exaggerating of course <g>) hehehe.
Oh, and the Jeep has the higher max torque, at only 400 RPM's more
than the CR-V. Can't find the actual curve, but I bet the Jeep still
has more torque than the CR-V at practical off-road RPM's in 4WD-Lo.

Dave
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0p2es/david/index.htm

 

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:03:15 -0700, "Generic" <generic@scientist.com>
wrote:

>
>"Fred W." <Fred.Wills@allspam myrealbox.com> wrote in message
>news:7uudncI01uBfUbHcRVn-hg@adelphia.com...
>>
>> "Generic" <generic@scientist.com> wrote in message
>> news:412aad50$0$95602$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.co m...
>> > There's room for improvement. Here's a pretty direct comparison between
>a
>> > Wrangler SE and the Honda CR-V.
>> >
>> > Wrangler SE: Curb weight 3235, 147 HP @ 5200 RPM, 165 lb-ft @ 4000 RPM,
>> EPA
>> > city 18, highway 20-21.
>> >
>> > CR-V: Curb weight 3258, 160 HP @ 6000 RPM, 162 lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, EPA
>city
>> > 21, highway 25.
>> >
>> >
>> > The Honda makes more horsepower and the same torque (at lower RPM), but
>> gets
>> > 4-5 more miles per gallon on the highway. When you load one up with
>huge
>> > tires and offroad gear the mileage would certainly drop, but that's
>almost
>> > certainly not what the OP had in mind with his Jeep.
>>
>>
>> First off, the SE is a 4 cylinder engine and this discussion was related
>to
>> the 4.0L six cylinder (tractor) engine we all know and love.
>
>Well, yeah... You can do a similar exercise by comparing the Ford Escape 6
>cyl to the Jeep 6 cyl.
>
>> Secondly, 3 mpg difference is not that much. Especially considering the
>> Jeep running gear will allow you to actually go *off-road* and the Honda
>> running gear is designed for cruising the local mall. With that in mind,
>> the 3 mpg advantage of the Honda does not seem big enough to me...
>
>Again, yeah... 3 MPG is better than 10%, 5 MPG is close to 25%. The
>vehicles are obviously meant for different purposes--but the CR-V and Escape
>get better on-road mileage with the baggage of full-time 4wd.
>
>What is WRONG about selling them with newer engines? Especially if you can
>get more power and better mileage at the same time.
>
>-John
>

It's not wrong really, but there's a lot to consider when actually
comparing the vehicles side by side (even if you stick with the 4cyl
SE vs. say the 4cyl CR-V). For starters, the stock SE comes with
P215/75R15 tires along with a 4.11 gearing. CR-V comes with P205/70R15
tires, and I can't find *any* info on gearing.

Now leaving the gearing aspect out of the equation (although I would
pretty much assume that the CR-V is geared for street use, not
off-road), you're comparing mileage of a Jeep with ~27.7" tires vs. a
CR-V pushing ~26.3's. That right there would probably account for the
'superior' CR-V mileage. If not, give the CR-V a tranny and gearing
actually suitable for off-road use, and I think you'll for sure see
its mileage spec drop, perhaps even lower than that of the 4cyl stock
Jeep.

Newer quite often isn't better. :)
'Specially as hard as it is to work on those damn foreign engines that
are designed to be completely dis-assembled just to change the oil
filter (exaggerating of course <g>) hehehe.
Oh, and the Jeep has the higher max torque, at only 400 RPM's more
than the CR-V. Can't find the actual curve, but I bet the Jeep still
has more torque than the CR-V at practical off-road RPM's in 4WD-Lo.

Dave
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0p2es/david/index.htm

 

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:03:15 -0700, "Generic" <generic@scientist.com>
wrote:

>
>"Fred W." <Fred.Wills@allspam myrealbox.com> wrote in message
>news:7uudncI01uBfUbHcRVn-hg@adelphia.com...
>>
>> "Generic" <generic@scientist.com> wrote in message
>> news:412aad50$0$95602$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.co m...
>> > There's room for improvement. Here's a pretty direct comparison between
>a
>> > Wrangler SE and the Honda CR-V.
>> >
>> > Wrangler SE: Curb weight 3235, 147 HP @ 5200 RPM, 165 lb-ft @ 4000 RPM,
>> EPA
>> > city 18, highway 20-21.
>> >
>> > CR-V: Curb weight 3258, 160 HP @ 6000 RPM, 162 lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, EPA
>city
>> > 21, highway 25.
>> >
>> >
>> > The Honda makes more horsepower and the same torque (at lower RPM), but
>> gets
>> > 4-5 more miles per gallon on the highway. When you load one up with
>huge
>> > tires and offroad gear the mileage would certainly drop, but that's
>almost
>> > certainly not what the OP had in mind with his Jeep.
>>
>>
>> First off, the SE is a 4 cylinder engine and this discussion was related
>to
>> the 4.0L six cylinder (tractor) engine we all know and love.
>
>Well, yeah... You can do a similar exercise by comparing the Ford Escape 6
>cyl to the Jeep 6 cyl.
>
>> Secondly, 3 mpg difference is not that much. Especially considering the
>> Jeep running gear will allow you to actually go *off-road* and the Honda
>> running gear is designed for cruising the local mall. With that in mind,
>> the 3 mpg advantage of the Honda does not seem big enough to me...
>
>Again, yeah... 3 MPG is better than 10%, 5 MPG is close to 25%. The
>vehicles are obviously meant for different purposes--but the CR-V and Escape
>get better on-road mileage with the baggage of full-time 4wd.
>
>What is WRONG about selling them with newer engines? Especially if you can
>get more power and better mileage at the same time.
>
>-John
>

It's not wrong really, but there's a lot to consider when actually
comparing the vehicles side by side (even if you stick with the 4cyl
SE vs. say the 4cyl CR-V). For starters, the stock SE comes with
P215/75R15 tires along with a 4.11 gearing. CR-V comes with P205/70R15
tires, and I can't find *any* info on gearing.

Now leaving the gearing aspect out of the equation (although I would
pretty much assume that the CR-V is geared for street use, not
off-road), you're comparing mileage of a Jeep with ~27.7" tires vs. a
CR-V pushing ~26.3's. That right there would probably account for the
'superior' CR-V mileage. If not, give the CR-V a tranny and gearing
actually suitable for off-road use, and I think you'll for sure see
its mileage spec drop, perhaps even lower than that of the 4cyl stock
Jeep.

Newer quite often isn't better. :)
'Specially as hard as it is to work on those damn foreign engines that
are designed to be completely dis-assembled just to change the oil
filter (exaggerating of course <g>) hehehe.
Oh, and the Jeep has the higher max torque, at only 400 RPM's more
than the CR-V. Can't find the actual curve, but I bet the Jeep still
has more torque than the CR-V at practical off-road RPM's in 4WD-Lo.

Dave
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0p2es/david/index.htm

 

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:03:15 -0700, "Generic" <generic@scientist.com>
wrote:

>Again, yeah... 3 MPG is better than 10%, 5 MPG is close to 25%. The
>vehicles are obviously meant for different purposes--but the CR-V and Escape
>get better on-road mileage with the baggage of full-time 4wd.
>
>What is WRONG about selling them with newer engines? Especially if you can
>get more power and better mileage at the same time.

One gets the feeling here that some Jeep fans wish it were still, say,
1955.

---
RJ

 

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:03:15 -0700, "Generic" <generic@scientist.com>
wrote:

>Again, yeah... 3 MPG is better than 10%, 5 MPG is close to 25%. The
>vehicles are obviously meant for different purposes--but the CR-V and Escape
>get better on-road mileage with the baggage of full-time 4wd.
>
>What is WRONG about selling them with newer engines? Especially if you can
>get more power and better mileage at the same time.

One gets the feeling here that some Jeep fans wish it were still, say,
1955.

---
RJ