XJ/ZJ as budget off roader

[redthies]

I’m still (more?) on the fence now. There seem to be very few if any XJs around my area that I’d even consider, but there seems to be a good variety of ZJ and WJs. I like the look of the WJ more, and I can’t imagine the ZJ is any less electronic reliant. I have a 3500 diesel and a 100 series TLC, so as I said before, this will be mostly a trail toy, but it will see a bit of highway/freeway travel as our run around rig when the truck and camper are set up as “basecamp”. In a perfect world I’d find something that isn’t too big of a turd so I can leave the diesel at home a bit more often. Is there much difference in fuel consumption between the 4.0 and the 5.2 or 4.7? I know the 5.2 is a thirsty pig... but solid as a rock.

 

[Mundo4x4Casa]

Having owned 3-XJ's, also known as the, "Not-so-grand Cherokee", i can say i like them. 1990 (rolled it off a cliff in Telluride); 1989 Limited (a lot of woes with the dangerous Bendix 9 anti lock brake system, which was resolved with a large class action lawsuit); and a 1999 Classic. The first two had the Renault Renix fuel injection system, which was less desirable than the last iteration (post 1991) with MPI Mopar Fuel Injection. For a decade, the 1997-2001 XJ's were the toad of choice for medium MoHo owners. Why? 3000 pounds. All weather; all surface. Can be towed wheels down. Low profile. Narrow. Easy to attach trailer style tow brakes and a tow bar. I cannot say any of these features fit when flat towing my up armored, built CJ-8 with 37 inch tires. A couple close disasters forced me to buy a car trailer for it.
I still have my '99, with a 3.73 trashlok rear end, NP-242, AW-4, and a 3.73 True Trac front diff, and find it to be the best snow car I've ever owned. It has a 2 and 3 inch lift, F/R, 30 inch mud tires, and 122K miles on it, only 10K mi. in the last 10 years. With so few miles is probably worth what I paid for it 10 years ago and soldiers on, mostly through our winters on the West Slope.
My son has had a '93 ZJ, which he drove 200K miles until the electrical system caught up with him; and a couple pretty much trouble-free WJ's, which are probably the all-time pinnacle of the Jeep line with their all coil suspension on solid axles, but not so nimble and heavier if a toad. After having many NP-231's and NP-242's, my choice, especially for snow country, is the 242 with it's full-time slot and the AW-4 (Aisin-Warner) wide ratio Toyota transmission. The Mopar auto trans of the era was a dog, needing a rebuild about every 80K miles. I've driven a stick XJ with the T-5 trannie, and it had a very awkward clutch, plus the wennie gears of the T-5. No thanks. Going in and out of ice/snow, season after season in part-time 4WD on the highway will stretch or tear up the chain on a 231. The 242 is actually easier on the drivetrain because it does not bind up in curves. It does have a smaller output shaft and bearing than the 231, but it was never a problem in my 300K miles driving XJ's. One trans tech friend once remarked somewhat in jest that the AW-4 works just as well with or without ATF. The bottom line for me is that the XJ is just fun to drive. It's a 4WD mosquito, flitting from mogul to rock garden with a lightweight ease not found in heavier Jeeps. If this is your choice you will have to cast your net far and wide to get a suitable XJ without high miles or too beat up. They made 350K(?) of these (1984-2001), but time is taking its toll and they are fading from the scene as we speak. jefe

 

[drinkdrankdrunk]

The 4.0 and the 4.7 get pretty much the same gas mileage, which made it hard for me to decide to go with the 4.0, but the reliability of the 4.0 compared to the 4.7 is what I ultimately made my decision around. I can't speak for the 5.2 but I think it gets similar but slightly worse milage than the 4.0/4.7.


Also as Mundo said above, the 242 tcase is in my opinion the best of all the options offered between the XJ/ZJ/WJ. It gives you the most control out of any of the systems. The 247 only gives you 4hi unlocked, and 4lo locked. The 242 gives you 2wd, 4hi locked, 4hi unlocked, and 4lo locked. I'm not too familiar with the 231 but from my understanding it's pretty much the 242 but without the 4hi locked option, though the internals are supposed to be slightly stronger. I should be able to answer most questions you have regarding the WJ if you have any, it sounds like Mundo is your XJ guy though.

 

[jonb8]

I've owned them all and it comes down to the motors and transmissions.. The Chrysler transmissions are junk at best and the AW4 in the xj is as bulletproof as they come.. I drove this xj from WV to California and ran the Rubicon Trail last year (5300 miles), and followed it up this year by driving it to Colorado, and Utah (3600 miles) Chrysler made the electrical systems on the ZJ and WJ's a nightmare to diagnose issues with along with the 4.7 engine that was also expensive and hard to maintain.. I'll say the 5.2 and 5.9 engines were reliable but the D44 rear axles in the ZJ was a D44A and A stands for aluminum and not very reliable.. Other then that on the ZJ you get a D35 which has spider gears the size of a quarter....LOL

 

[Battle]

XJs are great - you get the same front suspension as a TJ, the option for a better rear axle than a TJ (Chrysler 8.25 > D35), a leaf sprung rear for stability, a very nice wheelbase, an actually good automatic, a pretty strong stick shift (Asian Warner AX15 - not a T-5), and most importantly (and subjectively) a really fun car to drive. It takes more work to fit bigger tires than say a TJ, the stick shifts have really undesirable axle gears (3.07s), and the unibody (or uniframe if you want to get pedantic) is not very good at resisting rust, but otherwise, I've been very happy with the three I've owned (two sticks, one automatic). My current rig is essentially stock, but makes long-distance trips with ease and wheels fairly well for just having 27" tires. My last XJ was locked/locked on 33s and I once drove ~1,500 miles round trip to wheel it pretty hard and it got me back without issue. Before that, when I lived within 30 mins of an ORV park, I wheeled it at least once a month and it always surprised me with how capable it could be. Wouldn't have hesitated to push it further in terms of distance.
A lot of people say the 1999s are the best year. I owned one, and compared to my 98 and my current 97, the 99 did seem to be the most well-engineered model year. Seems like Jeep worked out all the kinks then before jumping the shark with the 2000s and 2001s (low pinion front axle, coil pack ignition, and a new head casting that's susceptible to cracking).

 

[comptiger5000]

The WJ isn't much heavier than a ZJ FWIW. Excluding some of the early base model ZJs, most similarly optioned ZJs and WJs are within 100 lbs of each other, often a smaller difference than that. Both are around 1000 lbs heavier than a XJ though.

The D44a isn't a bad axle, but it needs a skid plate and maybe a truss for heavy use to avoid damaging the aluminum housing. It's pretty hard to outright break it though, as the guts are close in strength / size to a JK D44.

Personally, if swapping transfer cases, I'd run a 231, not a 242. The 242 is kind a POS IMO. 20 lbs heavier for no real gain, shifts in / out of 4wd much worse and the "full time" mode is open center diff, so it's pretty worthless in my experience (much worse than the fulltime mode of a 249 or 247).

 

[jonb8]

I agree with everything Battle said, and will add that 1998 is my favorite year xj. I've had the best luck with them, its a lot harder to diagnose a no start (fire) issue when they went to coil pack because it could be either crank sensor or coil pack. The heads were prone to cracks in 00 and 01 also. Watch for unibody rust in rear sections around rear bumpstops and were the gas fill hoses go through on drivers side.....

 

[Luckychase5]

I've owned them all and it comes down to the motors and transmissions.. The Chrysler transmissions are junk at best and the AW4 in the xj is as bulletproof as they come.. I drove this xj from WV to California and ran the Rubicon Trail last year (5300 miles), and followed it up this year by driving it to Colorado, and Utah (3600 miles) Chrysler made the electrical systems on the ZJ and WJ's a nightmare to diagnose issues with along with the 4.7 engine that was also expensive and hard to maintain.. I'll say the 5.2 and 5.9 engines were reliable but the D44 rear axles in the ZJ was a D44A and A stands for aluminum and not very reliable.. Other then that on the ZJ you get a D35 which has spider gears the size of a quarter....LOL

Love those XJ’s! Do you have a build thread on the white one?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jonb8]

Love those XJ’s! Do you have a build thread on the white one?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The white one is my brothers MJ, he has a build thread on Comanche Club. it's in the epic builds section

 

[zebsxj4]

The white one is my brothers MJ, he has a build thread on Comanche Club. it's in the epic builds section

Is that the ORF front bumper on the teal xj?

 

[Mitch502]

If you're going for 3" lift, you can't go wrong with any of the 3 (XJ/ZJ/WJ)

XJ's used to outnumber ZJ's/WJ's in aftermarket parts, but that is starting to not be the case. And if you're truly going to stick with "budget" and not do a TON of stuff, I'd go with ZJ/WJ for FAR SUPERIOR comfort in my opinion, and the V8 option.

And honestly, you can probably find a cheaper ZJ/WJ that's nicer than any XJ for the same price.

The 98 5.9L ZJ is the best ZJ, and you can find some stock ones for pretty cheap cause people don't know what they have and they typically don't bring much anyways. The 5.9L has the 5.9L engine plus a heavier transmission. Look at my build thread in my sig for some info on them.

 

[jonb8]

Is that the ORF front bumper on the teal xj?

No I built that one,

 

[ultraclyde]

Since this thread popped back up, I'll throw in that I'm selling my ZJ but I'm in the Southeast. PM me if anyone's interested.

 

[BigDaveZJ]

The biggest thing I would suggest when buying a unibody rig for wheeling is to buy one that has not already been wheeled extensively. The unibody is the main drawback to these rigs and eventually it will become a problem if you're running 33's or larger and truly wheeling it. It is WAY easier to put in some preventative measures at the beginning than it is to repair a damaged unibody. I've had a 95 ZJ for close to 20 years where the unibody is held together by duct tape and a prayer, but recently picked up a 5.9 that I will eventually transfer the suspension and axles over to. The unibody on the 5.9 is in perfect shape, and I will be adding several different methods of reinforcement to try to keep it that way.

 

[sniderexciderr]

I have been considering these very same platforms. at the moment I'm leaning toward a zj.

Wj: My favorite of the 3 as far as looks. why I don't like it is because the front axle is basically wj only. and any upgrades for that axle are super spendy. and you still have a LP. jk axles are an easy swap from what I can tell but they are still pretty expensive compared to xj hp30. I would guess it would probably be fine 33s and smaller.

Xj: Plenty of them out there, but hard to find ones for a decent price that haven't been abused. suspension kits and armor are pretty cheap for them and axle upgrades are way cheaper than wj.
leafs in the rear, makes axle swaps easy and the suspension is simple. Definitely a tried and true platform for abuse.

Zj: same front suspension and axle width as tj, and xj. So you can just bolt in a hp d30 for the better gear strength. upgraded shafts are way cheaper than what's available for wj if you need more beef up front. the zj has a linked rear suspension. My plan is to weld zj brackets to an explorer 8.8 and do that swap due to availability of that axle. the Zj also seems to be cheaper to buy than the xj too and I have seen a few online in my area in decent shape.

but all of that depends on how far you want to take the build. I'd like to do 35s at some point.