Renix=slow HO=fast!

[Jeepguy03]

I've owned a 1990, and 2 2000 models. All three were 4.0 auto 4x4 with the same gear ratio. The 1990 and one of the 2000s had the NP242. They all felt very similar power-wise. I think the HO engines have the slight edge in top-end HP, but the renix engines have torque earlier on in the power band. A lot of it depends on how it was maintained. Other influences could be tire size/weight, weight of gear carried in the Jeep, even alignment.

I will say I miss the fuel mileage in the renix. I routinely saw 21-22 mpg cruising around town. With the 2000s I'm lucky to get 17, and I know a lot more about maintenance now than when I owned the 1990.

The renix interior is also superior. My 90 was a limited so it had leather, but just the build quality of the plastics is better. The interior in the 97+ is cheap and rattles constantly. Obviously it is an entry level 16 year old SUV not a BMW, but even when it was only 6 years old the thing rattled haha.

 

[cruiser54]

I've owned a 1990, and 2 2000 models. All three were 4.0 auto 4x4 with the same gear ratio. The 1990 and one of the 2000s had the NP242. They all felt very similar power-wise. I think the HO engines have the slight edge in top-end HP, but the renix engines have torque earlier on in the power band. A lot of it depends on how it was maintained. Other influences could be tire size/weight, weight of gear carried in the Jeep, even alignment.

I will say I miss the fuel mileage in the renix. I routinely saw 21-22 mpg cruising around town. With the 2000s I'm lucky to get 17, and I know a lot more about maintenance now than when I owned the 1990.

The renix interior is also superior. My 90 was a limited so it had leather, but just the build quality of the plastics is better. The interior in the 97+ is cheap and rattles constantly. Obviously it is an entry level 16 year old SUV not a BMW, but even when it was only 6 years old the thing rattled haha.

Interesting and I concur.

Having driven them basically side by side, as demos for myself, and then customer vehicles concurrently, I have to agree with your assessment.

The OP's conclusion is far from accurate. There are more variables not being taken into account.

 

[maybe2fast]

60mm throttlebody seemed to help my displeasure. still seems alittle doggy, but she is a sub 200hp brick

 

[Ecomike]

Bending the 90 degree throttle rod on my 87 Wagoneer last month to match my 89, solved the last of my 12 year old gutless power Renix issues on the 87 Wagoneer, FINALLY.

I discovered it by accident using a snap on Brick Mt-2500 test on the TPS at WOT engine off, power on and physical inspections to see why the TPS was not reaching Max readings. It was going to about 55% instead of 87% open at WOT. What a huge massive difference a small change in the angle of that throttle rod made. PO must have dorked it up.