Best pre 2000 XJ model year?

Have a '88 XJ since new. Its a go to work truck with 276,000 on it.

Thinking of getting another pre 2000 XJ. What was the "best" all around year model? Its strictly a back and forth to work usage, no off roading, modding, go fast, climb rocks, etc. Dont need 4wd and perfer an automatic.

I'm not gonna say search, but the question has been asked 'many a time'.


99 for many reasons... I have a 97 and when it dies I'm goin 99.

I hear a lot of good things about 1999 - and I heard about them AFTER I got my 1999, so it is a little less biased:roll:. The ones with 8.25's are 29 spline (along with 97, 98, and some 96's), there is no risk of vacuum disconnects, the 4.0 is likely to have less mileage (just because of it's age), and it has more unibody reinforcement than earlier models.

Most of these advantages are off-road perks, though. The drivetrain on XJ's varied very little throughout production, so you will likely be in a similar boat regardless of year chosen. Naturally, I would still lean toward as 'new' as possible and/or as few miles as possible. If you are looking for longevity, the way it has been treated by previous owners will have a lot to do with the rest of it's life. If you can find one that has been a grocery getter with all the previous maintenence records in the glove box, you'll be best off (as with any vehicle purchase). The drivetrain on XJ's is pretty solid and able to withstand lots and lots of miles. If the 4.0 is taken care of, it lasts a long dang time...as you know. Out of curiosity, what happened in the 2000-2001 production years that steers you away from them? The change in the fuel injection system? A lot of guys here just don't like the front axle, but it is an off-road concern.

Good luck!

Floydargue said:

I hear a lot of good things about 1999 - and I heard about them AFTER I got my 1999, so it is a little less biased:roll:. The ones with 8.25's are 29 spline (along with 97, 98, and some 96's), there is no risk of vacuum disconnects, the 4.0 is likely to have less mileage (just because of it's age), and it has more unibody reinforcement than earlier models.

Most of these advantages are off-road perks, though. The drivetrain on XJ's varied very little throughout production, so you will likely be in a similar boat regardless of year chosen. Naturally, I would still lean toward as 'new' as possible and/or as few miles as possible. If you are looking for longevity, the way it has been treated by previous owners will have a lot to do with the rest of it's life. If you can find one that has been a grocery getter with all the previous maintenence records in the glove box, you'll be best off (as with any vehicle purchase). The drivetrain on XJ's is pretty solid and able to withstand lots and lots of miles. If the 4.0 is taken care of, it lasts a long dang time...as you know. Out of curiosity, what happened in the 2000-2001 production years that steers you away from them? The change in the fuel injection system? A lot of guys here just don't like the front axle, but it is an off-road concern.

Good luck!

Click to expand...

i only heard the bad part about 00-01 is the low pinion front axle... but thats fixable as problems come about, i personally love my 2000 xj

99 (first half of year before head change) for the late style. 95 for the older ones. Of course that's what I'd say, because I have a 95 and a 99.

MaxxXJ said:

i only heard the bad part about 00-01 is the low pinion front axle...

Click to expand...

and the head, and coil packs..

nw-xj-scott said:

and the head, and coil packs..

Click to expand...

i think my head got replaced at 32K before i got it and the coil packs seem to be doing alright so far... but i wont know until after one goes right...

I've missed my 88 ever since I sold it, and I want another renix (easy to fix and they were not chryslerized yet, LOL) My 97 is a bit of a problem child, but it keeps running and running and running even when it's in need of repairs. I'd probably get a 97, 98, or 99 if I wanted another newer XJ...

95 or 99 like Matthew Currie said. 96 would be ok if you aren't going to lift it, want OBD II, and like the old body style, but I'd say 95 is superior... And I have a 96.

if i get another xj it will be a 97-99 model, i just simply like that body style best. and besides, who can safely say that their xj is all an 88 or all 94 parts? =) i sure cant say my xj has xj leafs on it... or will have a bumper off a 2000 xj =)

nw-xj-scott said:

and the head, and coil packs..

Click to expand...

Head I'll agree on - coilpacks I won't. My coilpacks have 160k miles on them, cousin has 157k on his and I met a fellow Jeeper with 250k miles on his '01 coilpacks - all original equipment. I guess the argument is if they go bad, they cost a lot to replace?

They are also apparently a pain to test ignition and such on - you can't pull just one spark plug. I like coil-on-plug for a lot of reasons, but I don't like it when it's one monster module, I prefer a separate coil pack for each plug.

There isn't actually anything wrong with the function of teh coil packs. It just makes it a bit harder to diagnose some engine problems (like trying to short out a plug) and teh coil rail can be a pain to get in and out. I would also add that another bad thing about 00-01 is the california emissions package and the heat soak issues.

I'd get a 99 if I did it over again.

99 (first half of year before head change) for the late style. 95 for the older ones. Of course that's what I'd say, because I have a 95 and a 99.

I thought they did not start the 0331 head until 2000. When did they start the 0331 head in 99?

I prefer any of the 96's up just for the newer styled interior and better seats.

The 00/01 low pinion D30 is a $100 swap so that wouldnt sway my decision.

Coil packs.... Bought my 01 from the original owner with 200k on it. Other than normal servicing and brakes nothing else has ever been touched so that coil pack is still going strong.
True it would be harder to "backyard check" missing cylinders but thats not much of a downfall IMO.

Heads... Ive talked to more people who havent had any problems with their 0331 heads than those who have. If the head had a flaw it would have shown up 1000's of miles before I got it.

Rmart30 said:

Heads... Ive talked to more people who havent had any problems with their 0331 heads than those who have. If the head had a flaw it would have shown up 1000's of miles before I got it.

Click to expand...

I've had my hands on three very high mileage 0331 heads and none of them had any cracking. Still, the fact that the issue has shown up in many other cases makes me want to shy away from it...

I think the 00-01s also have less balls in reality, but on paper they are the same.

bwinter1946 said:

99 (first half of year before head change) for the late style. 95 for the older ones. Of course that's what I'd say, because I have a 95 and a 99.

I thought they did not start the 0331 head until 2000. When did they start the 0331 head in 99?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure, but I have heard that late 99's can have the 0331 head.

The Grand Cherokee started getting the 0331 heads in '99. Could be very possible that Jeep wanted to change the entire '99 model year over to that head, but had a surplus of older 0630 head-equipped engines left over and just used them all up in the Cherokee. At the time, I'm sure the 0331 head was viewed as superior to any previous cylinder head design so they wanted to put it in their 'top of the line' Jeep model (WJ at that point).

It wasn't really viewed as superior from a performance point, but from an emissions stand point.