Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum!
If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page.
Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.
Thsi is my first post to this forum. I do not own a XJ yet but am in the market. I would like to know what is the first year XJ with the 4.0 upgrade to the new design that I have read about on this forum? I currently own a '99 Durango that I have added many toys to(400+hp) but am looking at something new to play with. Thanks for any input.
Which 'new design'? There have been several minor tweaks to the 4.0L since it was introduced to the Cherokee using a Renix computer in 1987.
4.0L I6 "Power Tech" Renix - 177 hp @ 4750 rpm, 224 ft lb @ 2400 rpm/220lbft @ 2000rpm - used 87-90
4.0L I6 MPI "Power Tech HO" (High Output) - 190 hp @ 4750 rpm, 225 ft lb @ 3,950 rpm - used in 91-95
4.0L I6 MPI "Power Tech HO" (High Output) - 190 hp @ 4600 rpm, 225 ft lb @ 3,000 rpm - used in 96-99 (OBDII was included)
4.0L I6 MPI "Power Tech HO" (High Output) - 193 hp @ 4600 rpm, 231 ft lb @ 3,000 rpm - used in 00-01 (distributorless ignition)
Thanks Yucca Man! I had no idea there were so many changes. It looks like I will be looking for a '96 or newer to get the OBDII and the higher HP. Any other reccomendations you might have as to a specific model? I plan on using it for off roading but not to the extent of major rock crawling.(at least not at first!) Thanks again!
99 seems to be the banner year for that engine, and the Cherokee itself. With apologies to George Orwell, all Cherokees are equal, it's just that some are more equal than others
Look for a Sport model. The base model (SE) has idiot lights instead of gauges. The Sport will give you the more important things like gauges but not the super fawncy stuff that adds weight and complexity without adding any off-road performance. If you can find one with the Up Country package (this is NOT the same as the Country Edition offered in earlier years) you'll get skid plates, tow hooks, and an upgraded suspension.
Thanks so much for all the tips! I'm glad I checked with you guys first, I had no idea what all the different variations of the XJ were. I am getting rid of a '95 Mustang conv. that I have had just over a year and have decided that it is too small. I am 6'5" and there just isn't enough room in the newer body style stang. Yes it is fun, and fast but it will be replaced by an XJ very soon. Thanks again!
They are impressive spec's, but there is something to be said for having the OBDII option. I guess I've gotten spoiled being able to plug into my rig and get the codes, but are they worth the extra cash for a newer XJ? I guess I will have to think about it. Thanks for the pointer! RWD
Body redesign in 97 was a biggie too, they lost the fiberglass rear hatch and went to steel. redesigned the dash and interior. Also if planning on mods look for one without a D35 Rear, look for an 8.25, quick way to tell is the 8.25 has a flat bottom and the 8.25 was not used if the XJ had ABS, ABS only came with a D35.
At 6'5" you might want to consider the older style interior and exterior design. I am 6'3" and drive a 90 XJ. It feels roomy enough but when I drove the newer style at a job as a security officer I felt cramped. The panel below the dash was way too far forward... or back... too close to my knees. I kept hitting them on it. Everything seemed to be made more ergonomic for the average height person. Be sure to test drive both styles. I think I would definitely trade comfort over some engine options. Also I like the style of the bezels around the side markers and headlights on the older style. They were made with different peices that fit well together. The newer style looks like they took the cheap way out and made a one peice bezel that goes around the grill and headlights.
At 6'5" you might want to consider the older style interior and exterior design. I am 6'3" and drive a 90 XJ. It feels roomy enough but when I drove the newer style at a job as a security officer I felt cramped. The panel below the dash was way too far forward... or back... too close to my knees. I kept hitting them on it..... Also I like the style of the bezels around the side markers and headlights on the older style. .
90NH, by "newer" do you mean after '97 or even earlier? I have a 17 year-old grandson who's 6'3 & wants an XJ, but finds the knee/head room in my '96 marginal.
I agree with 90NHXJ. My wife's 1996 Sport was always uncomfortable for me to ride in long distances. I'm 6'3" and the primary issue was leg room. I picke dup an 87 Laredo this past fall, and what a difference the earlier adjustable seats make! I don't know what other changes were made to the interior, but my 87 is comfortable, the 96 is somewhat tolerable.
I dunno about that, I'm 6'6" and very comfortable in my 98, initially our TJ's felt kind of cramped but after a few minutes I'm fine. I'm actually more comfortable than in the wifes 96 Olds cutlass but I think thats more of a 'I don't like being that close to the road' feeling I get with that low rider boat of hers...
I guess it's a question of how height is distributed. My 6'3" grandson is all legs & it's kneeroom that's barely adequate for him, my 6'4' son's height is from waist up & he just clears the headliner, a 6'5 son-in-law is evenly proportioned both ways & is comfortable.
(What bothers my son most is the grab handle above the front passenger seat. He has an intercranial shunt & that danged thing is positioned to crack his head right where the shunt is. Unless someone can give me a good reason to keep it I think I'll remove it.)
another thing to think of for us "big guys" is that a 2 door has a much larger door opening than the 4 door models but the same floor pan and wheelbase.. i have to slode my seat all the way back and i hate having the B pillar right next to me in my line of sight...
I would say by newer I mean the 97's and newer (I think it's the 97's). It was the year they remodeled the exterior to the more rounded design. It just felt to me that everything was moved closer to the driver to make it more ergonomic. I like the interior of the newer models but feel more cramped inside them. The biggest part was the knee area. On my 2 door 90 my head is close to the ceiling but I have plenty of knee room. But hey... any XJ is way better than no XJ.
It's the damned seat.... I have a 95'(power NOTHING) and an 00'(power EVERYTHING), the earlier seats sat lower to the floor and were not adjustable for height. The newer (electric seats atleast) are of course more cumbersome under the seat due to the motors. I have a Limited (the 2000), so it's got all the electric, and i have measured and found that even with the seat all the way down, it does not squat as low as the seat in my 95'. This in addition the the new dash, creates a problem. I am a 12 volt installer so i've had the opportunity to take both apart on multiple vehicles, the knee board in the 97+ is slighlty beefier (safety) so it is more intrusive. The seats limited drop only accentuates this intrusion. It was enough that i noticed...and it annoys me how close my head is to the ceiling sometimes (only when my hair is spiked up to go out). But it didn't sway me from getting the exact jeep that i dreamt about at night.
i have a 99 classic and its great my seats are still manual, but being 5'11 i fit quite comfy All I do is feel sorry for anyone who has to ride in the back, because i refuse to move my seat one way or another lol. my grandma has the same year/make model and my grandpa who was 6'10" never really had too many probs except his legs were kinda scrunched. but then again i could never figure out how he managed to fit in a 47 willys to drive it lol
