Threeweight wrote:
I did a lot of research on the 2.8 before I bought my CRD. As I recall, our "happy tractor" is literally a tractor engine (and a mini-van engine, and an suv engine, and a boat engine, and an industrial equipment engine, etc...) Has been adapted to many, many different uses over the years in both the 2.5 and 2.8 incarnations, and has as stellar reputation for reliability. I don't think the iron and aluminum bits of the engine are much to be worried about. My only gripe about the engine is the use of a timing belt that will need replacement every 100k.
As I tell my wife, the Italian parts of our Jeep are bomb proof. It's the stuff Chrysler built that we have to pay attention to.
That warms to hear. I too did some research about the 2.8 before I went out and bought one. My choice was between a Patrol 3.0 and the Jeep.
The 3.0 Patrols have blown excessively many pistons in Australia, and I turned to the same country to find reports of failures on the KJ. I found none. I discovered the inks and kinks on the CRD (blow-by oil vapor in intake, torque converter, EGR and MAF clogging). Based on that I went ahead with my purchase, even though I loved the Patrol as well.
As I get more and more information about the KJ it seems the engine itself has no problems around here. There is a few guys who's lost an engine prematurely, because something fell off the intake and got chewed by the pistons and shat all over the engine interiors
So I too came to that conclusion that the engine itself is fine, it's all the stuff around it which needs attention, which is nice to know beforehand.
Where did you read about reliability of the 2.8 in other applications?