raising the height changes the amount of air disturbed as you drive -
disturbing the air uses extra energy.

it also tends to force people to but on bigger, heavier tires to make it look right.
which require extra energy to turn.

however - it is a Jeep.

Jeeps tend to work better with lifts and bigger tires, even if you disturb the air a bit.

_________________
2005 CRD
stuff
Skeptic quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Well. I took about a 2 mpg hit when i got a lift, maybe three mpg.
Imho the crd with stock rubber is making more power at highway speeds than you reasonably need, so your not going to see a significant hit, like if it were a gasser, also putting taller rubber on the crd does not hurt it, it seems to help. Now, i already had a tune on it so i don't know about stock.

However when i got taller tiers, i gained mpg.
I now cruise at 65 mph at @30-36 mpg and 1750 rpm. Before that I was at I believe 2100 rpm. I usually drive about 70 to 75 mpg and i'm pretty mild around town but i live in a hilly area, i get a easy 28-32 combined.
When i go up to Barona i only manage to get around 26 mpg. On my old 4 runner that was about 6 mpg. I get better mileage commuting up there than my wife's Saturn, and it's not a struggle for power, ether. (2003 l200 gets about 22 mpg on that trip)

235 85 are not going to work stock. They are pushing it with a Frankie II premium. I had to remove the fender liner, lower air dam, and i rub on the sway bar. I can knock the fenders off in thick mud.

That's a thirty two inch tire. 265/75's fit better it seems. (with the same trimming) However the 235/85 work great on the stock alloy's.

There is plenty of info on tire sizes in the tire section.
The end effect is that taller help us, wider hurts us.
I went with 235/85 because i liked the gearing i would get, and the fact that i could use the rims i already had.

Tire weight has a larger impact on stop and go, something the liberty is already crippled at, this vehicle is BIG, turbo or not, it's heavy. It takes fuel to move a stationary mass. It takes a lot of fuel to move it quickly.

I find this VERY interesting--taller is better.

I have no idea what the rims are on my 05; they are certainly not stock.

I love my GY Duratracs, quiet on the road, awesome everywhere, better fuel economy than a 245/75, look great. Tough to get the tires to sit on an 8" rim but im living proof it can be done.

_________________
2006 Jeep Liberty Limited CRD - DRL's activated, Moab wheels and 215/85/16 Goodyear Duratracs, Frankenlifted, Cummins Lift pump, Magnaflow 2.5" all the way back, no cat , suncoast, Viper command start, Valentine One.
1967 Jeep M725 - a real cream puff

265 70 16's Mich, LTX E rated off of my 02 Dodge 2500

http://davidhaggart.smugmug.com/gallery ... 1438_ZcBAB

_________________
2006 Liberty Sport CRD
GDE FT ECO/HOT Tunes.
OME 2.5
265 70r 16
SC Bumper
Glass Pack
Provent
Dodge 2500 in tank Lift pump
Samco Hoses
Rocky Road UCA
Transgo shift kit
Updated torque converter
Weeks Kit 1 & 2

This should only be an issue in 4WD (part time). This mode should only be used when you have compromised traction so any wheel size difference can be accounted for by wheel slippage. In 2WD and AWD (full time) the front and rear can turn at different rates so different tire sizes should not be a concern. If his fronts are going fast he more likely has an alignment issue.

Interestingly, on my CRD I have gotten into some situations where I needed the 4wd to pull me out (rear tire not on the ground b/c I drove into a small ditch and happened to stop *just right*) and the part-time had NO reaction at all. I stayed stuck, and the rear wheel continued to spin in the air. Put it into 4wd-lo, and drove right out of the problem.

This has happened several times, so I know it wasn't just an isolated incident. Thoughts from the group? I thought the electronic lockers were supposed to engage in part time just like in 4-lo... So since my 4-lo works great, whats happening?

What "electronic lockers"???? - these aren't Rubicons - everything's mechanical

and in the case of the 242 transfer case - the lever pushes against a spring which pushes against the gears
if the front and rear shafts are turning exactly the same then the 4 wd engages - if they're not the same = it doesn't engage the front wheels
note - it can go to 4 low gearing for the rear - and still not engage the front wheels
- and it can be small differences in tire pressure or front rear wear - that's enough of a difference to keep the gear from engaging.

however Full time 4 wd will engage - there's a differential action that allows the front and rear to rotate differently - so it works

_________________
2005 CRD
stuff
Skeptic quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Ok, so it is a spring and not an electronic servo of some sort. But let me reiterate the situation: one rear wheel in the air, one front wheel slightly less in the air. Rear wheel spins freely, in EVERY MODE. I tried them one by one trying to get out of that spot. No reaction whatsoever, and I pressed the brake each time to stop the wheels in case there was some linkage that needed to slot in. Nothing worked or changed until I hit 4-lo, then the CRD moved and I got free.

How would tire pressure have anything to do with the engagement of the 4-wd function, if you are supposed to do it when the wheels are NOT turning? Ditto for engaging it when already stuck - It has to be able to engage when starting off and slot into the gear at the next available tooth, or people would never be able to drive out of a mudhole. I'm not disputing your description, but I am still very confused. It doesn't match with my CRD's behavior. Maybe there is something wrong on mine, I don't know. These transfer cases are magic to me right now, I've never even seen a breakout of their components.

4low added a 2.72:1 gear reduction which increased the torque to the wheels by 2.72,even with one(or 2)tires off the ground 4 low will greatly enhance your chances of getting forward/reverse motion even if your open on both ends.Oh and ATXKJ's discribtion of how the shifting works on the 242 is correct,it's a sever weak point in that t-case.