| LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/ |
|
| Liberty weight http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=33956 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | redfin49 [ Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Liberty weight |
I read somewhere that the Libby weighs 1000 lbs than the cherokee! Is this true, and if it is...WHY?!?!? |
|
| Author: | Cobalt-60 [ Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Liberty weight |
redfin49 wrote: I read somewhere that the Libby weighs 1000 lbs than the cherokee! Is this true, and if it is...WHY?!?!?
Read here: http://www.allpar.com/model/jeep/liberty-history.html This is one of the reasons that I took the,.... hhheeeemmmm, 'Rear Axle Mass Damper'  off mine.... To save weight...
|
|
| Author: | MaineSleddah [ Tue Jul 08, 2008 2:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Here ya go... Depending on engine options the 4x4 Liberty, is on avarage, weighs in at 4070# and the Cherolee was 3386#. Thats only a 684 pound difference. 
Jeep Cherokee (XJ) Stock Specifications Author: ThePhantum All XJs were built as a "Unibody"…meaning that the body and frame rails not just tied together, they are one piece, as opposed to a frame with the body mounted to it (like Wranglers are). All XJ's have solid axles in the front and in the rear. The suspension consists of coil springs up front and leaf springs in the rear. All XJ's came with disc brakes in the front and drums in the rear. Dimensions (There may be small differences, dependent upon trim level and/or optional equipment) Wheelbase = 101.4" Overall length = 165.3" - 168.8" Overall width = 67.9" - 70.5" Track = 58" Height = 64" (with roof rack 66.8") Ground clearance from differentials = 7.3" (Upcountry = 8.3") Approach angle = 37.6º - 38º Departure angle = 31º - 32.1º Breakover angle = 21º - 21.9º Curb weight 2wd = 2,891 lbs - 2,993 lbs Curb weight 4wd = 3,057 lbs - 3,386 lbs Cargo capacity = 71.0 cu ft. ============================================================ LIBERTY 4-WD JOB RATINGS 2.4-Liter Engine Transmission: NSG370, Five-speed manual Axle Ratio (lbs.): 4.1 GVWR (lbs.): 5200 GCWR (lbs.): 7000 GAWR Front/Rear (lbs.): 2750/3150 Curb Weight, est.(a) (lbs.): 3826 Max. Tongue Weight(b) (lbs.): 300 Max. Trailer Weight(b) (lbs.): 2000 Max. Payload(c) (lbs.): 1150 Max. Cargo(d) (lbs.): 400 3.7-Liter Engine Transmission: NSG370, Five-speed manual Axle Ratio (lbs.): 3.55 GVWR (lbs.): 5600 GCWR (lbs.): 8750 GAWR Front/Rear (lbs.): 2750/3150 Curb Weight, est.(a) (lbs.): 4044 Max. Tongue Weight(b) (lbs.): 525 Max. Trailer Weight(b) (lbs.): 3500 Max. Payload(c) (lbs.): 1150 Max. Cargo(d) (lbs.): 400 3.7-Liter Engine Transmission: 42RLE, Multi-speed auto Axle Ratio (lbs.): 3.73 GVWR (lbs.): 5600 42RLE: 7400 Multi-speed auto: 10,100(b) GAWR Front/Rear (lbs.): 2750/3150 Curb Weight, est.(a) (lbs.): 4115 Max. Tongue Weight(b) (lbs.): 750 Max. Trailer Weight(b) (lbs.): 5000 Max. Payload(c) (lbs.): 1150 Max. Cargo(d) (lbs.): 400 2.8-Liter Engine Transmission: 545RFE, Five-speed auto Axle Ratio (lbs.): 3.73 GVWR (lbs.): 5600 GCWR (lbs.): 10,150 GAWR Front/Rear (lbs.): 2750/3150 Curb Weight, est.(a) (lbs.): 4296 Max. Tongue Weight(b) (lbs.): 750 Max. Trailer Weight(b) (lbs.): 5000 Max. Payload(c) (lbs.): 1150 Max. Cargo(d) (lbs.): 400 (a) Curb weight is for a base model with standard equipment. (b) With Trailer Tow Group. (c) Payload is the maximum allowable weight of driver, passenger and cargo rounded to the nearest ten pounds. It is reduced by the weight of optional equipment. Five passengers at 150 lbs. each. (d) Cargo is determined by subtracting the weight of driver and passengers from payload. |
|
| Author: | Tokyojoe [ Tue Jul 08, 2008 2:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
A little bit more for the KJ Renegade models (skids and a few other items added). |
|
| Author: | sleeve84028 [ Tue Jul 08, 2008 2:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Let's see: Added Electronics Added Sound Deading material Added IFS Added Size Stronger Chasis for improved crash performance I think that covers most of the major items... |
|
| Author: | USPLibby [ Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Chrysler also used a different/stiffer grade of steel for the uni-body = a bit more weight than even a comparable sized Grand Cherokee. |
|
| Author: | Guest [ Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Liberty weight |
Cobolt-60 wrote: redfin49 wrote: I read somewhere that the Libby weighs 1000 lbs than the cherokee! Is this true, and if it is...WHY?!?!? Read here: http://www.allpar.com/model/jeep/liberty-history.html This is one of the reasons that I took the,.... hhheeeemmmm, 'Rear Axle Mass Damper' off mine.... To save weight... If that goon had helped design the '99 Grand Cherokee, he'd know it was a WJ and not a ZJ. AllPar article wrote: Chrysler continued with the release of the Grand Cherokee and fixing the Wrangler back to its heritage with the TJ. OK, when I owned a CJ I didn't consider YJs or TJs to be real Jeeps...but how was the YJ not true to its heritage, but the TJ was? Quote: Toyota's line of SUVs before the RAV4 had consisted of truck adaptations and a clone of an old Jeep (the Land Cruiser). With all the praise heaped upon the RAV4, all the auto manufacturers around the world rushed to clone it. The Liberty is one of these clones.
YUP, he's 100% right. the KJ is a clone of the RAV4, right down to its transversally mounted 4 cylinder, economy-car underpinnings, viscous center differential, independent rear suspension, and full time AWD. That guy hits the nail on the head. |
|
| Author: | InCommando [ Sat Jul 12, 2008 12:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Amen, ThunderbirdJunkie. What a pantload. They went with a heavy-design RWD 4x4 & the RAV4 is a FWD ( some AWD but no 4x4) economy car on stilts. HAve you ever parked a KJ next to an XJ, both stock? The KJ is much more substantial looking. One reason the KJ is heavier is the much stiffer structure. You may recall the KJ's had some issue with body flex and misaligned doors. Some suggest that you do not off-road a 2dr XJ as they are floppy w/o the stiffening from the post for the rear door mounts. Add the safety features, electronics, more airbags,etc... that all newer vehicles have and now maybe you can see why econoboxes of 20 years ago got 40-45 MPG where they get 30-35 now. & that is why the KJ is heaver, too. EDIT: This guy is also wrong about torsion bar suspension, and I can back this up: In addition to being a killer supension in NASACR, the fastest of the fast cars on NHRA class racing use these suspensions to this day. Yep, too much weight without corresponding performance is just what makes you competitive in high-dollar "stock" & "super stock" racing. 
This explains way, just like in Nascar, Chrysler was "factored" heavily in these classes: a junk suspension, huh?.  I have posted pics on here of my '71 Plymouth, with the original 30-year old suspension pieces front & rear, launching on this junk torsion bar suspension. On a good night this junk stock suspension allows enough weight transfer to pull the front wheels.
Just because someone is an engineer does not mean they are anything more than another guy with an opinion. Or maybe an axe to grind or a need to stir up controversy for publicity for their book. Maybe this kind of thinking explains why AMC ceased to exist and Chryslers was absorbed by Mercedesd-Benz. All while he was there. |
|
| Author: | Sir Sam [ Sat Jul 12, 2008 1:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Liberty weight |
ThunderbirdJunkie wrote: If that goon had helped design the '99 Grand Cherokee, he'd know it was a WJ and not a ZJ.
OK, when I owned a CJ I didn't consider YJs or TJs to be real Jeeps...but how was the YJ not true to its heritage, but the TJ was? Yup, and the second gen XJs started in 97. Wrongler's had square headlights, thats why. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|