LOST JEEPS :: View topic - Comparision: Liberty KK vs. Grand Cherokee WJ

I have a CRD. I tow all kinds of stuff.

That is all.

I have a CRD. I tow all kinds of stuff.

Definately agree with all of this... I had the 4.0 in an old Commanche pickup. For jeep type applications, it's the best 6cyl engine I've ever driven. Only have to add the qualification because Porsche makes one hell of a 6cyl engine as well... Just wouldn't want one in a jeep. We like to call the 4.0 "The Engine that Won WW2".

Why? The 4.0 was designed well after WW2,the Jeeps in WW2 had the "Hurricane" 4 cylinder engine,same engine for the Vietnam era Jeeps also(M151's).

tjkj2002 wrote:

Why? The 4.0 was designed well after WW2,the Jeeps in WW2 had the "Hurricane" 4 cylinder engine,same engine for the Vietnam era Jeeps also(M151's).

Obviously, because we don't know what we're talking about... You got a problem with that?

:lol:

Other than the fact that these two jeeps have similar sized engines why are we comparing these two. seems like apples and oranges to me. Does anybody have any writing about a kk vs xj??

Stiff suspension in the WJ? Are you kidding? It was almost too soft, in fact I put Rancho 9000 on it so I could adjust them to help with the spongy feeling it had. The Liberty is far stiffer from the day we bought it.

As far as on road manors in severe conditions, yes hands down the Libby is far better. I hear you about the hydroplaning. The WJ also acted very unpredictable on gravel roads, did fine on washboard roads though. In snow the WJ once again could be very unpredictable.

Author:	Rutdggr [ Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:11 am ]
Post subject:	Comparision: Liberty KK vs. Grand Cherokee WJ
For the last 8 years, we have had a 2000 WJ as one of our daily drivers. It was our main transportation for special events (weddings, funerals, road trips, vacations), and really has been a very dependable vehicle. With 152,000 miles on the odometer, I can say I have used this Jeep in many different types of environments (Florida summers, tropical downpours, and winter in the mountains) while learning how it performs. Besides 2 batteries, 1 water pump, 1 set of replaced rear axle bearings (from boat towing), and regular servicing, this Jeep has not required anything else replaced. But I can tell the automatic transmission will probably need to be rebuilt within the next year. In January 2008, we were ready for a new main DD. We looked at the new Liberty, Chevy Trailblazer, and Chevy Malibu. Worried about the future price of gas, we tried to honestly consider the 4-door sedan, but after the test drive of the Jeep, it had everything we needed and the features we wanted to enjoy life alittle. So in the 6 months that have pasted, it’s natural for me to compare the Liberty to the Grand Cherokee which we still own. Which one do I prefer, and would I make the same choice again?? Let’s start with the motor. The 4.0 beats the 3.7 hands down. I have no way to measure emission output, but that is about the only thing the 3.7 could beat the 4.0 at. The 4.0 is stronger while towing a load, has a higher top end at above-legal highway speeds (oops! Not suppose to mention that!), and delivers the same fuel economy as the 3.7 engine. The 4.0 engine itself is easier to work on too, with plugs, filters, and wiring laid out with lots of room under the hood. As for drivetrain, the Liberty has lower gears (3.73) than the WJ. Maybe this is why my Liberty can get off line just as quick as my WJ. Both are automatic transmission, but the WJ starts to pull away from the Liberty around the half-mile mark. I’ve had the Liberty up to 95 mph, and didn’t seem to have too much pedal left. I don’t really want to say what I have had the WJ up too, but that Jeep will flat run the highway! The Liberty does have Hill-assist and ESP. I don’t care much for the ESP, and have learned tips on this forum on how to de-activate it. Both have nice interiors. The Liberty looks bigger on the outside, but the WJ actually has more room for the passengers and rear cargo area. The WJ also looks alittle more upscale on the inside. Both have very nice exteriors, and I am very happy how each looks. But I have to say I like the Liberty more because of the front grill area and the headlight/foglight setup. The lights are awesome at night, but we will see how well the plastic over the headlights holds up to fogging over time. As for severe weather riding, I have to give the edge to the Liberty. The WJ has always wanted to hydroplane on wet roads, it is probably one of the worse vehicles I have owned with this problem. Even with good street tires rated for wet roads, the WJ will break loose in a heartbeat, causing yours to rapidly increase too! You definitely have to pay close attention in the rain. Both Jeeps have front/rear wipers and front/rear defrosters, but the Liberty also has side defrosters for the windows. During our trip in 3” of snow in the mountains, the Liberty had to be one of the best vehicles I have ever driven in this type of environment. The stability of the drivetrain and the creature comforts of the interior made me want to ride all of the back country roads anywhere we went. With regards to off-road, I have to again give the edge to the Liberty. Even though I haven’t wheeled any rated 3 or higher trails with it, the Liberty seems to flex better than the stiff Grand Cherokee. The hill-assist option has helped with down-hill decents, and the Liberty has lower gears. The WJ does get the nod towards approach angles though. So which one is better? Tough call! I definitely would not want to give up either. If we want to head out to the trail or mountains, I definitely want to take the Liberty. But if I am pulling our 4-wheelers, boat, or headed down the Interstate on a road-trip, I prefer to take the Grand Cherokee. And if I could do it all over again, would I make the same choices? Yes I would! I don’t like the new styling of the Grand Cherokees as much as the 99-04 body lines, and I would still pick the Liberty over the Chevys I thought about because of the options/freedom for fun during the weekends. The Jeeps fit our lifestyles, and we are very happy about that. Any thoughts or comments?

Author:	JL Rockies [ Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:49 am ]
Post subject:
I have a CRD. I tow all kinds of stuff. That is all.

Author:	Jeepjeepster [ Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:55 am ]
Post subject:
Very good write up! We have a 94 ZJ with the 4.0 and a 04 KJ with the 3.7 and I agree with just about everything youve said. One thing Ive noticed about the 4.0 is it has tons of low end torque which makes it seem like its has more power than the kj but they are really about the same. Ive towed with both and the liberty will tow just as good but the stability isnt as good. The zj and the kj have the same wheel base but the center of gravity is lower on the zj. I prefer the kj for hw traveling since the tranny shifts different. With the zj, it just down shifts into 3rd when going up a hill but the liberty usually stays in 4th and unlocks the torque. I guess when they designed the 42re they didnt design it to do that. JL Rockies wrote: I have a CRD. I tow all kinds of stuff. That is all. Thats nice. We have a hemi and tow stuff too but this thread isnt about those.

Author:	Rutdggr [ Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:56 am ]
Post subject:
JL Rockies wrote: I have a CRD. I tow all kinds of stuff. lol I seem to have a trailer behind me most of the time too...

Author:	jerseykj [ Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:08 pm ]
Post subject:
all i can say is that i like my liberty, i wish i still had my grand cherokee though. i had the 5.2 with the 3.37 and all the options and it would get up and go. it was more comfortable too with the leather seats. but the tranny went and it was time to get something new that could travel and didnt have to worry about a breakdown as the wifes family is up north. as long as it runs good i'd keep it for now until something major goes on it, then decide if you want to spend the money to fix or upgrade.

LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/

Comparision: Liberty KK vs. Grand Cherokee WJ http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=88&t=33620	Page 1 of 2

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:12 am ]
Post subject:
I traded in a '01 WJ(with the 4.0) for my '02 KJ.I liked the Grand but with the amount of trouble that the grands seem to run into after 75,000miles,not all but many(I worked at a dealer and know how many came in for what when I worked there ),I opted to trade in my WJ after putting 50,000miles on in one year.Both got the same mpg's,both would do the same top speed(I always take everyone of my vehicles to top speed at least once),though the KJ rode much better and the KJ had a better t-case(WJ had the 242,KJ has the 231).The WJ did have more interior room but the KJ is big enough for me for the most part.Both have about the same aftermarket support(WJ and not the ZJ grand).Overall I'm glad I traded the WJ in,I miss it sometimes but I'd never give my KJ up now and have not regreted buying the KJ either.

Author:	cocojo [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:57 am ]
Post subject:
I own both a 98 zj 4.0 with a new rebuilt engine and an 08 Liberty. Both feel about the same in power. The newer 08 just drives better because it's a new vehicle and tight. Both feel about the same in power. The liberty feels like it has more off the line but flattens out sooner than the 4.0. The 3.7 has 210HP while the 4.0 has 190 HP. I have found horsepower is not the end all beat all as the car companies push for. I much prefer torque with a larger displacement engine over horsepower and the 4.0 has more displacement. I always like the straight six 4.0 liter engine over the smaller displacement 3.7 v6. One of the best motors I ever owned was in the older Ford puckups with the straight six 300 motor, now that was one great engine. I owned an 06 CRD with a four cyclinder diesel which only has 160 horsepower but had 295 foot pound of torque and that engine was faster, pulled more, and got better mpg than either the KK or my ZJ. You just can't replace cubic inches with just adding horsepower. I much prefer torque over horsepower.

Author:	johnb [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:54 am ]
Post subject:
Definately agree with all of this... I had the 4.0 in an old Commanche pickup. For jeep type applications, it's the best 6cyl engine I've ever driven. Only have to add the qualification because Porsche makes one hell of a 6cyl engine as well... Just wouldn't want one in a jeep. We like to call the 4.0 "The Engine that Won WW2".

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:56 am ]
Post subject:
johnb wrote: Definately agree with all of this... I had the 4.0 in an old Commanche pickup. For jeep type applications, it's the best 6cyl engine I've ever driven. Only have to add the qualification because Porsche makes one hell of a 6cyl engine as well... Just wouldn't want one in a jeep. We like to call the 4.0 "The Engine that Won WW2". Why? The 4.0 was designed well after WW2,the Jeeps in WW2 had the "Hurricane" 4 cylinder engine,same engine for the Vietnam era Jeeps also(M151's).

Author:	johnb [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:44 am ]
Post subject:
tjkj2002 wrote: Why? The 4.0 was designed well after WW2,the Jeeps in WW2 had the "Hurricane" 4 cylinder engine,same engine for the Vietnam era Jeeps also(M151's). Obviously, because we don't know what we're talking about... You got a problem with that?

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:31 pm ]
Post subject:
johnb wrote: tjkj2002 wrote: Why? The 4.0 was designed well after WW2,the Jeeps in WW2 had the "Hurricane" 4 cylinder engine,same engine for the Vietnam era Jeeps also(M151's). Obviously, because we don't know what we're talking about... You got a problem with that? Nope no problem..........but now you know !

Author:	greenjeepster [ Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:35 pm ]
Post subject:
Other than the fact that these two jeeps have similar sized engines why are we comparing these two. seems like apples and oranges to me. Does anybody have any writing about a kk vs xj??

Author:	Gimme Liberty [ Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:43 pm ]
Post subject:
greenjeepster wrote: Other than the fact that these two jeeps have similar sized engines why are we comparing these two. seems like apples and oranges to me. Does anybody have any writing about a kk vs xj?? If you didn't want to read it, no one made you. I for one found it interesting.

Author:	Rutdggr [ Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:45 am ]
Post subject:
Thank you, Gimme Liberty. I wrote it up just as a general discussion about 2 types of SUVs made by Jeep, and I appreciate hearing what others thought as well...

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	KJ Taz [ Thu Jul 03, 2008 9:28 am ]
Post subject:
I also owned a 2000 WJ. I have to say it kicked but over the Liberty offroad. There is no comparing a SFA to a IFS..................... I had the 4.7 and that thing was far faster than the Liberty. I had it up to 129. Drove fine at those speeds. Had the same gears as the libby, 3:73's. Got the same gas milage in town and was capable of getting better gas milage on the highway (depending on how heavy your foot was). It was far more comfortable than the Libby. Stiff suspension in the WJ? Are you kidding? It was almost too soft, in fact I put Rancho 9000 on it so I could adjust them to help with the spongy feeling it had. The Liberty is far stiffer from the day we bought it. As far as on road manors in severe conditions, yes hands down the Libby is far better. I hear you about the hydroplaning. The WJ also acted very unpredictable on gravel roads, did fine on washboard roads though. In snow the WJ once again could be very unpredictable. But this is most likely because it was always in 4wd. You just never knew exactly when it would be kicking in. Oh and my WJ as well as the libby had the heated side mirrors, this may not sound like much but I have really become accustom to being able to see out of my side mirrors in snow. Very nice option. Over all I give the edge to the WJ. But like was said some where in this thread its like comparing apples to oranges. 2 totally different vehicles. I will say I would take the 4.7 over the 3.7 any day as it had far more power and got about the same gas milage, but I still like the 4.0 the best of the 3.

Author:	Rutdggr [ Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:16 am ]
Post subject:
Thanks for your comments, Taz! This is what I was hoping for when I posted, to see if my impressions were similiar to other owners... BTW Great action shots of your WJ! Thank you for sharing those. KJ Taz wrote: Stiff suspension in the WJ? Are you kidding? It was almost too soft, in fact I put Rancho 9000 on it so I could adjust them to help with the spongy feeling it had. The Liberty is far stiffer from the day we bought it. In my opinion from driving both of my Jeeps off-road, my WJ is stiffer than the Liberty. And I should clarify my description too. I should have stated I believe my Liberty flexs better than my WJ. Where the WJ will easily lift a tire, the suspension on my Liberty seems to allow the tires to remain in contact with the ground better. I should also state I have not equipped either vehicle with quick disconnects yet, but I have disconnected the sway-bar while wheeling a semi-difficult trail. I also now believe the after-market shocks and tire tread compound on my WJ could be affecting my impressions. As my Liberty is completely stock for now, the shocks on the WJ have been changed out a high-pressure gas-charged ones, the the tires are high-mileage street tread vs. the softer all-terrains on the Liberty. Those two factors would of course result in a slightly rougher ride over stock on the WJ vs. the stock ride of the Liberty. KJ Taz wrote: As far as on road manors in severe conditions, yes hands down the Libby is far better. I hear you about the hydroplaning. The WJ also acted very unpredictable on gravel roads, did fine on washboard roads though. In snow the WJ once again could be very unpredictable. My thoughts exactly!

Author:	greenjeepster [ Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:40 pm ]
Post subject:
i think you took my post the wrong way, I was just saying that these two jeeps are not even in the same class, I didnt mean for you to get so defensive... I apologize.

Author:	Rutdggr [ Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:01 pm ]
Post subject:
Hey Jeepster, no problem with me (and welcome to the site, I'm new myself)... BTW A thought about your comment, why do you think the KK and WJ are not in the same class. I'm no expert, but they are both mid-size, 4-door SUVs from the same manufacturer. I would think it would make sense to compare them. I also think the Liberty is more up-scale than the XJs (no offense, XJ owners!), so naturally the Grand Cherokee would make sense to compare too... And for the record, I also have a buddy that drives a 2002 WJ, but he thinks WJs are a higher quality ride...

Author:	greenjeepster [ Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:50 pm ]
Post subject:
I guess, In my opinion, with the larger V8 engines as an option and only the baseline engine being the 6 cyl, they where in a different class. The Zj, Wj are both luxury?? The price being the biggest difference that I can think of. I owned a 96 zj, loved it, but It seems like a whole different kinda jeep. Even now the new Grand Cherokee seems like its more in the same class as some of those cross-overs. That was a great comparison though, But what i would like to see is a real off road comparison of the kk, kj, and the xj.... which one reins supreme??