New Jeep Grand Cherokee HEMI

I agree that V8 Grand Cherokee's are great for the money. I'm currently looking at getting a low-mileage '98 5.9L Limited (ML55 eater ) and have heard great things about the new "Hemi" powered WK as well. I've seen a few on the road so far and found that they do look quite nice (despite my initial dislike of the design). Here's a good place to check for info/opinions about the new WK "Hemi" GC's:

http://www.jeepsunlimited.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=181

P.S. I forgot to mention that there's supposedly an SRT-8 version of it coming out maybe later this year or early next year as well so that might be worth waiting for.

http://www.wkjeeps.com/wk_srt8.htm

 

Not a bad truck but a FREEKIN THIRSTY B!TCH

 

22-24 may well be a lie that ends up like "I will respect you in the morning"


I had one for review and the Hemi bell (low fuel warning) was ringing a great deal. It is thirsty. I was getting 14-16 combined. It is a good mover compared to the 6 cyl which is like pushing mud up hill but the claimed 22-24 is NO WHERE NEAR real world

 

I have 99.. Been running great has 85k on it now daily driver and winter beater but still looks brand new.

The new WK is definetly alot for the money, Can get a fully loaded 5.7 Hemi Limited with everything even rear seat dvd media center for around 38-39k.

The WJ's previous model year 99-04 had shabby interior build quality many rattles and squeeks for a highway driven auotmobile.

few images:
http://worldgallery.dyndns.org/Detailing/s4300003.jpg
http://worldgallery.dyndns.org/Detailing/s4300005.jpg
http://worldgallery.dyndns.org/Detailing/s4300008.jpg
http://worldgallery.dyndns.org/Detailing/s4300010.jpg
http://worldgallery.dyndns.org/Detailing/s4300001.jpg

 

Yep thats my 99 last August 04.. It look the same as then but its white from all the salt. Its still running on stock goodyear rubbers stock everything except the speakers and amp which crapped out. The engine runs strong and will still give most SUVs and Low end cars a run for there money. Only thing that bugs me is the Interior is rattles and creeks like crazy. This spring im thinking of taking it all apart and running dynamat or fatmat all over the interior.

Overall I been happy with it for the time we had owned it. Its to nice to sell cause most dealers would give you 6-7k max for a 99 with 85k miles no matter how well it drives or what kind of condition its in.

 

That 14-16 still sounds typical for a v8 SUV, and a bit better than some. Either way, at least you don't have to drive the piss out of it to get moving, unlike SUVs with less power and alegedly better gas milage.

 

Jeff-

It seems like Grand Cherokees are kind of polarizing -- love it or hate it.

Some people have wonderful experiences (like you), and others have transmissions blow up and squeeks and rattles (like the one my boss owned)

 

99+ WJ's had no major engine, tranmission issues. The interior squeeks could be because mine is a 01/99 build and it was purhased 7/99. But Im going to fatmat the interior this spring to tigten it all up.

The only issues where the differentials they whine like crazy a few had failures with the quadra drive vari-lock axles. But for the most part they have been decent.

The WK lacks solid front and rear axles but it rides alot better then the previous WJ.

 

True. It's not bad considering the power, size, and weight. My smaller and lighter 01 Cherokee Sport which has the 4.0L I-6 and weighs in at around 3,300lbs is rated at 16city and 20 hwy. I probably get around 17-19 combined just because i do more hwy driving. So 14-16 combined is not bad at all. A worthwhile tradeoff since you get a hell of alot more power, performance, and lot more luxury than my smaller Cherokee which really isn't that better in the mileage department.