Ford Explorer or Jeep Cherokee

[KemP]

I am looking at getting either a Ford Explorer or Jeep Cherokee late 90's versions and wanted to know if anyone has experience of either of these. I'm not interested in the dev version of the Jeep. Petrol only and the 4ltr versions

I like the idea of switchable 2/4 wheel drive. It will be used mostly for winter trips to the mountains and towing my boat a couple times a year not as an everyday car. I live in Oslo so the winters are long and I want something reliable and simple to fix.

Thoughts or thing to look out for?

[sawman]

I ran a 1998 4.0 jeep cherokee while I lived in Canada, I test drove an explorer, but in comparison to the jeep it was inferior in almost every way although it was a little bigger inside, it felt wobbly an unweildy.

The jeep was completely reliable, living outdoors through the winters( -30 for weeks on end) Rust can be an issue with these - around the rear windows particularly, also the struts on the rear hatch are fragile - ours didn't hold the tailgate up when it was cold, it just about held enough pressure in the strut when warm. Mechanically they are tough as old boots and the engine is a peach.

Gearbox seals can leak and are expensive to fix (due to labour) I think also that parts can be difficult to get.

[KemP]

Thats good to know thanks

[bigkeeko]

I`ve had four XJ Cherokees. All 4.0L autos. If you can handle the wky fuel economy the old 242 six pot is a cracking engine and the auto is smooth for an old thing. The rear leafs will be sagging and check for corrosion under the rain gutters in the door frames.Inside is hardly roomy but and Orvis models offer little over the Limited models. Like I say four 4.0Ls and never once was I let down. Thats the only one to have. Diesels are problematic/pants and the 2.5 petrols are junk as well with the half pool cue gearstick.

Edited by bigkeeko on Tuesday 13th August 22:02

[MoparSteve]

I own a 4.0 Jeep, bought it 3 years ago with 80,000 miles, (although it was a one owner with fsh), now on 120,000 NEVER let me down! Bought it really as a running around vehicle, but use it at least 4 times a week, and the wife uses it every day through winter. Ever since i've had it, the computer says 19.9mpg. Great motor!

[Stinkfoot]

I run a sheddy 96 Cherokee 4.0 that I use for bootfairing. It was a 150 quid banger a couple of years ago ( yes thats the right price) and its been utterly reliable, needing only a battery and a 2nd hand set of tyres to get it it MOT'd.

We love it and its been totally reliable since. Would have another in a flash.

Edited by Stinkfoot on Tuesday 20th August 23:03

[tr7v8]

I looked at the Explorer when I was looking, I was concerned about spares availability as there aren't that many around. I went for a Grand Cherokee & it has been great.

[KemP]

Thanks for all the imput guys. Looks like the Jeep is the way forward.

[rswift]

Had both, currently still have a 1998 Jeep Cherokee, bought to use last Winter, but have ended up keeping it. No problem with fuel as it's on LPG.

The Explorer is a bit more modern in the handling driving (Jeep on leaf springs still) but as mentioned the Jeep is quite reliable, and easy to work on. The Explorer has a few things waiting to drop off....rear self-levelling suspension, and cam chain guides are two from memory.

Happy with the Jeep

[LuS1fer]

Had neither but the Jeep looks like an iconic American car and the Explorer looks like a lump of blancmange so you know what you have to do.

[Captain Cadillac]

Explorers rust worse than Jeeps, its common to see them over here with very little of their sills left.

I find th Grand Cherokee a lot more civilized and nice to drive then the Cherokee but either one is nigh on indestructible. 120k miles is just broken in on a 4.0.

[hearselover]

Ive been running a 4.0 Wrangler YJ for the past 3 years as a winter hack and its brilliant. It doesn't have the comfort or gadgets of a Grand Cherokee but will take you anywhere. Mine is on LPG and returns equivalent of 28 mpg.

[dblack1]

KemP said:

It will be used mostly for winter trips to the mountains and towing my boat a couple times a year not as an everyday car. I live in Oslo so the winters are long and I want something reliable and simple to fix.

Of the 2 options this screams get a jeep. I am not a huge jeep fan, but the automatic explorer is known for transmission problems, esp when you tow (don't use overdrive when you tow in an explorer, or your trans will be toast for sure). The jeep is also generally easier to work on. If the boat is more than just a really light boat, I would consider getting a vehicle designed more for towing than either of these.

[300bhp/ton]

Another vote for the Jeep. Grand Cherokee is probably better than Cherokee for towing.

Biggest benefit with the Jeeps is off road ability over the Explorer though.

You might also want to look at the Chevy Blazer S-10. It's a good alternative to the Explorer.

[dblack1]

300bhp/ton said:

Grand Cherokee is probably better than Cherokee for towing.

But the grand Cherokee has reliability problems like the explorer. The Grand Cherokee is AWD as well, which means, more tyre wear, worse fuel economy, tires should be replaced all at once, so if you have a non repairable flat you should be buying all 4 tires. Need I list more reasons the grand cherokee is a bad choice...

[tr7v8]

dblack1 said:

300bhp/ton said:

Grand Cherokee is probably better than Cherokee for towing.

But the grand Cherokee has reliability problems like the explorer. The Grand Cherokee is AWD as well, which means, more tyre wear, worse fuel economy, tires should be replaced all at once, so if you have a non repairable flat you should be buying all 4 tires. Need I list more reasons the grand cherokee is a bad choice...

My Grand Cherokee has been fine. Not sure what reliability problems it has. Ignition lock went, common fault on all Chryslers, tweeters died, replaced cheapy from the US & because mine was independently maintained missed the calliper upgrade so it's had all new front brakes. Recently went through the cooling, so new stat & rad. But it is now 13 years old with 116K miles & I expect to replace bits. Tyres were a mix when I bought it, got a set of General ATs which are less that 1/3rd worn after 32K, total cost was £390. The AWD isn't that sensitive to tyre wear compared to say an Audi or Subaru. And this applies to most 4 x 4s at this level not specific to the Jeep. As for fuel mine is doing 18.6MPG which is what I expect for a 4L petrol.

[tr7v8]

dblack1 said:

KemP said:

It will be used mostly for winter trips to the mountains and towing my boat a couple times a year not as an everyday car. I live in Oslo so the winters are long and I want something reliable and simple to fix.

Of the 2 options this screams get a jeep. I am not a huge jeep fan, but the automatic explorer is known for transmission problems, esp when you tow (don't use overdrive when you tow in an explorer, or your trans will be toast for sure). The jeep is also generally easier to work on. If the boat is more than just a really light boat, I would consider getting a vehicle designed more for towing than either of these.

I strongly looked at both & never saw issues with the Explorer box, all the issues were wheel bearings, cam chains & electricals.
In the US both tow extensively so I don't understand the comment about towing. Just looked it up the Explorer is rated to 2500kG so lower than a GC. My GC is rated to 3250kg although at that level regularly I'd want stiffer rear shocks & springs because of the overhang. But mine is now 116K up so probably needs new rear shocks anyway.

[dblack1]

tr7v8 said:

My Grand Cherokee has been fine. Not sure what reliability problems it has. Ignition lock went, common fault on all Chryslers, tweeters died, replaced cheapy from the US & because mine was independently maintained missed the calliper upgrade so it's had all new front brakes. Recently went through the cooling, so new stat & rad. But it is now 13 years old with 116K miles & I expect to replace bits. Tyres were a mix when I bought it, got a set of General ATs which are less that 1/3rd worn after 32K, total cost was £390. The AWD isn't that sensitive to tyre wear compared to say an Audi or Subaru. And this applies to most 4 x 4s at this level not specific to the Jeep. As for fuel mine is doing 18.6MPG which is what I expect for a 4L petrol.

The first gens weren't bad with the AWD system, but my old boss had a newer one and went through 6 transmission rebuilds in 100k miles. The first gens have a slew of other problems my sister has one and borrows my minivan frequently when her gc breaks down.

tr7v8 said:

I strongly looked at both & never saw issues with the Explorer box, all the issues were wheel bearings, cam chains & electricals.
In the US both tow extensively so I don't understand the comment about towing. Just looked it up the Explorer is rated to 2500kG so lower than a GC. My GC is rated to 3250kg although at that level regularly I'd want stiffer rear shocks & springs because of the overhang. But mine is now 116K up so probably needs new rear shocks anyway.

In the US both don't tow extensively (I live in the US and rarely see an explorer or cherokee towing what I see more of is the expedition). If you don't turn off overdrive on the explorer and try to tow you will overheat your transmission. And what I ment about towing and needing a bigger vehicle, is if you have a larger boat, I wouldn't tow it with either of those. Most freshwater fishing boats will be fine but bigger boats will bring you closer to what the vehicle is actually rated to.

I would never purchase a vehicle with towing near its rated max in mind. My minivan is rated to tow 1500 kg, but I wouldn't buy it to tow a small boat.