6 or 4 cylinders for the wrangler ?

I'd go for the 4.0 - if its the third vehicle for fun usage only, then the you won't be doing that many miles on it so the difference in petrol won't make so much of a difference.

-- Coasty Semper Paratus (Always Ready)

The same is true in the USA.

Over all the I-6 is a better engine. I get up to 18 MPG with my I-6 if you keep your foot out of it.

The 4 banger is not a bad engine, in my opinion it just lacks power. The truth to the matter, it is what you want and what you can afford. Be happy with either and enjoy yourself.

I have a Cherokee ('96) with the 4L 6-cyl ... perfect for my current needs (good highway speed, pulls the boat, keeps me warm in the winter). When we move to the west coast :-), I'll probably also get a (used) TJ 4-cyl manual and command-trac. My opinion, for just taking it easy, a 4-cyl manual coupled with the command-trac will get me any where I want to go ... just more slowly :-). And the city (low speed?) mileage *seems to be better* by a ratio of about 19/15 going by these numbers ... 2.4L 4-cyl, manual: 19 | 20;

2.4L 4-cyl, automatic: 17 | 19; 4.0L Inline 6-cyl, manual: 15 | 18; 4.0L Inline 6-cyl, automatic: 14 | 18.

Patrick did pass the time by typing:

Have you looked at the diesel? You get good power better economy and the fuel costs are lower than unleaded gas.

Unless you know something we don't, there isn't a diesel Wrangler yet. Although "mic canic" was going to post some photos of the one on his lot ...

Dave Milne, Scotland '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

Dave Milne did pass the time by typing:

That's odd, I thought most vehicles made for your side of the pond were usually produced in diesel first. Guess they didn't for the Wrangler. How about a nice liberty diesel. :)

True enough pretty well. We had the XJ diesel (a 2.5 VM unit) and the liberty diesel is with us. Also Grand Cherokee diesels too - they are pretty popular. I'd like a diesel if they made a nice BIG one (a 4.0 diesel would be terrific). But a Liberty ? I'll pass on your kind suggestion :-)

Dave Milne, Scotland '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

If you plan on a considerable amount of highway travel - open roads, doing

70+ mph - then you will be much happier with the 6, and the fuel mileage isn't enough different to justify the smaller motor. If you will be driving around town and hitting the occasional trail, then the 4 will be fine. If you get the 4, be sure to take the manual trans, if you opt for the 6, then it is your choice of manual or auto.

I don't know the EPA estimates, but I'm inclined to think that with a 3.07 for a 4.0 and a 4.10 for a 2.5, they ought to get about the same gas mileage.

The 4.0 here in America is worth it based on resale alone. I've seen people try and sell 2.5 Jeeps here in America and have difficulty selling them. Seems everyone wants the 4.0.

Interesting, because when I went to buy another Jeep I specifically looked for the 4 cyl. When I was in Florida during 1992-6 I was spending $350 - 600 a month on gas and I was getting annoyed and broke doing that. Going back and forth all over the state with the A/C on was the reason, of course. Now I have the 4 (no A/C) and it's just fine for my purposes. Capt. Purple

the 4 cyl. When I was

getting annoyed and

the reason, of course.

Amen that. I've had both 4.0L and 2.5L YJs and the 120 hp I squeezed out of the 4-banger just didn't cut it, and the savings at the gas pump were negligible. Off road the lack of power didn't matter, but forget towing anything and expect to be flipped the bird a lot on a SoCal freeway. Of course, the new 2.4L boasts 147 hp that could probably be tweaked to put out even more, but I don't know anything about that.

No, they put the VM 2.5 / 2.8 in the XJ, KJ, ZJ,WJ but not the TJ