Hemi Vs. Pentastar on Jeep Grand Cherokee
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: Off Topic
Forum Discription: Anything non-Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32426
Printed Date: May-08-2024 at 6:51am
Topic: Hemi Vs. Pentastar on Jeep Grand Cherokee
Posted By: Bri892001
Subject: Hemi Vs. Pentastar on Jeep Grand Cherokee
Date Posted: December-06-2013 at 12:50pm
|
Hi All, I'm looking at Used, mostly 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokees to be my commuter, road trip car and tow vehicle and to replace my 06 Liberty with 100k miles. There's a boggling array of features, and the more money you have, the more stuff you can have on it, the skies the limit. Trying to keep my out the door (after trade) cost at about 20k. Even the base models though, are pretty well equipped. The only add on features that I actually need are the tow package. I like having the Low Range Transfer case for the boat ramp (Many are 1 Speed All Wheel Drive). I also like the sunroof on the Jeep I have so trying to find that as well. The funny thing, as you look at adding some niceties, the Hemi engine comes close to be a no-cost or at least low-cost add on. It seems like if you want Navigation and leather, the Hemi is almost free. I found this one that fits the bill perfectly for me: http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=02131&endYear=2013&photosOnly=true&listingType=used&ownerId=54930026&driveCodes=4WD%7CAWD&listingTypes=used&sellerType=b&maxPrice=29000&listingId=358725632&pricesOnly=true&mmt=%5BJEEP%5BJEEPGRAND%5B%5D%5D%5B%5D%5D&modelCode1=JEEPGRAND&driveCode=4WD%7CAWD&startYear=2011&makeCode1=JEEP&maxMileage=60000&searchRadius=100" rel="nofollow - 2012 Low Mileage Everything I actually Need V6 Pentastar I made the "mistake" of test driving this Hemi Version, even though I had pretty much settled on a V6. The acceleration was pretty eye opening. More than you really need but a lot of fun. http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?modelCode1=JEEPGRAND&makeCode1=JEEP&ownerId=603919&listingType=all&exteriorColorSimple1=Stone+White&searchRadius=0&listingId=354931122" rel="nofollow - Loaded Hemi Higher Miles 2011 Does anyone have long term experience with either? Any legitimate version for the V8? Keep in mind, unfortunately I do a lot of around town driving and slogging through traffic. Also, have some family members now pretty spread out and will be doing some long (fuel using) trips. I'm basically satisfied even with my current (much criticized) 3.7 v6, so either engine would be an improvement in acceleration. The Pentastar would give me improved fuel economy to boot so that would be nice. The Hemi would give me a whole lot more acceleration but a drop in fuel economy. |
Replies:
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: December-06-2013 at 1:05pm
|
Got no idea on the newer models, I have a 95 & 01 Cherokee and a 98 Grand. If I could do it over the Grand needs a v8 even just to haul itself around let alone a boat too. Zach would be the guy to answer this, I don't know if towing short distances a hemi would be needed and towing long distances a couple of times if the mileage would kill you the rest of the time ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: December-06-2013 at 1:20pm
|
Just for comparison, I'm towing with a Lincoln Town Car now, towing the Nautique from Indy I averaged 13,towing the Mustang to Florida 14, just the car to Florida is 19. I really thought it would do better on it's own ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: December-06-2013 at 1:23pm
|
If you are satisfied with a 3.7 I don't see any reason to go with the hemi. My roomates both drive GC with 3.6s. One is an 11 with about 50 k and the other is a 12 with 30k. No engine issues with either yet and they get much better around town MPG that my hemi truck (10 ram 2wd.). I can imagine a jeep would be similar to mine in all around fuel economy with the hemi. At this point in my life I would actually get along perfectly fine with a 3.6 in a 1500 truck. I usually only tow the boat around town and it takes 2-6 trips to the lake (2 hour drive) per season. 3.6 all the way if it were me. The stigma that follows a v6 truck is still there but not with a v6 SUV. Ben used to make a lot of trips to Chicago from Indy in his 12. It regularly returned 25-26 highway on his trips. He averages around 16-17 for a normal city work week. My hemi truck averages about 14-14.5 city when it isn't below freezing outside. No wind on the highway I average between 20-22 depending on where I am going. 14mpg towing to the lake with my boat. The GC with the Pentastar is no slouch. I do know the new 8 speed makes a world of difference when towing with either engine. ------------- |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-06-2013 at 2:18pm
|
Thanks guys. Zach, that is definitely good to know about your roommates' 3.6 GCs. That's a lot of good information. I'm definitely leaning towards the 3.6 Pentastar, so good to hear it wouldn't be a mistake. One other reason for the 3.6 is that it seemed to ride a little "lighter on it's feet" kind of hard thing to describe. I read that it handles a bit better, so I may have had that idea in my head a little too. But, I guess the Hemi puts another 300lbs in the nose of the vehicle, so heavier springs etc. They both rode smoother than the Liberty for sure, but it seemed like the v6 really floated nicely over bumps (and we have an awful lot of bumps and potholes in Boston). |
Posted By: JPASS
Date Posted: December-06-2013 at 3:33pm
|
My buddy's '06 Grand Cherokee with the hemi just dropped a valve seat at around 80K miles. He was told this was pretty common on the earlier hemis. about $3000 to fix it. ------------- '92 Correctcraft Ski Nautique |
Posted By: OldSchoolBlue84
Date Posted: December-07-2013 at 1:38am
|
06 Jeep Commander with 4.7L and it's a blast to drive! I was looking for the Hemi but could not pass this up with only 20k miles at the time. Now with 115k, runs strong, pulls great and still a blast to drive. Highway looking at 18 MPG, city around 14MPG but towing the boat is a big whopping 11 MPG. I also have a liberty with 130k but no tow hitch but another fun ride! ------------- Kostas http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6700&sort=&pagenum=1" rel="nofollow - 1984 Ski Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: P71_CrownVic
Date Posted: December-07-2013 at 2:04am
|
You are not going to see a real advantage with the V6 over the V8 in real world driving. That is why my grandma had a V8 Rainier over the I-6 Rainier. The fuel mileage is 1mpg less than the I-6. Unless it's a 2013+ V6 with the 8-speed....go with the V8. The Hemi is a great engine, very powerful and gets great mileage (18 average in my truck). That being said, the 3.6 is a gem of an engine. ------------- |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: December-07-2013 at 10:54am
I always laugh to myself when you guy's always talk smaller engines for your tow vehicle but then I only lived 7 miles from work. Maybe you could save even more by putting a smaller engine in your boats   ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: December-07-2013 at 11:55am
|
Gary, I live less than 5 miles from work ;). ------------- |
Posted By: P71_CrownVic
Date Posted: December-07-2013 at 10:26pm
Not me. I will ALWAYS advocate for the bigger engine. I think everything is better with a V8. No wimpy gasoline V6 for me. ------------- |
Gary S wrote:Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: December-07-2013 at 10:44pm
|
I tow with 2002 ford explorer v6 210 horse power. I cant brag or complain about it. I maybe tow 20 hours a year so my vehicle must be able to tow, but not be perfect for it. It towed the 1987 5 hours each way through the hilly side of Wisconsin to and from Green Lake with out a whimper. I don't need to get there first, just get there. Prior to the explorer I did the same for years with a 175HP v6 Dakota! ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: P71_CrownVic
Date Posted: December-08-2013 at 10:45pm
My grandparents used to tow with their 1996 160HP OHV 4.0 V6 Explorer. This was a major dog but as reliable as the sunrise. To be honest I have heard nothing but bad about the 2002+ Explorers. Transmissions are well know to fail in the early years. Ford just threw their hands in the air after the 2002 refresh and the Explorer has never been the same since. How has your's been? ------------- |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: December-08-2013 at 11:04pm
|
Its a long story, I received the vehicle from a relative with 130,000 miles on the odometer. They had no major issues during ownership. I have a work van so only put a few thousand miles on the explorer a year. The first three thousand miles of ownwership it cost me about a dollar per mile in maintenance including a bad timing chain (It has two one on the front and one on the rear. To replace the rear you have to pull the engine(guess how I know). Also had a bad wheel sensor that affected the anti-lock brakes and a bad 4x4 control module that had it stuck in 4 high for awhile. (I think I did well getting all that fixed for 3 grand). The last 1500 miles have been trouble free including my round trip to Green Lake. It is due for tires and is a little scary in the snow right now, this will be my first after Christmas purchase. Considering The purchase price or lack there of I am not yet underwater on value but I am hoping for better things in the near future. As far as towing with the 210 horsepower acceleration is adequate but lack luster, Braking and ride seem fine, and 4 low will pull the boat up the steepest wettest ramps I have found. ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: P71_CrownVic
Date Posted: December-09-2013 at 12:46am
Not bad at all. And even with good tires it's scary with all the F-ed up drivers we have. And the SOHC V6 is a good engine. Although rare to have the actual chain go bad....on any engine. My grandparents Explorer was never going to win any races, but it was as reliable as the sunrise and a great vehicle for them. It was replaced by a 5.3L V8 powered Buick Rainier and the fuel economy is about the same but performance is on par with the 1994 Taurus SHO they had. She scoots. And it's awesome that my grandma says she loves the power and smoothness of the V8. Grandps taught her well. ------------- |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: December-09-2013 at 10:27am
The Chrysler 3.9 is quite possibly the worst v6 ever made IMHO. I would rather a Chrysler 4.0 I6 any day. The lopped two cylinders off of one of the best v8s ever made and created one of the worst v6s. ------------- |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-09-2013 at 12:00pm
|
I think back in the days where the Grand Cherokee had the 3.7 and the Hemi, it would be a no brainer to get the Hemi if costs were close. The 3.7 is OK in the Liberty but I could see how it would be a real dog in the heavier Grand Cherokee. The Pentastar is a much stronger contender. Still haven't made a move yet though. |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: December-09-2013 at 2:04pm
|
Pentastar is a whole different ball game. Chrysler has always been lightyears behind the curve in 6 cylinder technologies. Best one they made prior was the 3.5 in the LH(old 300) body trim. They screwed it up when they re designed the top end and stuck it in the RWD version of the 300 and the Pacifica (barf). ------------- |