I'm just beginning to keep my eyes open for a used Jeep Wrangler, primarily for occasional use at a summer cabin in the mountains on dirt roads and trails in the area. Probably wouldn't be doing very extreme stuff in it. I'd like it to have an automatic transmission to make it usable by family members who don't drive manual transmissions.

Because of the limited use it will get, I'm looking to stay on the low end of the pricing scale, and based on my initial research, it seems like model years 1993-1997 can be in my price range. Are there any years or engines that are favored or should be avoided? Any other things I should look for? I've got a lot of time to look for the right one. Thanks for your input.

4.0 inline 6, the little four cylinder just doesn't have the power, and teach those family members to drive a manual

plus 1 on the 4.0 in line six and tranny,have a 93 with 160k all ranch use cant break it, we call it the bone collector. rio7

The 4.0L 6 is low on power, but the 4 is WAY worse!!! I guess I've been spoiled by my V8 CJs.

I wouldn't go older than 97 if price is close. There was a redesign that year with major improvements. Check the axle ratio if possible. They made a lot with 3.07 gears back then. I'm not sure what the other options were, but somehing with a 3.55 or 3.73 would be far better.

I've had both the 4.0 I-6 and the 2.5 4 cylinder. The 4 cylinder isn't that bad for a lot of uses. It ain't gonna be fast on the open road, especially on inclines in mountains. But they came with 4.10 gears. In town, or offroad they are actually better in many ways. Fuel mileage is about the same, but you can often find 4 cylinder vehicles cheap. Either engine will last a long time.

Get the manual and make everyone learn how to drive it. Especially with the lower powered engines.

That's [bleep] up right there. If they develop a meth habit, you gonna help 'em out with that too?

You're so weird.
LOL.

that's a little harsh, the op's talking about his family not yours

US taxpayers have to pay serious money to train 28yo E-6's to drive a manual transmission pickup truck before they can be sent on a lot of deployments that require them to be able to safely drive such. That is absolutely GAY!

WOW.........even for you.


As a tax payer I don't mind teaching a 28yr old soldier a new skill. Sure, it would be nice if he'd grown up on a farm and learned a bunch, but that's not the reality. Hell, I'll pay for the lad to learn to do pretty much anything (useful) he wants while he's serving our country..........and pay for his college once he's out. FAR more money is being wasted elsewhere..........

And while a few here might beat their chests for knowing how to shift a manual tranny, I'd wager that many of them still can't do it w/o wearing the sycros, and likely don't even know what those are.

My just-turned 16yo daughter knows what a syncro is, and how best to manipulate a worn syncro in a 2nd gear with 265,000 on it. She'll have a decent draw time and be able to run our nation's service rifle just fine before she leaves home as well.

I thought the original comment was kinda funny and yeah, people should learn the joys of manual transmissions and other fundamental lessons of life. Like shooting and hunting.

Used to amuse myself shifting gears sans clutch in our 60 series Chevy dumptruck, while hauling along some of our summer employees in it. Usually school teachers, none of whom had ever "seen sucha thing". ;O)

Old Jeeps and other such things. Prefer manual transmissions for two reasons: Clutches aren't hard to replace and auto trannies that have sat around "unused" for periods of time, tend to go south with use. Three reasons, if counting the "fun factor".

I can descend some pretty steep slopes with my beater 5 spd. manual Bronco II in four WD low and in first gear. Auto version? Good luck with that.

Yeah, Dupe, you actually listed FOUR reasons.

I'm in a hurry for work and don't have my coffee down yet, but are a manual's strengths as I see them.

-allows driver to better match engine torque/HP to the conditions/needs

-cheaper to replace clutch than repair auto tranny
-easier to feel a tranny failure
-compression braking
-lighter

BTW, I did the clutchless shifting thing as a kid also. My dad and grandpa both fully explained how tractors and trucks work when I was young, and actually understanding WHY things are as they are goes a long ways towards mastering a piece of equipment. My dad also emphasized listening to, feeling, and being tuned into the equipment I was operating. That's been a life skill I've carried with me, and am thankful he didn't just throw me the keys or be content that I passed a DMV test.

TAK, I'm glad you're teaching your daughter correctly. She's definitely among the ranks of a minority already, and I'm sure you're rightfully proud.

Okay, off my soapbox now. I actually think an auto is superior to a manual in driveability offroad, maybe not durability. For wet, muddy conditions, a hot metal box full of thin 10W is going to get water inside of it.

Probably the biggest single reason not to have an auto in a Jeep is the excessive length of the tranny really works against ANY lift with a vehicle as short as a Jeep. Might be okay with something like an Unlimited.

in hardcore offroad stuff I agree an auto is better, but for a weekend cruising down a log road i'll take a manual

I've got a 2000 with a 4 cly. and a stick. JMR's comments are spot on. Off road at low speeds, it lacks nothing over the six. I am the original owner and it's been remarkably trouble free.
The big problem with the inline 6's were they weren't geared right for the slow off road speeds and were usually sold w/o the heavy duty rear ends. If you are going off road much, you are far better off with the 4.
BTW, if buying used, make sure it was well cared for and not beat up. Jeeps are designed from the ground up to be tough. But a careless or ignorant off road driver can ruin one w/o much effort. E

Having driven both, personally I prefer a manual, but maybe thats because we Brits tend to start out with manuals from the get-go..

I think part of that is because years ago autobox's were not so reliable, tended to be heavier on fuel, and were just not that particularly good at shifting when they should..

Most especially the autos you guys have over there. A GM turbo 350/400 or 460LE can be built up pretty bulletproof. Drag racers here have figured out how to do that, and most every tranny mechanic knows what aftermarket parts to use.

I suspect your right..Plus I would say most drivers over here want to buy a vehicle and just drive it, and they are not interested in buying something they know will need rebuilding just to perform as it should..LandRover fanatics are probably the exception though!

A friend as a newish Toyota Hilux with an autobox, and after driving it a time or two, I can say it is a huge improvement over the old British Leyland or Rover auto-transmissions..

Driving up to Scotland last year, the on board computer showed it was returning 36mpg on the main roads and that was fully laden and running at around 65 to 70mph and I suspect a manual box would not do any better...

Our police cars, vehicles that get used very hard, all went to automatic transmitions many years ago. That's because they hold up much better than any manuel transmition when used like that.
The only thing you need to do with one is make sure it gets serviced regularly. So they cost alot more than a manuel transmition to maintain. I have one in my 06 dodge diesel. Nice to have when carrying and towing heavy loads in the mountains.
Actually, having had a auto trans in an IH ScoutII for many years, I found them better for off roading. Much easier to ease over nasty rocks. Easier on the drive line components as well.
I dunno about you guys, but when I'm hunting, I tend to look around too much which means I don't drive as well as I should over rough ground. An auto transmition is much more forgiving. E

I won't dispute that an auto is better for a lot of stuff. As someone else stated for hard core off roading, specifically rock crawling and with heavily modified vehicles they are better. At least with a stock vehicle I cannot get an auto to go as slow downhill without braking as a manual. In reality that may be the only true advantage. But for me, and where I live it is a HUGE advantage. I live on an extremely steep hill with about 1/4 mile straight down till I get on level ground. When it snows 4X4 low in a manual gets me down at about 1 mph without touching the brakes. I actually give it a bit of gas going down. With the auto 4X4's I've owned over the years 5-7 mph is about as slow as they will go. Too fast for the conditions.

If it were for daily driving an automatic is all I'd have. But it sounds like the OP is planning on using his jeep the same way I use mine. As a toy and occasional vehicle. Part of the fun of driving a Jeep to me is the manual. And every one really needs to learn HOW to drive a manual. An old Jeep is as good to learn on as anything.

I forgot to add bump-starting to my list of reasons I prefer a manual to an auto. That can become a huge selling point if/when the time comes.

The TJ models from 97 - 03 has a coil spring suspension and has a better ride. the YJ 87 - 95 which is what I own has leaf spring and is a bit rough. I like the interior better on a YJ as its like a old CJ and is more roomy. The 2.5 is an ok motor but has had more issues than the 4.0. I have driven both and I much prefer the 4.0. The YJ in 95 had upgraded UV joints. Some YJs had some electrical issues mainly on 2.5 liter versions. The TJs are more expensive to lift and have issues (rare) with death wobble (google it). Both the TJ & YJ are a better overall jeep than the CJ. They both have a wider wheel base and a better frame, but the CJ has a tailgate which I love. Either would suit your needs. Stay away from a 87 - 89 YJs though, the auto tranny in them are built by pugeo and are complete crap and they have the old 258 ci I6 which is an awesome motor but is carberated and it takes a bunch of effort and a nutterbaypass for most of them to run great. The 4.0is fuel ingected and is bullet proof. I have had mine for 12 years as a daily driver it has amost 200000 miles and I have only changed plugs wires and rear main seal. can't beat that.

I have owned a few Jeeps over the years and given the OP's stated use I would opt for the 97 or newer models if he can find one that fits the budget. An auto is fine (if I want to see my 50th wedding anniversary that is what I would have to buy)for what he is going to do with it. Maybe get a hardtop with A/C and cruise control since I am old and like to be comfortable when it is hot out. They also are easier to sell when that time comes. 4.0 engine is fine but the little four cylinder is okay for most things too. If a good one comes along with the four I wouldn't let that kill the sale.

My favorite Jeep was a 1971 CJ-5 with the v6 and factory 4spd with overdrive. It had terrible brakes but would go just about anywhere. Last of the Jeeps before AMF got ahold of them for awhile.

I just bought a jeep back in march fter wanting one since a kid. Found one that a girl used as a daily driver and never been offroad. Had 3.07 gears, 4.0 with 5 speed manual. 125,000 miles Paid 5500 for it. Put a winch bumper on it and my old x8000i warne. Put a 2" budget boost spacer lift, new shocks and replaced old 31" tires and wheels for a set of rubicon wheels and 265/75r16 federal MT. I lost a bit of power on hills but nothing dropping it to 4th wont fix. Pulls my 17ft prodrive boat fine and gets 18 mpg. I'm tickled with it.


when I bought it


Now

Looks like a GREAT sportsman's rig/grocery getter. I recently read that 3.07's were exactly what you want if you plan to drop a Cummins 4BT in a Wrangler, if anyone is interested in that.

that sounds like a bad ass upgrade

Very good deal on a TJ even if the miles are high, the 4.0 is a damn good motor.

Those 4.0's will usually make it to 200K+ and rebuilds are cheap.

Only problem with the 4.0s is that they are GUTLESS as heck!! My 2003 Rubicon (auto trans) is a DOG on freeway hills (Interstate 5 Grapevine, and Siskiyous), and that's with stock sized tires (245/75/16) and factory 4.10 gears. Constantly downshifting and revving up way too high for a straight 6!!! I guess I am too spoiled with the 401 v8 in my older CJ5.