'92 Jackaroo or XJ Cherokee?

[ads85]

Hi all,

Looking at buying either a 1992 Holden Jackaroo or a 95/96/97 model Jeep Cherokee. Both the Holden and Jeep would be Automatic running on petrol.

Having some trouble trying to choose between the two cars, would like to get your 2c worth.
What are the pros and cons with these vehicles in terms of:
*running costs
*access to spare parts and their general costs (compared to other vehicle brands)
*reliability/performance history
*low speed driving?
*how comfortable at freeway speeds in terms of revs and other vibrations?

Both cars are listed as drinking up 15L per 100 Kms in highway conditions.
To get a rough idea - what sort of mileage would I get out of $40 worth of petrol selling at $1.20/L?

Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.

cheers
-Adam

[bj42turbo]

The wife has had a '94 Jack as a family car for a few months now after owned 4 commodores. Our's is a 3.2 petrol Auto. I am pretty happy with it although I think its a little underpowered but our last car was a supercharged V6. She loves it to go shopping and carting the kids around, she espessially likes the rear rear seat as she can separate the 3 kids. Off road ability as a standard 4wd is ok but it does suffer from low ground clearance and does tend to run away on down hil 4x4 hils proberly more to do with been an auto. Milage...we have had it as low as 12.84L per 100km travelling the Hume but as high as 20L per 100km 4 wheeling at Big River both times air con on and fully loaded with kids a camping gear.
Overall we love it, was cheaper than the better known 4bys and allows us to go camping with the kids and enjoy this country.


Dazz

[-Scott-]

What $$$ are you looking at?

I know I'm biassed but I believe the 3.5V6 Paj would be a better all-rounder than either of your choices. Better on road than the Jeep, and off road I think the Pajero's IFS is better than the Jackaroo's.

Of your two, I'd take the Isuzu over the Jeep. I think the vehicle ages tell you something - '92 Jackaroo versus '96 Jeep?

Cheers,

Scott

[franco]

Of your two, I'd take the Isuzu over the Jeep. I think the vehicle ages tell you something - '92 Jackaroo versus '96 Jeep?

Cheers,

Scott

what does that tell you? tells me one is an overpiced with limited off-road capabilities and the other is value for money

For ya $40 worth of petrol, its about 233km at a 15l/100km average.

The Jeeps fuel consumption is also applicable for suburban driving, I can get 12-13L loaded up on the highway with a stuffed cat. and yeah, much more capable and equally as comfortable (if you are not too tall) than the ricer.

I would suggest take em for a test drive to work out the comfort factor you desire. There are different models too, the Cherokee Sport doesnt have the flash trim ie. leather and all the bells and whistles, but is 1" higher than the limited which has also the fancy creature comforts.

[-Scott-]

Of your two, I'd take the Isuzu over the Jeep. I think the vehicle ages tell you something - '92 Jackaroo versus '96 Jeep?

Cheers,

Scott

what does that tell you? tells me one is an overpiced with limited off-road capabilities and the other is value for money

It tells me that most people would rather take a Jackaroo that's four years older than the Jeep.

I guess it's the traditional market forces of supply and demand. The market has decided the older Jackaroo is worth about as much as the newer Cherokee.

No, I know. There's heaps more Cherokees than Jackaroos available on the second hand market. So there's a greater supply - that's why their prices are "more competitive." More supply than demand. Or is that less demand than supply? Hmmm - chicken or egg?

and yeah, much more capable and equally as comfortable (if you are not too tall) than the ricer.

Hmmm. Equally as comfortable? So, Jeep took the capable solid axle front end out of their Cherokee and replaced it with a more complex, more costly and less capable IFS for absolutely no reason?

Crikey, how stupid do THEY feel?

I would suggest take em for a test drive to work out the comfort factor you desire.

I agree. Buy the one you like.

[Goatse.AJ]

Jackaroo will generally be more reliable than a Jeep (Flame suit on - especially if you go back to the threads of burning Jeeps )

[badger]

my experiances with these cars having owned neither is jackaroo has next to no aftermarket support, is extreemly thirsty and are not very capable offroad (mate owned one and traded it for a rover need i say more)

jeeps have over heating issues wich can be over come easily, have more power, econamy and 4wding capability are also more comfy. great aftermarket support (if you cant get it here it will be in the states n cheap enough to import) but have the most hidious dash ever put in a car.

look into the pajero over the jackaroo 100 times the car. but make sure if you pick a paj or jeep its been well looked after as neither tend to like neglect.

[Steve F]

What do you want it for? Touring or crawling. The Jeep has a LOT more potential for crawling and heaps of aftermarket support. I have catalogues dedicated to the XJ only and all the parts in them are available here in Aus from several suppliers.

It also makes a great tourer for two adults or two adults and young kids. I'd definatley go Jeep over Jackaroo if you're after a few mods etc.

As for problems, I have a 2000 and the only issue I've had was a busted rear axle, twisted in two. That was over easter and I was running some tough tracks up at Coffs Harbour, no other major problems in the 5 years I've owned it.



Cheers
Steve

[grimbo]

my parents had a couple of Jackaroos and did the Simpsons, Tanami and Googs Track in them. they are a very comfortable touring vehicle with plenty of interior space. the petrol can be a bit thirsty but up against the 6 in a Cherokee they'd be line ball on economy stakes. The diesel is a nice engine.

I like the size of the Cherokee but unfortunately I can't drive them comfortably as the foot well is too cramped and the interior space is a lot smaller and cramped than the jackaroo.

For touring and mild stuff the jackaroo is a good vehicle. Acessory wise you can get bars, rood racks, cargo barriers, mild suspension lift and lcokers so not sure what else you would need.

If you are wanting it to be a hardcore vehicle than maybe the Jeep but I'd pick other vehicles ahead of it for that

[youngyNHpaj]

Is there a particular reason why you have limited yourself to those two vehicles?

[ads85]

Thankyou all for your replies – very generous with your time and effort.


*Why these 2 vehicles?*
Pretty much all comes down to money. Unfortunately working on a tight budget. Not really wanting to spend over $7,000 for a car that’s 10+ years old. Although concerned that a 4WD selling at a low price could be trouble.

Just after a car that has a bit of ground clearance, won’t really be doing much of the traditional 4 wheel driving/bush bashing (although peace of mind knowing the vehicle is capable of such tasks).

Living in Melbourne the car would be mainly used for day trips to rural towns with many unsealed roads enroute. A couple of quiet roads I like to take are nothing more than goat tracks – hence the need for sufficient ground clearance. Other than that can’t see myself having a need to add any mods to the car, won’t be doing any river crossings or ‘rock hopping’ – except for those huge, unavoidable potholes found roads/tracks that see little other vehicle traffic.

Would be nice to drive something more powerful than a 1.3L engine that can handle freeway speeds without the revs vibrating the car to death.

Was planning on making a purchase then taking the ‘new’ car for a 5,000km road trip around NSW. Sadly with the price of petrol and the figures posted earlier in this thread I fear driving a 4WD on such a long distance would be somewhat financially crippling for me. With that being the case I may have to put back the purchase of a 4WD until I receive a significantly larger income…….or look for a diesel or LPG option. Of course these cars have their negatives about them too. I can’t really see a stand out option between Petrol, Gas or Diesel fueled vehicles. You may make a financial gain somewhere, but then loose it on some other feature of the car.

I currently drive a 1.3L which gets me around 400Ks on $40 worth of petrol selling between $1.10-1.20/L. Don’t think I could get similar with a 4WD.

[franco]

I currently drive a 1.3L which gets me around 400Ks on $40 worth of petrol selling between $1.10-1.20/L. Don’t think I could get similar with a 4WD.

i doubt you would get any 4wd (maybe a zook?) with that economy. if economy is a big factor, dont even consider a 4by unless its a diesel which likely be out of your price range.

[bj42turbo]

I currently drive a 1.3L which gets me around 400Ks on $40 worth of petrol selling between $1.10-1.20/L. Don’t think I could get similar with a 4WD.

i doubt you would get any 4wd (maybe a zook?) with that economy. if economy is a big factor, dont even consider a 4by unless its a diesel which likely be out of your price range.

I have to agree, you will sacrafice fuel ecomony having a 4by. Something my sister stewed over owning a VX commodore wanting a 4by. But having just got a 2003 Jack she says having the convience of a 4by as a "soccer Mum" out ways the extra costs. Plus also now she can see a bit more of the country with us. and her kids love the Jack.

I would also like to ad as someone already said you do need to drive em. My wife drove, a jeep, an 80 series, GQ, pajero, and she found the Jack just felt right. She then drove around 5 jacks of diferrent ages to see the differance then we bought acording to our budget.

The photo's below are just some of the things she does now that she certainly couldn't do with a Commo. except maybe posing out the front of our house

Dazz

[KiwiBacon]

I currently drive a 1.3L which gets me around 400Ks on $40 worth of petrol selling between $1.10-1.20/L. Don’t think I could get similar with a 4WD.

Expect a petrol 4wd to use twice that amount of fuel on average.
Three times as much around town and when in a hurry.

[ads85]

I currently drive a 1.3L which gets me around 400Ks on $40 worth of petrol selling between $1.10-1.20/L. Don’t think I could get similar with a 4WD.

Expect a petrol 4wd to use twice that amount of fuel on average.
Three times as much around town and when in a hurry.

Sadly this is something I have to accept, its a shame it has to be this way. Thanks all for your help, happy travels.

[Highway-Star]

ads85 wrote:

I currently drive a 1.3L which gets me around 400Ks on $40 worth of petrol selling between $1.10-1.20/L. Don’t think I could get similar with a 4WD.


But no! If you are prepared to sacrifice comfort in the name of economy you can. My 1.3L Sierra gets average 10.5km per litre, and it's fairly stock. Also I'd say the somewhat more comfortable Vitara would be capable of similar economy, the EFI one's maybe even better.

As for your original vehicle comparison, Jackaroo or Cherokee. I don't know allot about the Jackaroo, but to say the diesel would be the best option here. The Cherokee, under $7000, I'd be worried; All XJ's i've seen under $8000 need some work to make them a viable long term vehicle to keep (Mind you, I expect high standards of vehicles, an oil leek halves the velue in my mind). [/quote]