My Liberty is dead.....

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

waywardtravel

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Panama, AZ
I know that before the Vortex heads at least 50% of all SBC's running around have at least one cracked head,ultra common issue with pre-Vortex heads.

I guess I knew what I might be starting off topic and I apologize. Vortec heads are fortunately cheap "like $300.00" and far superior to their predecessor only limited on building in more H.P. by factory 1.94 valves none the less bolt on horsepower. The hair line crack that develops in the steam hole between cyl 3 and 5 on the previous heads is not known to it's owner because it does not effect the engine. It's like a scratch in your paint only it won't rust if you don't sand, prime, and paint it. You can send those to a reputable head shop who will tell you not to fix it. Although they can. Just use them and use sealer on your head bolts.

The warranty on a GM performance car or truck SBC purchased from the dealer or outside "Summit Racing" installed by the dealer or you / me is 100,000miles but only 36mo within the USA.
 

bmrrwolfe

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
0
Location
North Olmsted, OH
Well as much as it ***** to have had a motor go tango uniform on me, this will kinda work out. First, I needed to replace the vehicle right away, as I need dependable transportation to get to work. So... a local dealer had a 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander XLS I was able to negotiate a pretty good deal on. It's gonna spoil me with the level of goodies in it, and it's FWD, 4WD, or AWD depending on what you select. I probably never would have looked at this, but I was in the market for used, I needed a car pretty quick, and it was on the lot. It really grew on me. I'm a big guy and it is a lot easier to enter and exit than lots of "full size" SUVs I looked at, with lots of cargo space. The luxury level stuff is not stuff I would have normally looked at, but I'm actually VERY impressed so far, and I'm not gonna argue with the comfort level. My off road activity now days is pretty much limited to pretty well defined trails and dirt roads - not the looney stuff I did in younger years, and this vehicle will handle it effortlessly. It actually has 3/4" MORE ground clearance than the Liberty had.

How does it have FWD, 4WD and AWD?
Atleast to my knowledge AWD was "full time" all wheel drive while 4WD was selectable..
Also I have to disagree on the more ground clearance. The only spot it may have more clearance would be the at the rear pumpkin of the KJ since probably all independant without a true transfer case and more electronics/traction control limitations...
But if you don't wheel I guess its not really necessary anyways.
Also does yours have the CVT ******?
 
Last edited:

tjkj2002

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
10,612
Reaction score
39
Location
Somewhere between being sane and insane!
How does it have FWD, 4WD and AWD?
Atleast to my knowledge AWD was "full time" all wheel drive while 4WD was selectable..
Also I have to disagree on the more ground clearance. The only spot it may have more clearance would be the at the rear pumpkin of the KJ since probably all independant without a true transfer case and more electronics/traction control limitations...
But if you don't wheel I guess its not really necessary anyways.
Also does yours have the CVT ******?
It's FWD with rear wheel assist.
 

blue gascon

New Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Location
Colchester CT
Pretty unique system...

How does it have FWD, 4WD and AWD?
Atleast to my knowledge AWD was "full time" all wheel drive while 4WD was selectable..
Also I have to disagree on the more ground clearance. The only spot it may have more clearance would be the at the rear pumpkin of the KJ since probably all independant without a true transfer case and more electronics/traction control limitations...
But if you don't wheel I guess its not really necessary anyways.
Also does yours have the CVT ******?

Drive is selected as front wheel drive, four wheel drive (with power automatically going to the wheels with traction), or four wheel drive LOCK (where power is locked to all four wheels, regardless of traction status). Switching is through a knob on the center console and clearly gives three modes. No low range, but like I say, I'm not doing serious wheeling any more.

As far as ground clearance, the published spec for the Liberty minimum ground clearance is 7.75 in. (I agree, that must be at the rear meatball). But the spec for the Outlander is 8.5 in.. As I said, my off road trips now are pretty mild, and this should be enough to serve my needs.

****** in this one is a 6 speed auto, with paddle shifters that let you override the automatic shift points (within reason).

I really would not have gone looking at this vehicle if it weren't for the circumstances, but now I'm kinda glad I found it. It grows on me more each day.
 

tjkj2002

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
10,612
Reaction score
39
Location
Somewhere between being sane and insane!
As far as ground clearance, the published spec for the Liberty minimum ground clearance is 7.75 in. (I agree, that must be at the rear meatball). But the spec for the Outlander is 8.5 in.. As I said, my off road trips now are pretty mild, and this should be enough to serve my needs.
Having a weak IRS is what gives it the higher #.


Oh and don't ever hit anything with the front tires,they have extremely weak R&P steering gears that cost over $1000 for the part alone,dealer only part.Done about 20 or so R&P's in those outlanders last year.
 

Ry' N Jen

Banned
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
9,242
Reaction score
12
Location
Slightly North of the 49° th. Parallel... In HongC
Can't say never, but my old Cherokee ran for years, had over 200,000 on it when I "upgraded" to the liberty, with pretty much NO trouble except bad crank position sensor once and 1 worn out water pump, and it got BETTER mileage than the Liberty! If it wasn't rusting at the rocker panels I'd have kept it, and I'll bet it would still be running fine! Also had a 65 Wagoneer with a 230 Tornado six with mega mileage I did a motor rebuild on years ago. Parked it when I stopped using it. Three years latter a local kid bought it. We put in fresh fuel and a charged battery and it started right up - he drove it cross lots back to the family farm a couple miles away. Those are the Jeeps that sold me on the brand, but no more.


Out of curiosity, why didn't you just have the rusted metal work replaced in your Cherokee?

Also, having driven many Jeep Cherokee's as work vehicles, they did not get better fuel economy than the KJ!

Just saying!


Find it funny how when one has a major break down they always bad mouth the engine and car company.


Well said Troy.


I've always been a Chevy guy but I love Jeeps for what they have lost. I find it hard to believe that 7-9 million 3.7's have been produced.:shrug: The gen1 small block Chevy only produced about 50million. That was from about 1955 thru 1997 then discontinued in 2004 and still produced in Mexico (for good reason). That included all Chevy 245 thru 400 engines and every variant of Chevrolet but Saturn. If my kj's 3.7 or CJ's 304 dies and timing is decent they will get early 70's era small block Chevy's. I guarantee it's a more reliable engine and better bolt on parts. The real problem today in my opinion is that not enough cars are built around a power train. We are forced to buy unproven and unreliable and made to fail cars/trucks and Jeeps which the auto manufactures blame on heightening EPA restrictions. How did we have reliable 50MPG variable valve timing cars in the 70's, and why do we have to select from this crap of today?


50 MPG cars in the 1970's?

Which ones were those?
Oh wait, they are the ones that were never sold to the public!

Then there is the 267 Small block Chevy...

A total pile of shit!


Well as much as it ***** to have had a motor go tango uniform on me, this will kinda work out. First, I needed to replace the vehicle right away, as I need dependable transportation to get to work. So... a local dealer had a 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander XLS I was able to negotiate a pretty good deal on. It's gonna spoil me with the level of goodies in it, and it's FWD, 4WD, or AWD depending on what you select. I probably never would have looked at this, but I was in the market for used, I needed a car pretty quick, and it was on the lot. It really grew on me. I'm a big guy and it is a lot easier to enter and exit than lots of "full size" SUVs I looked at, with lots of cargo space. The luxury level stuff is not stuff I would have normally looked at, but I'm actually VERY impressed so far, and I'm not gonna argue with the comfort level. My off road activity now days is pretty much limited to pretty well defined trails and dirt roads - not the looney stuff I did in younger years, and this vehicle will handle it effortlessly. It actually has 3/4" MORE ground clearance than the Liberty had.

As for the Liberty, I have a friend who needs something in better shape than his current vehicle. He offered me the same cash as I would have gotten as trade in, so he's gonna get the Jeep. Best of all, he's worked out a deal with a school automotive program who wants to take it as a project - he buys parts, they don't charge labor, the kids get real world fix experience, I get some cash, everybody wins!

I know the whole "one bad apple" line of thought, but when it comes to the 3.7 I have to think - if the first apple I ever bit into was wormy I probably wouldn't be too eager to grab another! I took car of this vehicle and it died like somebody flipped a switch to the DEAD position. Anyway, it's a done deal. I am going to watch for an older Cherokee to pick up as a backup vehicle. I'll pull my plow off my old unregistered GMC pickup and put it on to do my own driveway, and if something goes with one of the other vehicles I'll have a driveable alternative.

It's FWD with rear wheel assist.

Ya, what Troy said!
 

waywardtravel

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Panama, AZ
Out of curiosity, why didn't you just have the rusted metal work replaced in your Cherokee?

Also, having driven many Jeep Cherokee's as work vehicles, they did not get better fuel economy than the KJ!

Just saying!





Well said Troy.





50 MPG cars in the 1970's?

Which ones were those?
Oh wait, they are the ones that were never sold to the public!

Then there is the 267 Small block Chevy...

A total pile of shit!






Ya, what Troy said!
]******* I mean Jen look up Honda variable valve timing!1970's No wait look up the fastest production car in the world on the provingest track in the world 2010 in Germany somewhere. I take that back, Remember that little Honda that had a CCVC something on the back around 1970's? I think these cars you did see on the street in PUBLIC were the founding engines for today’s "high tech" engines. Please don’t drink and type unless you have a clue what your talking about. Now what are you saying about the "267" or what he said, she said and I know I'm right because she said or Troy said. Read everything again take another breath and post again what you really mean to say SOBER. I don't know Troy personally but I believe it might be safe to say if your going to quote someone and use that quote of that other person to display your superiority, BE SMART ABOUT IT.
 
Last edited:

Ry' N Jen

Banned
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
9,242
Reaction score
12
Location
Slightly North of the 49° th. Parallel... In HongC
You are right Yellocoyote!

I'll keep it clean, but I will add my own comments seeing I've been called a *******!

Coming from a member with only 11 posts here, I doubt your authenticity
waywardtravel!

You were talking about American vehicles...
Now suddenly you are talking about Honda's?

Which were total POS rust buckets in the 1970's that got 50 mph?
That consumed how much engine oil?

Or were you even old enough to even know this from first hand experience when the Honda's from the '70 were new?

Proof waywardtravel,
Show us the facts with actual data sheets from the 1970's that document 50+ mpg before you call my wife then me a ********.

"A clue as to what I'm talking about"...

Do you know what Secondary education I have in the automotive industry to insult me?

Go buy another Chevy and leave the Jeeps to real Jeep enthusiasts!
And stick to marine Engineering...

Boats and Jeeps have nothing in common!
 

waywardtravel

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Panama, AZ
I'll get back when I have time soon. I'm just trying to boost my "thread count" apparently the thread count is somehow directly proportional to wisdom and coolness.:happy175: I'm new to this forum stuff.:happy175:
 

waywardtravel

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Panama, AZ
I'll keep it clean, but I will add my own comments seeing I've been called a *******!

Newton’s third law of motion for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Coming from a member with only 11 posts here, I doubt your authenticity
waywardtravel!

Oh yea, lots of posts or high thread count = smart thing again.

Please allow me to authenticate
I should have said around 50mpg because thats what I meant BUT
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/download.shtml
Click on 1978 data
1978 Volkswagen diesel Rabbit 40/53
1978 Volkswagen gas 39/53
1978 Datsun B210 36/48
1978 Dodge colt 34/45
1978 Honda Civic 36/44
1978 Plymouth Lancer 34/45
1978 Subaru 31/46
1978 Ford Fiesta 33/46

You were talking about American vehicles...
Now suddenly you are talking about Honda's?

Re-read auto manufacturers “cars,trucks, and Jeeps” not American cars, trucks, and Jeeps but read on.

Which were total POS rust buckets in the 1970's that got 50 mph?
That consumed how much engine oil?

Oh now you agree. 50mpg in the 70’s:pp:

Or were you even old enough to even know this from first hand experience when the Honda's from the '70 were new?
:smokin: now you remember ahhh the 70's I forgot
No I was born in 1972. My buddy had a Honda CCVC in high school around 1988 if that counts for anything. But at 26yrs old I had about 30 “how would you know you weren‘t born yet” engineers working under me which I hired and fired often due to lack of skill.

Proof waywardtravel,
Show us the facts with actual data sheets from the 1970's that document 50+ mpg before you call my wife then me a ********.

See above data it’s from 1978 EPA measurements. I can not supply anything prior to 1978 because you would reject it’s authenticity but, yes tons of cars and even the big three, Ford fiesta’s, Chevy Luv, and Dodge colt surpassed 50mpg and in 1979 the cars were more efficient but the data is more difficult because the EPA went to a combined mpg measurement. In 1972 the Honda 600’s smaller engine 347cc (civic) had a two cylinder, achieved 130mpg and was produced and sold to the public in Australia. It only could do that at 30mph though. the 600 was more world wide but only achieved about 65mpg before the energy crisis.

You know I really mean you not your wife.

"A clue as to what I'm talking about"...

Do you know what Secondary education I have in the automotive industry to insult me?

I’m not what you would classify as politically correct. I’m not doubting your education, only what you remember from actually being their. Refer back to Newton’s third law of motion as stated above. Some of the dumbest people I’ve met in real world experiences have Masters degrees.

Go buy another Chevy and leave the Jeeps to real Jeep enthusiasts!

I’ve owned 5 jeeps so far and currently have two. In the last five months I’ve spent around $8000.00 in jeep parts toying with my Jeeps. Define "real enthusiasts" for me please.


And stick to marine Engineering...

Boats and Jeeps have nothing in common!
You must be registered for see images


Ignorance is bliss.:happy175::happy175::whip:

I work on a boat that has an five engines, alternators, starters, hydraulics, wires, multiple bus can's, tons of electric motors, tempered glass, gas struts, hydraulic disc shaft brakes, I could parallel forever. Then add ton's more marine specific. Try provisioning and taking about 5cars and trucks towing or carrying 3 homes off road with all their associated systems to the middle of no where and make everything work for four months with no mechanical interuptions or down days. That's what a marine engineer does. (the good ones anyway)
My education was first Vocational automotive even had some ASE certs in the early 90‘s, then electronics (board level) then marine engineering (the book and hands on kind) I've always been a mechanic per say and probably the largest carbon footprint of anyone I know unless you give me carbon credits for the amount of engines I've tuned or repaired in effect cleaning the environment. I’ve hand built two high ten second cars though not jeep’s.
I'll just have to get my post count up so can be smarter though.
All said I don't know s##t about the Liberty YET. but the forums have people with unlimited knowledge so I like and respect them.
 
Last edited:

waywardtravel

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Panama, AZ
]******* I mean Jen look up Honda variable valve timing!1970's No wait look up the fastest production car in the world on the provingest track in the world 2010 in Germany somewhere. I take that back, Remember that little Honda that had a CCVC something on the back around 1970's? I think these cars you did see on the street in PUBLIC were the founding engines for today’s "high tech" engines. Please don’t drink and type unless you have a clue what your talking about. Now what are you saying about the "267" or what he said, she said and I know I'm right because she said or Troy said. Read everything again take another breath and post again what you really mean to say SOBER. I don't know Troy personally but I believe it might be safe to say if your going to quote someone and use that quote of that other person to display your superiority, BE SMART ABOUT IT.

I'm glad I said I take that back. Troy the car I was starting to write about was the 2008 ZR1. At that time took the nurburgring track record for the fastest production car. I would want to add with a roof, stereo amplifier, air conditioning,100,000mi powertrain warranty, 20mpg etc It finally beat out many many multi million dollar cars. It sold for less than 1/4 the price of everything that has beat it since it won. The Viper acr beat it later but had stripped interior, no stereo, 36,000 powertrain etc it was a purpose built race car with legal plates. Although I would take either. I wouldn't buy either. I've not followed the automobile industry since about 2005 so I will say I'm ill educated. I did drive a Z06 Corvette at about 160mph a couple of months ago.
 

tjkj2002

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
10,612
Reaction score
39
Location
Somewhere between being sane and insane!
I'll keep it clean, but I will add my own comments seeing I've been called a *******!

Newton’s third law of motion for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Coming from a member with only 11 posts here, I doubt your authenticity
waywardtravel!

Oh yea, lots of posts or high thread count = smart thing again.

Please allow me to authenticate
I should have said around 50mpg because thats what I meant BUT
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/download.shtml
Click on 1978 data
1978 Volkswagen diesel Rabbit 40/53
1978 Volkswagen gas 39/53
1978 Datsun B210 36/48
1978 Dodge colt 34/45
1978 Honda Civic 36/44
1978 Plymouth Lancer 34/45
1978 Subaru 31/46
1978 Ford Fiesta 33/46

.
You do now why that era the small cars could get better mpg's right? It's all about weight since back in the '70's they did not have to have the safety features vehciles must have today,hence those '70's small cars would be up to 30%-50% lighter then the compareable vehicle made today.

Then you got all the other junk you all "must have" like power windows,power seats,heated seats,A/C,20" rims,and all that other junk which draws electrical power dragging the engine down and adding weight that drops mpg's.
 

waywardtravel

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Panama, AZ
You do now why that era the small cars could get better mpg's right? It's all about weight since back in the '70's they did not have to have the safety features vehciles must have today,hence those '70's small cars would be up to 30%-50% lighter then the compareable vehicle made today.

Then you got all the other junk you all "must have" like power windows,power seats,heated seats,A/C,20" rims,and all that other junk which draws electrical power dragging the engine down and adding weight that drops mpg's.

I agree 100% but I think we are saying we can't or chose not to make an engine twice as efficient in a twenty to thirty year period. This car according to Ford achieved 25miles per gallon in 1913
You must be registered for see images

It's really pitiful but eye opening to look at it in that way.
So as I see it in 1913 if ford was right 25mpg.
In 2010 our CAFE average cars 27.5 and light trucks 23.5.
I like to think were smarter than that. It's quite obvious we chose not to.
I burned about 600gal NO.2 diesel last Friday fishing with the boss, but it was a great day fishing with some great company.:party52:
 
Last edited:

tjkj2002

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
10,612
Reaction score
39
Location
Somewhere between being sane and insane!
I agree 100% but I think we are saying we can't or chose not to make an engine twice as efficient in a twenty to thirty year period. This car according to Ford achieved 25miles per gallon in 1913
You must be registered for see images

It's really pitiful but eye opening to look at it in that way.
So as I see it in 1913 if ford was right 25mpg.
In 2010 our CAFE average cars 27.5 and light trucks 23.5.
I like to think were smarter than that. It's quite obvious we chose not to.
I burned about 600gal NO.2 diesel last Friday fishing with the boss, but it was a great day fishing with some great company.:party52:
The engines are better but like stated due to safety stuff required and all those useless items(power seats,A/C,and such) add mpg killing weight,and the fact in 1913 you were maybe traveling 25mph or so max compared to 75+mph today.
 

tommudd

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
22,456
Reaction score
3,643
Location
Southeastern Ohio
I think what we all must learn
or what waywardtravel is trying to tell us all
is that we know nothing
except that we all need to live vicariously through him and only then will we be all knowing and have a perfect life :Bye::yawn::freak3::shrug::whip:

or at least he stated on LOST that everyone wants to live vicariously through him
....................a laugh a day
 
Last edited:
Top