87 2.8 V6

[deezyperformance]

Can anyone tell about any good or bad with this motor I was looking at getting a beeter and found a cherokee with the 2.8 v-6 with low mileage but I
really havan't heard anything about this engine. Also what transfer case and axles?

 

[red91]

Can anyone tell about any good or bad with this motor I was looking at getting a beeter and found a cherokee with the 2.8 v-6 with low mileage but I
really havan't heard anything about this engine. Also what transfer case and axles?

I'd really be worried about an 87 with a 2.8.

It would be one of a kind.

:skull2:

 

[deezyperformance]

That's kinda what I thought wasn't the last year 86' at anyrate good or bad?

 

[Kudzu]

yes 86 was the last year...They have low power but last farily long time if taken care of...I hate the carb but that is just me and Yes I have 3 84s that had the 2.8 V6

 

[planefixer]

My personal experience with the 2.8 was not good.I had an '88 S-10 with that abomination of an engine and I can tell you this.....They are notorious for spinning rod bearings and cracking/breaking crankshafts (found this out on my own account and know others who had the same problems).I did regular, routine maintenance and even did a full rebuild after the first spun bearing incident.The engine lasted a whole 20K miles after the rebuild before the crank broke.My ultimate solution was to buy a "remanufactured" engine with a warranty and sold the vehicle.I will NEVER own a 2.8L equipped vehicle ever again- even if its free.

 

[jeepnuts311]

Also what transfer case and axles?

dana 30 up front (if it is 4x4) dana 35 rear (non c-clip) and probably a NP207 transfer case.

-Tim

 

[j99xj]

The 2.8 V6 was a "substitute" until the engineering of the 4.0 was complete. Jeep had to offer a 6 cylinder to be competitive and did it the cheapest engine they could find.

The AMC 2.5 I4 was a superior motor in all respects. I have never owned a 2.5, but it is very much like a 4.0 with 2 less cylinders.

 

[frankenstang57]

2.8's are terrible. I worked at a Jeep dealership back in the 80's and they were aweful even when they were new! A guy I work with has one and he's on his 2nd motor. I'll second the 2.5 4 banger is superior to the v-6.

 

[MudDawg]

A 2.5 will bolt up to the tranny...motor mounts, exhaust, etc are different..

On the other side of the coin...i owned 3 different s-10s with the 2.8...didn't have enough power to pull a greasy string out of a cat's butt except in 4 Lo.
2 out of the 3 lasted over 200K before they broke. A lot of good info is at www.60degreev6.com there are several variants on the engine...a 3.4 swap is popular.

 

[Atl XJ]

My personal experience with the 2.8 was not good.I had an '88 S-10 with that abomination of an engine and I can tell you this.....They are notorious for spinning rod bearings and cracking/breaking crankshafts (found this out on my own account and know others who had the same problems).I did regular, routine maintenance and even did a full rebuild after the first spun bearing incident.The engine lasted a whole 20K miles after the rebuild before the crank broke.My ultimate solution was to buy a "remanufactured" engine with a warranty and sold the vehicle.I will NEVER own a 2.8L equipped vehicle ever again- even if its free.

Thats unfortunate that you had some many problems with it. It was only the early 2.8s that had issues spinning bearings, they adressed it in '86 and they were pretty good after that. I had two 2.8l S10 Blazers, and 86 and an 89 that were still going pretty strong at 300K miles. Neither one was very powerful, but it did okay with the TBI and a 5 speed. The '86 was an auto and it was pretty slow. The 700R4 was kind of a POS, it went out at 180K miles.

Did you use OEM parts on the rebuild? Thats not very common.

 

[Atl XJ]

2.8's are terrible. I worked at a Jeep dealership back in the 80's and they were aweful even when they were new! A guy I work with has one and he's on his 2nd motor. I'll second the 2.5 4 banger is superior to the v-6.

I've noticed a patern with the Jeep 2.8s. First off, its rumored that GM gave Jeep its rejected 2.8ls, and second I've noticed that most of the 86 2.8l XJs last much longer than the previous models.

Another thing I forgot to mention, they get great gas mileage on the hwy. I got 25 mpg in the 86 and 27 mpg in the 89 since it had a 5 speed. The did seriously lack power on the hwy though.