What do you all know about the old Jeep Comanches? A big shot car dealer has a '87 on his used lot for about $1500, 4.0 5spd 4x4 shortbed dual exhaust.
This was the first one I ever looked at I always liked the looks and the straight front axle. But I never knew that they were a "Unibody."
I crawled under the truck and the frame under the cab looked like a unibody then it continues back where the bed is bolted on, is this a problem or a weak point.

 

I don't know if I'm allowed to post links to other forums (egad!) but guess I'll give it a go, mods feel free to delete if you think I'm out-of-bounds.
Ask over at IFSJA. I used to be over there when I had my wagoneer. There may be better jeep forums, but I haven't found them. (though most of their vehicles are pre-80s, some have newer cherokees)
www.ifsja.org/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi

The comanche is a butchered cherokee right? If so, I wouldn't imagine even a "weak point" being all that weak. I've seen cherokees do things that are too terrible to speak of

 

The only "bad" thing I've heard of unibody Jeeps (Yeah, that point caught even ME off guard!) is that they are expensive to straighten out if you obtain body damage.

I had a coworker who had 91 Cherokee...sounded like a 4 banger (It was a 4.0), but was quite solid. I think she went off to school, got a Liberty (brat!), and sold the Cherokee to someone here in town and it still rolls on. I think it has enough miles on it that it might give my Ranger (243K and then some) a run for longevity!

If they even made X-cab Jeep trucks, I might have considered one way back when, but when I get around to buying a toy to mud in, who knows.

 

Thats interesting. Ive worked on them before just never knew they were a unibody. Check to see if it does have some sort of SFC's on it. I do know they are good trucks with proven powertrain components. Some of them still have the plastic factory valve cover which can be replaced easy enough. I'd buy it.

 

I don't know about the Comaches, but i owned a J-10. It was a reliable, tough built truck. Only reason I don't have it now is because I started tearing it apart, and could'nt figure out howto get it back together (it was my earlier wannabe mechanic days). I've actually seen quite a few Comaches out there lately. They still look to be in pretty good shape.

 

If you found a J-2000 I would say go for it, otherwise skip the Commanche. Having worked on the Cherokees, I have to say they really do not have a beefy front end and most owners are hard pressed to find a point to install a tow hook.

They do not have a real computer system, so trying to figure out what is wrong is a hit or miss unless you have a dealer's computer system or you have a repair manual and can do multi-meter tests on every connector.

 

A co-worker of mine just sold his winter-beater 4.0L 87 Wagoneer (Cherokee). He figured it had 400 or 500 thousand kilometers (250-300 thousand miles) on it with an all-original drivetrain. Russell was its 13th owner, but it started rusting away badly, so he bought a 99 Cherokee to replace it.

His mighty Wagoneer was the topic of discussion at lunch numerous times (especially those days when he cabbed it to work!). IIRC, Chrysler bought out AMC in 1987, so the 87 models were still built by AMC in its dead-broke dying days. Russ became pretty well acquainted with the parts guy (an avid Jeep off-roader) at the local Jeep dealership. Some things he found out...

According to the parts guy, jeeps built in the transition years were mechanically sound, but electrically unreliable. In troubleshooting an intermittent no-start problem, he replaced almost everything in the ignition system, including the coil. I'm not sure if he ended up replacing the computer or not. Eventually he found a pin half pushed out of an electrical connector & the no-start problem never recurred after it was seated.

And due to the starting problems, he cooked the starter, so he had it rebuilt. The parts guy advised him to not touch the fuel injectors, because disturbing the fragile wiring harness was very risky. In fact, Russ was advised to spend the bucks on an aftermarket engine wiring harness (Painless Wiring or the like) if he intended to keep the vehicle.

Russ liked it well enough that he bought another one. He offered me the Wagoneer for $1000 bucks, but I don't have the driveway space for another vehicle (dang!).

One other thing we both found odd was the owner's manual called for 20W50 oil in the engine. Once he started filling it with the correct grade a lot of minor engine noises and leaks disappeared, too.

Cheers,
Eric

 

I bought a Comanche brand new in 87' and they are not unibody. The cab and bed were seperate. I wish I never sold it. It had 256,000 miles on it and NOTHING ever went wrong with it . They were pre-Chrysler, mine had a alum valve cover and was a renault engine 4.0 fuel injected.

 

It seemed that the cab and frame were one piece like a uni-body. And yes, the bed was separate.

 

Thats what I thought, It's not a unibody persay. It does have a frame, its just part of the chassis so It could be considered a unibody since the frame cannot be seperated from the truck but it has sub frame connectors from the factory which connect the front and rear portions togather. The middle of the car is where a unibody has flex, whith these there is no flex. Gee why dident they make it easy and put a frame on it.