We Are All feeling the pinch of gas prices from the 50-cent-a-gallon jump at the pump this past Memorial Day weekend. Our commute just a year ago would cost us about $104 a week in gas. Today, that same commute is running us $145 ... over $2,000 a year more just to get to and from work. Don't get us started on how the price of gas has impacted food, shipping, airplane tickets, and everything else.
The point is, if you are like us, you have been thinking about getting a commuter vehicle, something that is more efficient than that 12- to 15-mpg Jeep, and leaving the Jeep home for the day-to-day commute. In theory it sounds good. Get a beater commuter car for $1,000 and get double the mileage of the Jeep, which in our case would bring the weekly gas cost down to about $72.
On paper that sounds great, but who wants to drive a POS commuter car? That just takes any remaining fun out of driving and would make going to work that much worse. But if we got a Jeep that could pull down 20 mpg on the highway, our weekly gas bill would drop 40 bucks. It might not be much, but it would be a $2,000 a year cut in fuel costs, and we'd still get to drive a Jeep every day.
OK look, we know that buying another vehicle, with the added costs of insurance, registration, and maintenance, makes tenuous financial sense at best. But if you have a Jeep-buying problem like we do, or are just looking for a Jeep, why not make it one that gets decent gas mileage and keeps some money in your pocket at the same time?
Recently, the EPA has revamped the way that the mileage you see on window stickers is calculated and they are now much more accurate than they once were. With four vehicles on staff that were rated under the new system, we are actually seeing numbers that are in the city to highway range. Using that experience, we are referencing fueleconomy.gov.
Just think: A commuter car with a Jeep badge, low range, and the ability to get off the beaten path even on your daily commute. We've culled data from the U.S. government and our own extensive personal fleet of vehicles to bring you this list of Jeeps that can pull down that magic 20 mpg or more on the highway and keep you commuting in style.
We go back to '85 with this story, which is also as far as the EPA site goes back. While we do have personal experience further back than that, how many of us are going to be buying a Jeep that old as a daily driver/commuter anyway? Check out what we say compared to what the government says and see if any of these Jeeps in the 20-mpg club meets your needs.
'02-and-up LibertyWe Say: We've never driven one for any amount of time.They Say: 15-24 mpg.Overall: If you are looking for a Jeep that is IFS, and all you care about is the bottom line, look at the six-speed, four-cylinder version with 22 mpg on the highway or the 2.8L diesel with a claimed 24 mpg. According to the government, any of the Libertys will get you into the 20-mpg range with the manual transmissions getting just a tick better than the automatic with the same engine; just pick the one that suits you best.
 '87-'06 WranglerWe Say: Any...  '87-'06 WranglerWe Say: Any one of the manual transmission Wranglers, be it the 2.4L, 2.5L, 4.0L, or 4.2L, can get 20 mpg on the highway, with some stipulations.They Say: None of the four-cylinders make it, and the '89 and '90 six-cylinders don't make it either.Overall: If you have a four-cylinder, it needs to be on the stock 27-inch tires, on flat ground, and with no headwind. Really it isn't a mileage powerhouse. The six-cylinder versions are less averse to wind, but still need to have the stock tires on them. With the 4.2, keeping that Carter carburetor tuned and the vacuum spaghetti under the hood in order is a constant challenge. With any of the Wranglers, if you live at elevation or in mountainous terrain, that 20 mpg number isn't going to happen. The same thing applies if you have a Rubicon model and drive it over 55 mph or so, thanks to the 4.10 gears. |  '87-'01 Cherokee/'97-'92 ComancheWe...  '87-'01 Cherokee/'97-'92 ComancheWe Say: Any of the six-cylinder models and the manual transmission four-cylinders.They Say: The '91-and-up 4.0 HO automatics won't make the cut.Overall: The government rates both the automatic and manual transmission '87-'90 models anywhere from 1 to 3 mpg better than the '91-and-up HO models. We agree. However, they also rate the automatic HO models under 20 mpg, but with all three automatic HO XJs on staff, we pulled down 20 mpg on the highway when the Jeeps were stock, if we could keep them under 70 mph. In our experience, the '87-'90 six-cylinders do get better mileage than their more powerful later counterparts. As with the Wranglers, the four-cylinder models can pull down over 20, but unless you live in Kansas, don't expect to see it that often. And even though the EPA says the '84-'86 models will get over 20 with either engine, we've yet to see any of the early Cherokees that were reliable enough to drive daily. |  '93-and-up Grand CherokeeWe...  '93-and-up Grand CherokeeWe Say: Any of the six-cylinder models or the '07-and-up 3.0L diesel.They Say: The '93 ZJ with the 4.0L and five-speed manual, and the '07-and-up 3.0L diesel.Overall: The six-cylinder Grand Cherokee shares many drivetrain components with the regular Cherokee, but thanks to the added bulk, it has the deck stacked against it. We've done it, repeatedly, but that was with new Jeeps. The full-time 4WD-equipped models and the 5.2 and 5.9 V-8s won't do it, no matter what, but if you drive really slowly and can't do simple math, you might claim the 4.7 V-8 can. |
 '85 and '86 CJWe Say: We have...  '85 and '86 CJWe Say: We have yet to run across a CJ-7 or CJ-8 that, even in stock form, would beat 20 mpg.They Say: Either model with the manual transmission will do 20 mpg on the highway.Overall: We've driven a few pristine examples of these Jeeps over the years and still didn't clear 20 mpg. In bone-stock, completely restored form, the best we got was around 18 mpg. And that was in an '86 with a $30,000, complete frame-off restoration on flat ground for about 500 miles with little to no wind | | |