SWB vs. LWB

[nickangus]

I am looking to get a RRC some time soon and I?ve found both SWB and LWB classic's

what r some of the pros and cons of both

are they the same???

what is the difference in length??

plz help

thanx

nick

 

[nickangus]

also is there a difference in over all cost??

is it harder to find parts for one version over the other??

what does everyone think of a 94' SWB

thanx

nick

 

[p m]

you get extra 8" of wheelbase, all of which goes to rear passengers' legroom, and extra .3 of a liter of engine. The 4.2 feels much stronger than later Disco's 4.0. Basically, '93-95 LWB is an awesome vehicle - at the expense of a lot of doodads that turn into gremlins.

 

[Random]

The main differences are rear legroom, and .3L of engine displacement.

IMHO, the engine upgrade, and extra passenger/cargo room make the LWB the vehicle to get (of course, I own and LWB).

For SERIOUS off roading, the shorter wheelbase of the SWB is more desireable.

The LWB has "part" problems only when you're look at stuff between the front/rear wheels like rock sliders, roof racks, rear driveshaft, door sills, rear doors, etc..etc.. The majority of the parts are the same between the 2. Roof racks/rock-sliders, etc ARE available for the LWB, but they tend to cost a tad more than the SWB version. ($50-$75 more)

 

[Iron Boots]

the 4.2 geeks me out....even more than my wheezy 3.5 LOL

 

[nickangus]

so the SWB has less power and less leg room for the rear seats

and the LWB has more doodads to brake

for one im going to be driving so I don?t care about the rear passage leg room that much
and is the power really noticeably different

also what kinds of doodads r we talking about and r they the same in the SWB as the LWB plz explain

thanx again

nick

 

[nickangus]

is there a center locking diff in the later classics??

thanx

nick

 

[Ron]

LWB cost a little bit more, have 8in of leg room and more power.

They are less good offroad.

Buy a 95 if you can. 94 is fine too., mainly a preference on dash. Early 93 LWBs and most 93 SWBs have 10 spline axles.

 

[p m]

RJ - no big deal with 4.2. You can feel the extra 20lb-ft of torque, believe me.
Nick - no, all had Borg Warner t-cases since 89.
Ron - Steve Cooper may argue with that.

 

[Random]

I don't know of any "doodads" that the LWB has that the SWB does not. They are the same vehicle, with only a difference in Frame/body length.

I will agree that the 95's interior is a nicer than the 93/94, but for the $3000-$5000 premium that the 95's cost, I'll live with the "ugly" interior and spend the savings on accessories! To me, there's not THAT much of a difference between the 2.(others may disagree, just a personal opinion)

 

[Alyssa]

The 95 is much more updated than any of the previous years. It has the better HVAC controls-- heat and a/c are integrated, unlike 94 and prior. The LWB was usually more fully loaded than the SWB. It had a better stereo system, and a CD changer. I wouldn't say the LWB is more prone to breaking at all, unless you are looking at a LWB with air suspension vs. a SWB with coil springs.
The reason the LWB is less preferable to the SWB for off road is the breakover angle is worse, and the longer body is harder to negotiate in tight areas.

 

[Ron]

I don't see a 3-5k premium for 95s (are the 94s all $1,000?)

LWB does have a better stereo.

The 4.2 is a lot more powerful than the 3.9. The numbers do not do the power differnce justice.

Cream puffs tend to demand a real premium. I would recommend against these. Get something owned by someone who cared about it, high miles or not.

Some say 4.2s expire between 125-200k but I don't see it.

 

[nickangus]

with the smaller motor and less overall car would i get better gas milage in a SWB vs. LWB

nick

 

[Alyssa]

with the smaller motor and less overall car would i get better gas milage in a SWB vs. LWB

nick

I think it is negligable... anyone concerned about gas mileage shouldn't be in an suv...

 

[p m]

with the smaller motor and less overall car would i get better gas milage in a SWB vs. LWB

Nick,

my '95 LWB has the best gas mileage - better than 89 SWB and much better than the 96 D1. The difference is larger at higher speeds - the LWB makes about 16mpg at sustained 90 mph.
Ron is correct in saying that the numbers don't do justice to the feel ov 4.2 vs. 3.9 and 4.0.
3-5k premium? I paid $7k for my '95 (California vehicle), as cherry as they get.
(just got off the phone with the shop - time to convert it to coils... )

 

[nickangus]

Alyssa your right i know gas is really bad in a suv i was just hoping for a extra perk of the SWB

from looking around ive found a 94' SWB with 104K for $3500 obo.

does that sound like what i should expect or is that a really good deal



thanx for all the input everybody

nick

 

[scrover]

RJ - no big deal with 4.2. You can feel the extra 20lb-ft of torque, believe me.
Nick - no, all had Borg Warner t-cases since 89.
Ron - Steve Cooper may argue with that.

I don't argue much but I don't feel at any disadvantage off road either. With a decent lift you're less likely to get high centered, and as far as maneuvering the extra length, that's what the steering wheel is for isn't it?

All in all the lwb kicks ass. The extra room in the back is worth any minor hassle you might encounter off-road.

SC

(tall skinny tires rule )

 

[GregH]

And now, for something completely different...

My vote(?) SWB!

I've driven both and still like SWB due to better turning offroad and breakover angle. There is a difference in the 4.2 power and better handling onroad for LWB.

Steve just takes the easy cutoffs when offroad so he doesn't notice the difference...

 

[scrover]

Steve just takes the easy cutoffs when offroad so he doesn't notice the difference...

This one time, at Sherman Peak, I almost had to take the easy cutoff to get around the SWB that was spinning more wheels than Pat Sajak

Once in a while, I come across a trail that has been hammered by SWB vehicles. The LWB has the advantage of getting in and out of the SWB holes without sitting in them with both axles.

SC

 

[Ron]

Peter,

Can I have your old airsprings? I need them as cores to put in new bladders.

Now the LWB is MINE. I am going back to EAS.

$3500 for a 94 SWB is a fair if not good price.

LWB is slightly worse offroad. We are not talking about huge difference. You see it on short hills most. The other thing is a stock LWB is not that great offroad as it magnifies the problem. 2-3in lift it is much less of an issue and as you get on harder trails you may see some advantages to the LWB.

Ron