Like Nevada said, all new (but not old) Cherokees are transverse, all Grand Cherokees are longitudinal. Different beasts.
I had metal covers over the spark plugs on my 1954 Buick with the “nail head” V 8. I never knew what useful purpose these covers served. When I replaced the spark plug wires, the new plug boots were too big to allow me to put the covers back on, so I left them off. The car ran just as well without them.
Volvo V70, I would like to remove it to at least see the engine. Also if it is to quiet the engine, it isn’t doing a good job. I thot I might add sound deadening material in it.
Mountain bike, it is not the intake manifold. The engine is the 4 cylinder (I swore I would never buy one) 2.4 Tigershark. With a name like that, it must be vicious!
I am enjoying the 9-speed automatic. (as long as it dont’ give me trouble)
Thanks everyone for your comments.
Okay guys, I’m sold.
@Triedaq … my guess is those metal covers over your 54 Buick’s spark plugs were to suppress ignition noise from ruining Elvis’s rendition of “Blue Suede Shoes” on the AM radio!
@GeogeSanJose–That is the best explanation I have heard yet about the reason for spark plug covers on those old Buicks. However, even at that time, Buicks were Geezers’ cars. Chevrolets and Fords should have had spark plug covers. Drivers of Chevys and Fords were more apt to listen to and wear Blue Suede Shoes.
@Texases,I had to pull a grand Cherokee off an icy snow bank this winter(He was high centered) and I had a hard time finding a place to hookup(finally used one of the suspension arms)I didnt realize these newer Jeep vehicles had this much blank space,where are the recovery or tie down hooks?I assumed a Jeep vehicle would have many spots to hook too,I guess the recovery hooks must be an option,I couldnt even find a tie down tab
It’s called “cost cutting.” They don’t put nothing on a car iffen they don’t have to.
I pulled a Jeep out of a deep pile of snow with an S-10 but I was where the snow had been removed!
The cover on my “Hemi” conceals a maze of wiring and plumbing. It’s clear with it removed that the top of the engine was designed for functionality and not aesthetics. It does keep crud and dust from accumulating on the wiring and such, so it is probably a good idea. It has some insulation in it for sound dampening too.
It is also very easy to remove–it just lifts off. My main peeve is that it’s a royal pain to get it snapped back on properly. There are 4 posts that have to be simultaneously aligned with holes in the cover. Usually at least one is not cooperative.
Every time I read the header for this post,I think about the Hulk standing on the motor on the good guys truck and tearing the blower housing off(fat chance) sorry I couldnt resist(Mad Max-“Fury Road” didnt have a frame to post.
But seriously,I think it really improves the under hood view on some cars-Kevin
@kmccune: I agree it improves the aesthetics. Looking at the top of most modern engines with the cover off is about as stirring as looking at the mechanicals on a dishwasher that has been hauled out from under the counter.
I grew up in the time period when a motor looked great if it had chrome valve covers and a chrome air cleaned. There were even chrome bands to put around the generator. There were even chrome bolt covers for flathead engines. Now we think it looks great to cover the engine with a cheap piece of plastic.
@kmccune Maybe Oldsmobile would still be with us if Olds had a chrome engine cover or had convinced an accessory manufacturer to market a chrome cover. I remember when the 1949 Oldsmobile came out with its Rocket V-8 engine. By the time I got to high school the engine was very popular with the hot rod set. Many of these car fans had installed chrome valve covers and other chrome parts on these engines. In fact, hot rodders built up a car without the hood so that the engine was on display. I guess manufacturers today are embarrassed that their engines only have four or six cylinders instead of eight cylinders like “real” engines, so the engines are hidden under a cover.
I had a Renault Dauphine once that had a chrome valve cover(all 848 cc of mighty 4cylinder power backed by a 3 spd transmission,what killed Olds was the loss of corparate identity,When the only different is the badge,why bother,I dont know why GM,markets GMC and Chevy Trucks,back in the day GMC was truly a unique and good vehicle,with their own engines and whatnot(and good truck engines they were)
@kmccune The recent passing of Dick Van Patten reminded me that the TV ads featuring him as the Casper Milquetoast dad sealed Oldsmobile’s fate and permanently drove younger buyers elsewhere. Buick at that time was already an old man’s car and GM did not need a second one.
Oldsmobile used to mean something better and faster; we had a 1952 with the Rocket engine and Hydramatic transmission and it had a certain amount of class.
The cookie cutter designs of the 80s did not help either.
@Docnick From 1949 through the mid 1950s, I thought the Oldsmobile 88 was the most desirable car in the GM lineup. The Chevrolet PowerGlide and Buick Dynaflow automatic transmissions were not as efficient as the Hydramatic transmission on the Oldsmobile. The flathead Pontiac 6 and 8 cylinder engines didn’t have the power of the Oldsmobile V-8, and didn’t get as good gas mileage. My dad bought a 1954 Buick in 1955 which I purchased from him in 1963. Fortunately, it was was a standard shift and had plenty of power for the time with its “nail head” V-8 engine, but it was an evil handling bucket. It had a enclosed driveshaft, rear coil springs and lever action shocks in the back. There was too much unsprung weight. The Oldsmobile had leaf springs in the rear, an open driveshaft and airplane type shock absorbers and handled much better. Unfortunately, Oldsmobile decided in the late 1950s to appeal to the geezer set. I don’t think chrome valve covers would have been the answer to Oldsmobile’s downfall. The chrome valve cover didn’t help your Renault Dauphine.
have to agree,the companies have a hard time reading the markets at times and the poor little Dauphine needed some extra engineering.
The Renault Dauphine was one of the first bio-degradable cars. Renault proudly told the world that all the testing was done on the island of Corsica, equivalent to Catalina Island (dry, no salt, no long distances).
A friend who was going to University in Montreal, Canada, bought one and saw it disintegrate in his hands. With zero rust protection, a feeble engine, poor heater and an inferior electrical system, it barely lived till 4 years.
Mercifully it was sideswiped by a snow plow and with the insurance payout he bough a Dodge with heavy duty everything and finished his studies not worrying about whether his car would start…
Renault learned that North America is a very demanding environment for cars, and did not return till much later, but unfortunately, even after buying AMC they still produced inferior cars from their brand new plant near Toronto, located on RENAULT DRIVE!
The best thing they ever did was buying Nissan from where they learned some useful things.