97 jackaroo ubs II se

Submitted: Monday, Jun 27, 2011 at 13:25
ThreadID: 87226 Views:3210 Replies:5 FollowUps:3
This Thread has been Archived
Has anyone owned a 97 holden jackaroo ubs II se? We are looking at one of these as a possible 4x4 for our round aust trip.
It's a Manual 6 cylinder Unleaded Multi-point injected 3.2L (3165cc).
How are they at towing a van? Any common problems?

Any input appreciated :)
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: SimonW - Monday, Jun 27, 2011 at 16:06

Monday, Jun 27, 2011 at 16:06
Hi Blueteddy,
I owned one from new for 8 years & found it to be a very dependable, bullet proof vehicle & took it every where, I did a clutch & this was replaced as a defect under warranty at 80,000km, & had 175,000km on the clock when we sold it. The only annoyance was the clutch pedal some times didn't release & stayed on the floor, this only happened rarely in hot weather. As a touring vehicle very good, as a towing vehicle it is under powered compared to the v3.5lt, & with a box trailer & 2 bikes on it we would use up to 20lt/100 if a head wind, otherwise unloaded approx 13lt./100.

I would advise the 3.5lt as a better petrol option for towing.

cheers Simon.
AnswerID: 458576

Reply By: wizzer73 - Monday, Jun 27, 2011 at 18:33

Monday, Jun 27, 2011 at 18:33
How big/heavy is your van?

I tow a 16.49.1 jayco expanda with a jackaroo 3.5 manual(1998 model). The van weighs aprox 1.6T and the jack pulls this weight ok. Depending on wind conditions and hills I get between 25-30L/100km towing.

The 3.2L when new had 130kw and 260nm torque
The 3.5L when new had 158kw and 310nm torque

If the budget can stretch a bit the 3.5L would be the better tow vehicle out of those 2 choices.

Another place to ask this question would be over on the australia4wd forum in the jackaroo section
AnswerID: 458589

Reply By: Madfisher - Monday, Jun 27, 2011 at 20:30

Monday, Jun 27, 2011 at 20:30
Hi Blue,
We have three Jacks in our Family 98 3.5 se man with 186000, 03 Nullarbor auto with 105000, and My sons 02 3.5 v6 SE with appox 140000 ks. All have been very reliable with reasonable fuel consumption if well serviced and tuned.
The 3.2 motor is one of the longest lasting petrol motors out their with some now having covered 400000ks with out being touched. But in common with most short stroke motors they lack low down torque, and do not give their best till after 3000rpm. I test drove a couple and could not live with the lack of low down torque. The DOHC 3.5 is the same motor with a longer stroke and has masses of low down torque. The 3.5 will pull strongly in fourth gear from 1000rpm, abd will often give better economy as you rarely need to drop below 4th.
My advice is test drive the 3.2 sohc, then test drive a 3.5 dohc. Also in Jacks the manual boxes are stronger then the GM auto. I do not know what state you are in but their is a low k(109000) 3.5 for about $10000 I think in Vic on Car Sales.
Both are great vehicles but the 3.5 is the better tower.
Good luck Pete
AnswerID: 458599

Reply By: blueteddy - Monday, Jun 27, 2011 at 20:48

Monday, Jun 27, 2011 at 20:48
Thanks so much for the feedback, we have found a 2000 HOLDEN JACKAROO U8 MY00 SE which is the 3.5L model and we will give that a drive tomorrow.

The 3.2 L drove pretty good and only had 112,000km on the clock so its pretty tempting.

The 3.5 has 233,000km but has had its major service incl the timing belt so we'll see how it checks out.

AnswerID: 458603

Follow Up By: thewayes - Tuesday, Jun 28, 2011 at 05:21

Tuesday, Jun 28, 2011 at 05:21
Hi Bule,

Go the 3.5 but not sure how much you want to spend but I'd keep looking for the 3.5 with low K's. Mine is a 2001 and has 104,000 and they are not worth more then $8-10,000 and as far as pulling power I drive mine on the beach alot and in 3rd high at under 1000rpm it just pulls through the sand. They are a great 4x4 the 3.2 is heavy on fuel.

FollowupID: 732150

Follow Up By: Madfisher - Tuesday, Jun 28, 2011 at 13:49

Tuesday, Jun 28, 2011 at 13:49
By all means take this one for a test drive but as geoff said I would keep looking for a lower k one. The early 3.5s had free wheeling hubs so their is less wear and tear on the front end plus slifghly better fuel economy. Still that 3.2 will do the job, get the restrictors in the Y piece removed for better economy and power if you go for it.
Cheers Pete
FollowupID: 732172

Reply By: Member - Oldbaz. NSW. - Tuesday, Jun 28, 2011 at 08:32

Tuesday, Jun 28, 2011 at 08:32
Another biased vote for Jacks in general. I have a 3.5 auto that has been faultless over 50k of mostly outback touring..towing a C/t..& getting 15l/100km..but must be
driven sedately to get it. No better value full size wagon for your $$ ..IMHO. Look for
the lowest k's & the best service records......oldbaz.
AnswerID: 458634

Follow Up By: Madfisher - Tuesday, Jun 28, 2011 at 13:53

Tuesday, Jun 28, 2011 at 13:53
We done 294ks to 36.6l on a recent trip Bas after a tune and service. This is out of the auto with 4 people and two mountain bikes on the back, and some time siting on 110 on the f3. Not bad.
Cheers Pete
FollowupID: 732175

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (11)