All Activity
This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
ShowTime Comanche Build.
Quarterpastgone replied to Quarterpastgone's topic in MJ Hardcore Tech: Epic Journeys to Greatness
My original headers did not require me to cut but did not come in 1 3/4 primaries. that and they were damn near touching the firewall. I really liked the bigger primaries and the distance from the firewall for the cooler interior temps. -
I've checked the vaccum lines I can see and everything looks good. I have already done the heater core but have not removed the valve under the hood. That seems like they are an issue. I'm new to these older jeeps my 2000 xj is a little easier, I'm glad they changed them.
- Today
-
lol, yeah, just a little paranoid is all, i got the quote to fix everything and lets just say i've had to pick up some extra hours hahaha thanks, ill try it.
-
Naval Jelly
-
rust doesn't really spread that fast. but I doubt it'll hurt to just hit it with a touch of paint if it makes ya feel better. light coats only. don't make any drips.
-
So I'm taking the MJ to get all her rust fixed fixed, and get a new paint job. However, that is still a month away.. I might be a little paranoid, idk, but is there anything I can spray on existing rust spots to keep them from getting worse? The less it spreads, the easier it'll be on my pocket book I'd imagine. Preferably something clear, or white. Edit : I'll be getting the floor pans replaced, is it recommended to have them sprayed with rhino liner to prevent future rust issues?
-
Appreciate it, took it to the hardware store and they found me something that was similar to it, just get ocd sometimes about the mj lol
-
nice!
-
Hitch mounted winch
Knucklehead97 replied to Knucklehead97's topic in MJ Tech: Modification and Repairs
Got it all mounted up. Just gotta wire it now. Very happy with how it's turned out. Had to drill new mounting holes on the plate because it wasn't made for this small of a winch. Also had to buy a bigger roller fairlead since the one with the HF winch was made for a smaller mount. Ended up drilling another hole in the part that goes in the hitch so now it's 4" closer to the bumper than it would of been if I used the factory hole on the Curt mount. The hitch mount is tight in the hitch and doesn't jiggle at all. Got me a cover for it as well that's big enough to go over the winch AND fairlead, which is what I wanted. Sadly didn't get started on the wiring for the winch and my dual battery since the rain got too heavy today. -
Weird starting issue
SuperSwede replied to dasbulliwagen's topic in MJ Tech: Modification and Repairs
Probably the crankshaft sensor. Had the same problem myself some years ago. -
Does the trans have a Neutral safety switch?
-
ShowTime Comanche Build.
Pete M replied to Quarterpastgone's topic in MJ Hardcore Tech: Epic Journeys to Greatness
I think that Driver is referring to using different headers or custom making them. plenty of LS swaps have been done now and some have guys cut the frame for clearance (one guy hacked out quite a bit!), others apparently didn't need to. I couldn't tell you what the various differences are though. -
Dana 44 Disc Brake Conversion
krustyballer16 replied to agamble's topic in MJ Tech: DIY Projects and Write-Ups
I'll have to look into this when I do my 44. Got a really rusty one I'm gonna gut I guess and sandblast and use it in a 4 link build and swap to discs since all the brake parts are junk. Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk -
Last I heard was 66 dead so far.
-
My wife has an aunt in Smithsburg. I have client just east of there also. You should check the vacuum lines going into/coming out of the HVAC control box. The vent doors are operated by vacuum, so a leak in any of those will affect where the air blows. Also, try back flushing the heater core. If it hasn't already been done, you should remove the heater control valve.
-
I had been playing with the idea of converting the Dana 44 from drums to discs when the time came to redo the brakes. Researching showed there were several ways to do it ranging from easy to more difficult. Easiest and most expensive is purchasing an aftermarket disc brake kit. There is the option of using Ford Explorer backing plates and calipers, which will require minimal modifications. The other thing that a number of guys have used is Crown Vic backing plates and calipers, which use the same rotor as the Explorer, but have a trailing and leading caliper setup. And finally the is using backing plates and calipers from a Dana 35. This option appeared to be the most difficult to do and it required heavy modification to make it work. After researching I opted to use the Explorer for my disc conversion as its cheap ~$280 if you use mostly junkyard parts and pretty straight forward. I used the following writeup as my primary resource for information: https://www.naxja.org/forum/showthread.php?t=967146. The first modification needed to use Explorer backing plates is the bolt pattern. The Explorer backing plate has an axle housing bolt pattern that closely resembles the MJ/XJ D44. - 95 - 01' Ford 8.8 rear discs backing plate has a 2" x 3 9/16" bolt pattern - 86 - 90 MJ/XJ D44 has a 2" x 3 11/32" bolt pattern This gives a horizontal difference of 7/32" between the axle housing bolt patterns. The Explorer backing plate needs the holes to be inwardly elongated 7/32" for them to bolt onto the D44 housing. A Dremel with a carbide bit made quick work on elongating the Explorer backing plates. Remove about 1/8" inward side of each hole. I used the D44 retaining plate as a template and to measure when I had removed enough material. When removing the metal with the carbide bit wear gloves. The shaving that are created are super irritating if you get them on the skin, and hang around forever if you don't vacuum them up. Explorer backing plate with holes elongated Here's the D44 retaining plate over the Explorer backing plate after elongating the holes. Finally a test fit of the backing plate on the D44 after elongating the holes. The second problem that needs modification is compensating for the difference in thickness between the Explorer backing plate vs the D44 drum backing plate. - Explorer disc brake backing plates are .350" thick - 86 - 90 MJ/XJ D44 backing plates are .125" thick Giving a thickness difference of .225" between the two. You can have a machine shop custom make a spacer to make up the difference or you can go the easy route and look to Teralex. Teraflex uses a spacer in the aftermarket D44 conversion kit they sell to compensate for this difference. A search on the webpage showed the spacers to be available for purchase by themselves, PN 86261, for $6.99 each. The spacer are .226" thick. The addition of the spacer will require the axle shaft bearings be replaced. When you go to press axle shaft bearing assemblies on the spacer will go between the D44 retaining plate and the oil seal. Make sure the tapered side of the spacer is facing the oil seal. I read conflicting reports of whether or not the stock wheel studs would work. It varied on what material the rims were, steel vs alloy, and the back spacing of the rim. I run the 90's era stock steel D-window rims. Before I pressed the new axle bearing assemblies on I did a test fit the Explorer setup for thread engagement on the lug nuts. Using the old oil seal I put the axle in place with the retaining plate and spacer. The stock wheel studs appeared to be just long enough. I was able to get 5 - 6 full rotations on the lug nuts. That was not enough engagement for my personal comfort so I changed out the wheel studs with some Ford 8.8 disc brake rear wheel studs, Dorman PN 610-368. Axle bearing assembly with Teraflex spacer pressed onto the axle shaft. Parking brake shoes and hardware need to be installed before the axle shafts can be installed. When trying to put the axle shafts in the the Teraflex spacer kept falling down. To keep it centered and in place I put a few dabs of Ultragrey RTV on the spacer to essentially glue it onto the retaining plate. The third problem that needs to be addressed is the rotor hat height. The TJ uses the same rear D44 axle shaft as the M/XJ, and the TJ Rubicon comes with disc brakes on the D44. The TJ Rubicon rotor has a hat height of 2.295" vs the Explorer at 2.275", giving a height difference of .020". Which is negligible, so the use of a an Explorer rotor would/should not be a problem. If using the Explorer rotor the main issue is the center hole. The D44 axle shaft will not fit through the center hole without widening it. About .015" needs to be removed from the inner surface, a flapper wheel could probably take care of that. I read of a few guys have some brake pad drag when using the Explorer Rotor. The other option that a lot of guys use are ZJ rear rotors. The comparison of the three rotors is as follows: Explorer Rear Rotor w/Parking Drum in Hat -Number bolt holes: 5 - Bolt Circle Dimensions: 4.5" -Discard Thickness: .433" -New Surface Thickness: .473" -Outside Diameter: 11.22" -Overall Height: 2.295" TJ Rear Rotor w/Parking Drum in Hat -Number bolt holes: 5 - Bolt Circle Dimensions: 4.5" -Discard Thickness: .433" -New Surface Thickness: .472" -Outside Diameter: 11.22" -Overall Height: 2.275" ZJ Rear Rotor w/Parking Drum in Hat -Number bolt holes: 5 - Bolt Circle Dimensions: 4.5" -Discard Thickness: .374" -New Surface Thickness: .43" -Outside Diameter: 11.22" -Overall Height: 2.33" Again, the difference between the two, Explorer vs ZJ, is practically negligible. I went with the ZJ rear rotors due to the two issues that I read about with the Explorer rotors. Oddly enough I never read of anyone using the TJ Rubicon rotors. However, based off of measurements the change of brake pad drag would still be a possibility. The stock steel brake lines on the D44 will be too long, which will require them to be modified or replaced. I replaced mine as I don't know when the hardliners were last....if ever replaced. The hard lines were run to the rear towards the back of the spring perches. To connect the hard line to the caliper, I used two passenger side lines for an Explorer. I have them running horizontal and inline with the leaf springs to prevent them from getting snagged or caught on anything. While I was doing brake lines the soft line running from the D44 to the bed was clearly the stock length and didn't allow for any flex. A longer brake hose from a Dodge Dakota was put in as well. The last problem to address is the ebrake cables. There are three options that are discussed over and over: Cut the spring off the stock drum cable, fold it over and use cable clamps to secure it to the ebrake arm Purchase the Lokar Clevis Kit and modify them for the drum cable ends Use the Lokar Universal Ebrake Cable Kit and build your own cables I actually went with a fourth option. I thought what about using ebrake cables from a ZJ with disc brakes. I found a pair on a Zj in the junkyard and threw those on. The length is snug but long enough with no modifications needed. I remember reading mixed information on which rims and backspacing will work. I vaguely recall hearing the 90's era 5 spoke and 11 spoke stock rims wouldn't fit. But when researching the stock Explorer rims were the same size and dimensions as Jeep so there is no reason why they shouldn't fit. Further reading led me to believe some people were mixing up Crown Vic brakes. Stock rims most likely will not fit with that setup as the stock rims are 16" rims. But that's just me making conjectures. Anyways, the stock rims had plenty of clearance for the calipers. Several post discussed swapping out the stock single diaphragm brake booster for a dual diaphragm as well as a prop valve for one from a ZJ with disc brakes to provide better braking pressure on the rear discs. I've already swapped in a dual diaphragm booster and I still have the MJ prop valve as my load sensor still functions. Thus far driving around the brakes have worked flawlessly and if the load sensor fails I can install a wildwood adjustable prop vale on the rear line.
-
Every once in a while, I will go out to start my 87 2.5 and it won't crank at all. No click, no crank. And if I move the shifter through a few gears without pressing the clutch, then re try starting, it will crank right up? Usually. and when it won't, if I move the truck by pushing it to a different position, then shift it, it will then crank, otherwise I try to park where I can roll start it if I need to. Has anyone encountered anything like this? The last starting issue I had was when I did my 4x4 swap. The starter wouldnt work while bolted in, but would bench test just fine. I added grounds at that time thinking maybe a ground issue, but I don't know what to think now. I havent been under it yet to inspect everything. I'm just wondering if anyone else has seen this and what fixed it. I did replace the starter when I did the 4x4 swap with an advance auto or autozone part, but its been several years with no issues. Thanks for the input.
-
It's plug and play, bro. The mounting end is identical. Its just the wiper blade half that is bent differently, the half terminating at the J-hook. I bought my arms from eBay. I just now sanded them down a bit and shot on some spraycan truckliner black. Taking motor out now. I think I'll do my own writeup even though some others have covered this here and there.
-
An article I read said that there's an average of 42 of these pipeline 'taps' done every day. Most don't end like this.
-
That's cool you don't see many of these. I actually just got this one out of a local junkyard back in early dec.
-
Sweet! To connect them, do the originals pop off and the 97+ simply pop back in the same way or does a mod have to be done? Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
-
Of course, what ever helps the community along.
-
We have a saying in my house "stupid should hurt"............well, in this case it did!
-
So, I'm upgrading to 1997+ wiper arms. I'm doing this while I do the all-to-familiar wiper bushing replacement. Just for those who are thinking about this upgrade, I thought I'd try to show the difference between the 1996 (and below) arms and the 97+. The most obvious difference is the J-hook end versus the older style side pin. Going from side pin to J-hook should provide more stability during wiper operation-keeping noise down and perhaps help prevent chattering and overall better wiper operation. The other thing to note, although it is not very clear in the photos, is the fact that the 97+ arm extends upright higher and then dips down steeply as the length terminates to the J-hook. This implys to me that the downward force of the blade would be increased over the older, more straight and level style. Anyhow, my truck is in the garage out of the rain and I've got my wood stove fired up. Time to hit it.
-
komoririchard joined the community
-
2019 longdoor MJ build (2door XJ + Shortbed MJ b pillar chassis splice)
JMO413 replied to CheapXJ's topic in MJ Tech: Modification and Repairs
I was wondering the same thing. I'm 6'4" and 300 lbs and fit in my stock 88 nicely.
