Oyaji

IIRC, the seatbelt buckle manufacturer was Tokico, wasn't it? They are a supplier to many vehicle manufacturers, so many makes and models were affected. Stll looking forward to seeing the original issue of this thread resolved - can't wait for the next update. :)

He will get as far as he cares to push it. NHTSA will back him up, because the recall is a done deal. It's just a question of how far Chrysler will have to go in order to satisfy the recall: if they can't get the parking brake ratchet pawl, then replacement of assemblies is next, if none available then replacement of assemblies of assemblies ad infinitum (up to theoretically replacing the whole truck!), until the problem is resolved.

Seems to me that bizzatch owes you an apology too, at the very least. After all, she denied your claim for service to rectify a safety recall - and not just once either, but twice... and she got all snippy the second time around, too, basically told you to fk off and then threatened to make a company record of any further attempts you made to contact them, remember? Contact NHTSA next, attach copies of your correspondence with Chrysler, point out the flat refusals to provide mandated service and the intimidation tactics used in an attempt to drive you away from making further inquiry, and make sure to draw attention to her name. "Melissa" - she should be easy to track down, right? I bet there are fewer than 5,000 "Melissas" working at Chrysler Corp, so it should be a piece of cake to find the correct one... ;)

Hopefully there are NOT parts, you mean. They are still on the hook to fix his vehicle, and if they can't, a clever lawyer just might get him a new Jeep out of the deal! :rotf:

People don't get flamed here - folks are generally pretty darn nice. But you may run into argument from time to time... and that can be a good thing. It is a fine way to learn, presenting and comparing ideas and arguing their merits. . The A/C in vehicles so equipped generally comes on automatically when the defrost function is selected (some vehicles allow the option of choosing defrost with or without A/C). You are right about relative humidity (RH) being lower at colder temperatures, but that is exactly the principle by which running the A/C with the defroster takes advantage: it drops the RH of cabin air even further. The condensed moisture then drains outside the cabin space, where otherwise it would remain in the cabin air, free to condense on a cold surface again. When the conditioned air goes through the heater core, the RH drops even more (because warm air can hold more water vapor than cold air), allowing the heated dry air to evaporate and hold more moisture. Vehicles without A/C still have a defroster function, but it just doesn't dry the condensation on the inner side of the windshield as well. If you live in a climate with a lot of fog and high humidity, you come to appreciate the difference. :)

Yes, you're right. But if he has added even just a partial cage inside the cab (behind the seats) for the diagonal braces to bolt to, the unibody is now probably stiffer than stock and with substantially more rollover protection too, I would guess.

Normal operation. The a/c runs in defrost mode. It's supposed to cycle. Even with the heat on? Yes - the air is first cooled to drop the relative humidity by condensing the moisture out, then heated. It does a much better job that way.

Watch Craigslist. It would have to be a really nice 2wd 4-cylinder to go much over $2,000. But you know that value is determined by what somebody will pay... not EVERYBODY, but just SOMEBODY. For any given sale, regardless of how high the asking price, it only takes 1 buyer fool to complete a deal. I saw a very nice 88 2wd I-6 locally here for sale on the side of the road for a year and a half. It was listed online on a few sites too (CL, Oodle, and Ebay) for $4,500. It did actually sell, eventually, but I don't know for how much. I guess if you are patient enough and have a pair of enormous brass balls, you can hold out for a high price and eventually find a sucker who will meet it.

Toilet paper filters do exist, being a canister (like your "modified coffee can") and a roll inserted for the filter element. IIRC, they filter down to 5 microns, too, making them better in that respect than store-bought filters. Also IIRC, they are a by-pass type filter, meaning they don't filter all the oil volume coming from the oil pump, just some percentage of it. They did use to have the reputation of keeping engine oil super clean.

The proof will be in the pudding then, won't it. Sounds like there just might be a strong retro Jeep movement coming sometime in the future... might be a good idea to pick up an old Cherokee or 2 now while they are still cheap and plentiful. :)

More like, "Somebody is high."

Yeah, just a bit - about triple the market rate. Maybe the bed comes filled with hookers and blow?

After reading her that ad, I'm kinda surprised she didn't say to meet her "in the garage"... or "in the yard"! ;)

That's nice to have - it's good for around 2.5 kW at full load, right? Back it up with something to step up the idle, an isolator, a big inverter, and a couple big deep-cycle batteries and you have respectable capacity for remote AC power where there is no reasonable alternative.

Good info. I always like using a taller filter on any vehicle that has room for it. There are a couple advantages: more filter element means not only greater filtration capacity, but also less oil pressure drop; and the taller filter is easier to change next time around because it's easier to get ahold of. :)

I guess the next step is to look at the lifters... :(

. Still got the generator attached? If so I am definitely interested. ;) . Shipping would be an issue though. That was the reason I had to leave 4 low-time Caterpillar V-8 diesels with 400V generators on the wharf at Subic Bay, P.I. - got 'em free from a buddy after a ship refit, but couldn't afford to get them home!

' Okay, I take your point about Jeeps. I was speaking more generally about the industry. . Thanks for sharing some more of your background. You are quite right to zero in on spring and swaybar rates, shock valving, and even suspension bushing durometer, and to point out that there is more to vehicle dynamics than whether a suspension is beam axle or independent. (Surprised you did not mention unsprung weight though, nor the most important factor of all: position of the roll center in relation to the center of gravity. ;)) I didn't know that the Liberty was rollover prone from the factory, either - that speaks directly to the maxim I mentioned earlier, that "any properly-designed vehicle will slide before it rolls over." (I just remembered who said that - Dr. Thomas Gillespie, University of Michigan, in his SAE-published textbook, "Fundamentals Of Vehicle Dynamics". YouTube interview follows below.) . Detroit lost their collective way along the line. Well, just look at them now - they are paying for it. .

.They're taller, too. Not only does that adversely affect vehicle dynamics, it bites into fuel economy by increasing the frontal area. . You just hit a nerve about why I almost-but-not-quite ever got to liking the Liberty. :)

Take special care drilling your casting - proper alignment is critical. I was kinda hoping the foundry would have done that for you... oh well.

Sounds like there might be a class-action lawsuit in the making then. I know a metalurgical expert who has a thriving consultancy providing expert testimony for such cases (like high-rise crane failure, and the Mississippi River Bridge collapse in Minnesota). If there are any interested parties here who can provide failed parking brake parts and evidence of the consequences of failure, let me know and I could see if he is interested.

Once again I reiterate that the first video was not a slalom, but rather a simple avoidance maneuver. Additionally, 2 other vehicles from similar class(VW Touareg and Volvo XC90) easily managed to pass the same test the Jeep failed - and the Grand Cherokee has not only front and rear independent suspension but also active stability control. I do take your point about Jeeps not being sports cars, and I completely agree. Vehicles with beam axles are far worse than the Grand Cherokee tested - but if it failed with IFS and IRS plus stability control, what sort of chances would an old Jeep have? Compound that with lift and ask yourself that again... I disagree that the trend is toward giving up "safety and handling" - quite the contrary I think. The manufacturers had a good run of getting away with just short of outright murder for years, but ever since the Ford Explorer debacle (liability for which - in my opinion - they successfully but unjustly were able to pin on Firestone tires) there has been pressure to develop safer high-profile vehicles. Active suspension stability control, independent suspensions, and lowered profile have all been part of the move toward safety over the past 10+ years. I don't want to sell short the appeal of beam axle suspension for off-road capability; in fact I am a proponent of keeping road certification for such vehicles no matter how extreme. But it is incumbent upon the drivers of such vehicles to exercise due care to operate them in a safe manner. For myself, I prefer to be able to keep up with average traffic, and so I seek all the edge I can reasonably muster in making my vehicles as roadworthy as possible while expanding somewhat the off-road capabilities I am able to enhance. I will remark that most of the level of safe operation capability that a given vehicle has is derived directly from its operator. I know a little of your background and so I can comment that many (most?) drivers in the emergency avoidance anecdote you related would not have fared so well as you did. Here is an anecdote of my own... A company I used to work for paid to have key personnel attend a 4-day Bondurant racing course so as to improve their driving capabilities on the test track (thus enhancing not only the safety of the personnel but also of the hand-built multi-million-dollar prototypes they drove!). At the end of the 4-day course just before "graduation", Bob Bondurant loaded a 12-passenger Ford Econoline van full of his driving course students and challenged them one at a time to pass him in his heavily-loaded van on a road course while the student drove a competition open-wheel race car. To my knowledge, no one ever beat that challenge. That illustrates what used to be a maxim of car design: "any properly-designed vehicle will always slide before overturning." Some SUVs of the 1980s/1990s pushed (some would say violated) that. Here is another anecdote: Christina Hefner, publisher of Playboy Magazine (and daughter of Hugh Hefner, founder) once remarked that "there are 2 things every red-blooded American male thinks he can do better than any other - and 1 of them is drive." :rotf: Anyway, the upshot is that no matter how good I may think I am, I am always looking for an edge to do better. My experience has made me more a stickler for safety than most folks, but as those folks who have built cars from the ground up know very well, there is more than one measure of performance.

Didn't even realize it was a Jeep. Example was not a "slalom", but just a simple avoidance maneuver, and only at 43 mph at that. Safety applies to vehicle type regardless of make and model. There are some pretty simple things that can be done to improve vehicle dynamics - among them tire and rim choice and inflation pressure. Would you prefer a Ford example?

Good info though, had never heard of the 18" offering. Knowing what they came on narrows down the search - thank you. Still need to find the backset and the width - if anyone here can contribute, sing out! 18" wheels with 31" tire diameter would give a 6.5" sidewall - plenty to prevent wheel damage, and would cut down on "tuck" during cornering (admittedly not a strong point of a truck, but you never know when you might be forced into drastic maneuvers). Some of you might think I am too mindful of safety... seen this? ;)

Did Jeep ever offer any 17" rim with the 5 x 4.5" bolt circle? They started with the 17" rims when they brought in the WJ version of the Grand Cherokee in 1999, and those were NOT 5 x 4.5". Aren't these in the picture below 17", and called "Rubicons"?