Oyaji

Thank you for your criticism. I think you need to work on your reading comprehension. While you are at it, maybe take a look at your anger issues, too.

The heat loss comment is interesting to me. I think it is misplaced criticism. Because the primary means of heat rejection is via liquid cooling, and since the cooling is controlled by the thermostat, I don't see how the use of aluminum would make any difference in heat loss, nor how it would cost horsepower.

To put it any other way would just invite more flames from someone who has demonstrated a proclivity for seeing what he wants to see on a page rather than what is actually written there. No one in this thread ever made any claims that need backing up. To do so on the Internet is pure foolishness anyway because antagonists will just claim B.S., yet any information given is out there forever. Anyone who values his privacy should be very circumspect about posting personal information of any kind.

Man, I 'm reefed to see you all reefed up! Take a lap up and over "Trouble Hill" for me. :)

Suffice it to say that was probably a professional from the automotive business, and probably one who took Dr. Thomas Gillespie's class on vehicle dynamics - you know, the guy who wrote the book about the subject.

Advantages will be most pronounced for high RPM/top-end power. Still curious as to what they come up with. This would be a head for which to take a hard look at fabricating a high-flow intake manifold (a specialty of Edelbrock) and some long-tube headers too, I reckon.

Who do you suppose gave them the idea to do that test?

I clearly said that the wide mirrors to which I refer are for use with towing loads at the 8.5-foot highway width limit. Since you certainly must have read what I posted, you must be referring to towing loads that are that wide. I've never seen any 8.5-foot-wide "MJ's, XJ's, KJ's", so I sure would like to see a picture of any of them, as doubtless would many other readers who have never seen any before either - would you post up some photos of the "more than you can shake a stick at" examples for us, please?

:yeah that: I've seen this personally on dozens of our (old) vehicles/equipment out behind the barn.

Anyone who has never towed a wide trailer safely doesn't know first-hand the advantage of wide-mounted mirrors. On a narrow truck like the Comanche, they need to stick out nearly 3 feet on each side. Here is a picture of some removable ones; there are offerings from a number of makers but I don't like their price. Since they are easy to fabricate, I might make them myself, similar to these:

Seriously? How much more drag can they add to our brick shaped vehicles? That would depend on the size of the mirror, wouldn't it. Towing an 8-and-a-half-foot-wide trailer (the legal limit), you need big mirrors mounted wide. Besides the added drag (which, despite the clown comments above, is quite significant), such wide mirrors are beyond inconvenient when not towing. They are at risk of being broken, their appearance is aesthetically displeasing, plus as I mentioned already they cost in extra gasoline consumed. As an aside comment, the squarish lines of the Comanche contribute far less to aerodynamic drag than does the open bed. Drags results less from the shape of the front of a vehicle punching a hole through the wind, but more from the shape thats helps close that hole in the wind behind it. So, I'm betting you have a tonneau cover of some sort on your Comanche? Fiberglass or fabric? Where did you get it? I've been unable to find either one. I'm working on something much, much better, but I can't talk too much about it just now. I'd post up a picture of something similar that has been done already but to tell the truth I don't want the abuse I'd take for offering a sneak peek. People have their own very specific ideas about what their truck should look like, which is just fine until they decide to be very closed-minded and tell everyone else what their trucks should look like too. When it's time, I'll post some pics; until then use your imagination. :) You were quite observant and perceptive to offer up that tonneau cover guess from my comments about drag...

But but but - how else are you ever going to get to 10,000 posts? :rotf: Really though, if you have anything to contribute, might as well chime in, even if its just a bit of foolishness to liven things up and keep the ball rolling. If you can make a guess, then guess away (just call it a guess and don't present it as gospel). I think many would agree that Jimoshel posts the best material on these forums, Besides his wide knowledge to share, his stories and jokes are great! Might as well follow his example. :)

Seriously? How much more drag can they add to our brick shaped vehicles? That would depend on the size of the mirror, wouldn't it. Towing an 8-and-a-half-foot-wide trailer (the legal limit), you need big mirrors mounted wide. Besides the added drag (which, despite the clown comments above, is quite significant), such wide mirrors are beyond inconvenient when not towing. They are at risk of being broken, their appearance is aesthetically displeasing, plus as I mentioned already they cost in extra gasoline consumed. As an aside comment, the squarish lines of the Comanche contribute far less to aerodynamic drag than does the open bed. Drags results less from the shape of the front of a vehicle punching a hole through the wind, but more from the shape thats helps close that hole in the wind behind it.

I learned about Alumalite from my brother the artist, who has been doing castings with it for over 10 years now. He just started using silicone for his molds last year; I designed him a simple vacuum chamber to draw the bubbles out of the silicone mixture used to make the molds (works great). Any questions you have I can bounce off him - he uses opaque Alumalite but says the clear product handles similarly.

Bigger mirrors enhance safety, but add drag and hurt fuel economy. I'll be looking to buy or make some removable brackets for big mirrors to give better rearward visibility when towing.

A plasticizer might liven it up considerably. Now for the bad news: unfortunately, I haven't been able to get any for about 10 years now, and I don't even remember the brand name of the rather excellent one I used to get for vinyl. I think they got pulled from the market because of the health hazard: if memory serves, the plasticizers (for vinyl at least) turned out to be a synthetic mimic of estrogen and caused all sorts of heath problems if taken into the human body. It was pretty readily absorbed through the skin, so you'd have to be really careful if you could even get it. I am trying to find a source from China, but it is not a major focus of mine at the moment so I can't help you there any time soon. If your alternative is to through the boot away, before you do you might try brake fluid to liven it up. If left on too long it would probably do more harm than good (making the rubber too soft), but careful application and removal of the excess not absorbed (washing should do it) might yield results for some amount of time. Worth a try before you trash it.

*grunts*

Alumalite is the product to go with for sure. I suggest you check out the silicone products avialable for mold making: the molds you make would be much more durable (beyond your lifetime).

I was planning on eventually getting around to making my own red ones with clear reverse light lenses, and perhaps some extra to offer for sale, but you beat me to it. :) What are you using for the pour? and to make your molds?

:agree: Either that, or start fresh with 2 threads: 1 about the safety recall for the 1986 model year, and one to garner input about parking brake failure for other years to determine if it is commonplace and what to do about it. Thankfully, this thread has not yet gotten to the level of a "fullout internet bar fight"... at least not by all the participants. I think reading what has actually been written rather than what one expects to see on the page would go a long way towards understanding what the point actually is here.

The tires you have will hurt a little on economy, as the will nudge the engine a bit to the slow side of the "sweet spot" for highway cruising. I'd suggest 215/75R15s. Also, have you "read" your spark plugs? They tell a pretty good story of the running condition of your engine. Ideally the insulators should be a light grey or tan.

They would indeed, but since I already have 2 sets of steel and 1 set of aluminum XJ wheels on hand (all OE), I won't be going for them. Most likely I'll go for some 16x7 steelies ($15 apiece from a local junkyard) wrapped with 10-ply rating 235/58R16s at around $120 each. They air up to 80-85 PSI and are 31" diameter, so I'll be shortening the legs to the next factory final drive ratio. I have front and rear sets of both 3.55 and 4.10s, but unfortunately no automatic or manual transmissions with transfer cases; when it's time I'll at least have the option of choosing. For reasons of economy (both highway and build cost) I am tempted to stick with the 5-speed that is in it (BA-10, I presume). Isn't there a cheap way to attach a t-case that involves swapping the tailhousing and shortening the output shaft? (I don't have the 4x4 tailhousing though...) It will be awhile before I get to all that I think. As I mentioned, I have a good use for it just parked as it is to do some mock-ups of the main project I will need a "show-car" MJ for later. This one is too much of a project at the moment, unfortunately, and would take too much time and money better spent elsewhere. The dual tanks, however, will be very useful on a running MJ for helping prove the merit of the other thing I am working on...

Gogmorgo, thanks for the ideas, but JeepcoMJ says there is no room for it and that it is impossible, so clearly it can't be done. I guess that MJ with side-pipes picture you posted is photoshopped? Shame on you! ;) I thought about a stack, but I can't figure how to run one cleanly without cutting a hole in the bed, and that is out. I reckon there is not room between bed and cap to use even a flattened large-diameter pipe without running into heat problems. Running a stack external of the bodywork is unattractive because it's aerodynamically "dirty" plus worries me about passersby getting burned. Here is a pic of the side exhaust through the lower bed valance like I was talking about earlier. I have seen at least 2 MJs with similar setup, so I know that despite JeepcoMJ's assurances to the contrary that it actually can be done. One worry of indeterminant significance is that if I run a topper and ever have passengers, they may end up breathing carbon monoxide, as well as any occupants of the cab when the rear window is open... regulatory standards mandate that all exhaust must exit aft of the rearmost door or window of cabin space occupied by humans.

Some of you *hard look above this post* have a hard time reading and understanding what has been posted. This thread is about the 1986 parking brake recall, and by extension now, also seeking to find if there is a pervasive problem with MJ parking brakes beyond the 1986 model year that warrants further investigation. Anecdotal evidence given in this thread and the fact that the same part number was used for all MJ parking brakes suggests that there might be a problem across all years of production, so if you have a problem with your parking brake in any MJ besides the 1986 model you should speak up here. If you have a 1986 MJ with a faulty parking brake I suggest you take it by your deal for recall service. If you have any trouble getting that service I encourage you to post an account of your experience here. That there is an outstanding safety recall that Chrysler will honor is beyond contradiction, as they have admitted as much in their email copied in post # 59 on page 3. To be clear, safety recalls have no time limit and are not affected by product age.

Cogent, useful, and practical advice, thank you. I'll think about it, but probably won't replace the spare with a tank for the reason I mentioned before. I'll think about using the wiring idea in whole or in part. I know dual stock tanks have been used before, and it looks like that's the direction I'll go unless I can come up with a better and cheaper custom fabrication. To do that I'll need to re-route the exhaust pipe and muffler - ideas, anyone?