Eagle

Without replacing the springs, the absolute minimum lift from a SOA conversion is 5" to 5-1/2". If your springs are sagged, then doing a SOA plus new springs will definitely generate more than 5-1/2" of lift.

It all depends on how you intend to use the vehicle. Let's face it, there are tens of thousands of XJs and MJs in the world with the axle disconnect, and they work just fine. My '88 XJ has it -- 287,000 miles, has been wheeled at Paragon, on the power line rail in northern Rhode Island, Old Florida Road in Massachusetts, through one of the state parks near the Connecticut/Massachusetts state line, in Maine, and on fire roads around northern New Mexico. Still has the disconnect. The '88 MJ has fewer miles, but I bought it used. The previous owner wasd a teenager who had beat on it hard enough to blow up the Peugeot transmission -- but the disconnect axle was (and is) fine. I've wheeled that at Paragon, Old Florida Road, the Rhode Island power line trail, and some local spots nobody has ever heard of. Is the one piece axle shaft of the late model XJs stronger? Maybe a little, but remember -- it's the same diameter. You can get late models axles with larger u-joints, but just the absence of the disconnect isn't a guarantee of that. Lastly, the passenger side control arm mount is significantly WEAKER than the one that's part of the disconnect housing. What are your intentions for the vehicle?

Sometimes the only answer necessary is "Because I can." If you plan to do a good job of it and not a hack, I'd say go for it. Just be aware that cooling has always been a problem even with small-block Chevies in XJs and MJs, so pay attention to cooling.

I wonder if Hell Creek has different source information than General Spring. When I kvetched about the fact that most people find that General Spring's metric ton springs result in about a 3-inch lift, General Spring chimed in with some information purporting to show that there were actually a number of different metric ton springs from the factory. This would almost have to have been due to different option packages, because the factory service manual doesn't mention any difference in ride height for the metric ton package. They list a ride height for 2WD and a different ride height for 4WD. Period. (Both are subject to a plus-or-minus 1/2 inch tolerance.) I typically defer to the FSM. If they don't provide a different ride height for the metric ton package in the section specifically devoted to checking ride height -- then that suggests to me that the metric ton springs were intended to ride at "stock" height while providing more capacity.

The stiff pedal makes it sound to me like the straps on the slave cylinder didn't break.

The 90 4.0L didn't have a temperature sensor in the thermostat housing, the one for the gauges is in the left rear corner of the head and the one for the ECU is on the lower left side of the block. It shoulds like someone just used a 91+ thermostat housing on an older vehicle.

^^^ This. Do not drill the hole in the perch on the axle. Use a large C-clamp to hold the leaves in place and compressed while you remove the center bolt/pin, grind it, and replace it.

The only Cherokees with a foot brake are the police models with bench seats.

The solenoid is built onto the starter.

If the brake warning light didn't come on, I don't think the shuttle valve in the front distribution block opened the bypass line.

Beats me. The OP is the one who wants to raise his shock mounts. Mine never dragged when I wheeled the '88, but maybe I'm a wimpy wheeler.

Find where the drain tube attaches to the air box and see if the tube has rotted or split.

That setup is great for street use, but it doesn't improve the ground clearance at all compared to the stock mounts. Might even be worse for ground clearance.

Consider that you may have a bad ground at the back, and the backup lights are getting power but no ground. Do the taillights, brake lights, and turn signals function correctly?

You put the photo(s) on a photo hosting site like Photobucket or Tinypics, then post a link to the photo(s).

To be technical, a SOA will lift any MJ, 2WD or 4WD, about 5-1/2 inches. If a 2WD starts out 1" lower than a neighboring 4WD, after both undergo a SOA they will both be lifted by 5-1/2" (+/-) and the 2WD will still be 1" lower than the 4WD. The amount of lift from a SOA is the sum of 1x perch offset ~ 1/2" 1x axle tube diameter ~ 2-3/4" 1x perch offset ~ 1/2" 1x leaf pack thickness ~ 1-1/4" Add that up and you get 5 inches as a minimum lift.

The Peugeot BA 10/5 was the only 5-speed transmission used by Jeep behind the 4.0L engine in 1988. The change to the AX-15 was made mid-year in the 1989 model run. If your truck does not have a BA 10/5, it is not in factory configuration. With 35-inch tires, you need 4.88s.

Not possible.

Well, we may be talking about different things. I suspect you are talking about those bars that the factory offered that fit in the bed, against the back of the cab. Those aren't roll bars, those are show bars. When the OP said the previous owner had installed a roll bar, I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that he had put a structural roll bar inside the cab for protection and stiffening when doing severe off-roading.

There is a special bleeding procedure for the MJ which you should follow if your rear proportioning/height sensing valve is still being used. And remember that the proportioning valve shown in the third of those three photos above is an XJ proportioning valve. The MJ front thingie that looks sort of like that does not disassemble the same way, it does not have that front plug and spring, and it is NOT a proportioning valve.

The higher you lift it, the bigger tires you need to fill the wheel wells "appropriately." You can run 31s with no lift. You said you want to run 30s. Sounds like a plan to me.

So why not forget the idea of lifting and "building" it and keep it mostly the way your grandfather had it? There is nothing about lifting a truck that in any way helps in the "road manners" department. Basically, you seem to be going in two directions at once, meaning you are working against yourself. That's going to cost you more money, and the results will never be satisfactory. My red '88 MJ had a 4" lift when I bought it. I ran it with 31" tires. It was better than decent on the trail, the ride was horrible, and on-street handling was "meh." Plus, at 4" of lift, it wasn't high enough to really need steps or running boards (and they would have been rock magnets anyway) yet it was too high for me to get in and out without mashing down the outboard corner of the driver'[s seat. I finally took the lift out, and it was the best thing I could have done. Off road I can still go almost everywhere I could before, the ride and handling are both greatly improved, and I'm no longer destroying the sea every time I get in or out. And then there's the grandfather thing. Not everyone regards such matters the same way, of course, but I'll share my attitude toward about the only thing I have from my grandfather. I inherited his Winchester model 1903 .22 caliber carbine. It's not in perfect condition, but it's in very good condition. It takes a proprietary cartridge that had been unavailable for several decades. An ammo company recently made a run of that ammo and I bought some, so now I can shoot it. I found that my eyes aren't what they were when my grandfather was alive, so it would help a lot to install a scope. But ... it not drilled and tapped for scope bases and the receiver isn't grooved for scopes. I could have it drilled and tapped -- but I won't. I want it to be the rifle my grandfather had and used and enjoyed. If I add a scope, it won't be his rifle, and the holes can never be undrilled. Since you don't plan to wheel the truck, why do a bunch of things to it that all have negative effects on the aspects you seem to feel are important to you?

I think you answered your own question -- Roll Bar. People don't put roll bars in vehicles they drive to the Quik Mart three times a week. The previous owner probably wheeled the truck hard and the roll bar wasn't stiff enough to prevent the body from flexing. You need to get the cracks drilled at the ends and then TIG welded to prevent propagation.

Just enough to clear a 29-30" for now. You don't need ANY lift to run 30s. Many people run 31s on factory rims with no lift. You certainly don't need to go SOA (which will be a MINIMUM of a 5-1/2" lift) to run 30s. They'll look stupid under that much lift -- and since you seem to be interested in handling, remember that lifting the vehicle lifts the center of gravity and the roll center, which does not translate into improved handling. My apologies on the seat info. make that 1984 through 1994, not '96.

When Chrysler/Jeep updated the Cherokee body styling, they also changed the seat design. Seats from Cherokees from 1984 through 1996 should work. One caution: For a few years in the late 80s some models of the Cherokee came with what we call a "rocking chair" slider. That is, in addition to the adjustable rake of the seat back, there was another lever that allowed the seat bottom to move forward and back on a curved track, changing the angle. Those seats are too thick. You can mount them to the MJ pedestals, but they'll have you sitting too high. Why would you change the shackles? At 130,000 miles they're not likely to be rusted badly enough to be unsafe. Polyurethane bushing don't produce good road manners, they produce a harsh, noisy ride. They are for road racing competition, when you want ultimate precision in the way the suspension reacts. I doubt you would tear off any mounts in street driving with urethane bushings, but I think rubber will be a lot more comfortable. Again, at 130,000 miles I doubt you need new bushings. My original '88 Cherokee has 287,000 miles on it, it has been wheeled from Newe Mexico to paragon in Pennsylvania to Maine and New Hampshire. My control arms and all bushings are the originals. Find someone who knows something about XJs and MJs. The guy you are talking to obviously doesn't. There is nothing "pseudo" about the AWD function of the 242. It's full-time 4WD, and it works very well. My wife's XJ has it, and if it had been offer3ed with the 5-speed manual transmissions I would have it in everything. On paper, the 242 has a slightly lower torque rating than the 231. In reality, many of the people I used to wheel with at Paragon were running 242s and I never saw one give any problems.