Eagle

Brake lights are different from parking/tail lights. But the tail lights should be on the same fuse as the front parking lights, so if the fronts work, the fuse is good. Link from an old thread to a 1988 FSM for the MJ electrics. Wiring for the tail lights shouldn't have changed much, if at all. http://www.bteventures.com//mj1988electricalmanual.pdf I suspect the sockets.

If you have brake lights, it can't be a ground problem, so you have to look at the wiring on the input side. Unfortunately, you have an electrical problem, so you're going to have to learn to deal with electrical wiring. Isn't there a fuse for the taillights on the early MJs? (I should know this, but I seem to forget more than I remember these days.)

I'm more inclined to go with the CPS as the prime suspect. Another thing -- a 20+ year old fuel system may not hold pressure overnight. Do you turn the key to RUN and then wait until the fuel pump stops before trying to start the engine? If not, you're cranking the engine before you have adequate pressure in the fuel rail.

There is no front "proportioning valve" in the MJ. That distribution block beneath the master cylinder also acts as the proportioning valve in the XJ and ZJ, but not in the MJ. The XJ units have the "nose" occupied by a plug, behind which there's a heavy spring and a slider with an O-ring on it. None of that is present in the MJ. In the MJ, that unit is a distribution block, and also provides for a bypass to send full braking pressure to the rear wheels (by-passing the height sensing valve) in the event of a failure of the front brake circuit. The simple way to eliminate the rear height sensing valve is to disconnect the rear axle flex hose from it, run a new hard line from the "nose" of the front distribution block directly to the rear flex hose, and to plug the forward/lower output on the distribution block. That's it -- done. The cautionary note here is that the bypass will then result in the rear wheels always getting full braking pressure. To me, that's a good thing. However, you must always be aware that when the bed is unloaded, there will be a tendency for the rear wheels to lock up prematurely. If you're lot looking out for it, this will result in a spin-out. It's not an issue for me because I learned to drive before cars (and light trucks) had proportioning valves, so I'm accustomed to modulating braking with my right foot. For people who don't know anything other than proportioned braking and ABS, it takes some getting used to ... and some drivers can never adapt. For those cases, I recommend installing a Wilwood adjustable proportioning valve in the rear circuit. BTW -- I do NOT recommend using an XJ or ZJ proportioning valve in an MJ. First, they tend to get gummed up, leaving you with NO rear brakes. Second, the way they operate is IMHO exactly the opposite of what they should do. What they do is delay the flow of brake fluid to the rear wjeels until the pressure is fairly high. This means that most of your daily driving will use only the front brakes. (This explains why the rear brakes on my wife's 2000 XJ still had over 60% of the lining left when I opened them up at 100,000 miles.) The rear wheels don't see any braking until you really stomp on the peddle -- which is a panic stop, which throws most of the weight onto the front wheels, which is exactly when you DON'T want to suddenly be dumping pressure to the rear wheels. Even with no proportioning valve, I've never spun out my MJ. I DID spin out the 2000 XJ -- on a highway at 65 MPH when some idiot came up an entrance ramp and cut me off. It was a miracle the XJ only spun out and didn't flip over. By contrast, my '88 XJ hasn't had any rear brakes for two or three years. One of these days I need to disassemble the proportioning valve and clean it out.

Pumping the gas peddle is NOT an appropriate way to start a vehicle with electronic fuel injection. That worked in the days of carburetors because it cycled the accelerator pump to get gas into the cylinders. That's not necessary when you have an electronic squirter pushing the fuel in there at 39 psi. All you're going is opening the throttle body plate and making the mix LESS rich, when you really need it as rich as possible to start. Keep your foot off the gas peddle when starting.

Pontiac did it, too, in the mid-60s. I think the car was called the Tempest.

I'm pretty certain someone (maybe Hornbrod?) posted a link to the entire electrical manual for the early MJs. The wiring diagrams you need will be in there.

Nope. Not as long as the seller is going to hold out for a ridiculous price. It won't be better than described if you go look at it ... the BEST you can hope for is that it won't be too much worse.

Yep. I've seen several examples of Clayton's long arm kit. Compared to what a pro does, the long arms in that setup look absolutely frightening. And XJ rear springs won't be of any use in an MJ.

I can't be serious? No, I think YOU can't be serious. All this can be fixed in one afternoon? Needs front drive shaft headlights rear pinion bearing rear taillight rear shocks front stablizer rocker panel patch driver side floor pan rear frame patch Welded rear 3.07 gears with huge tires. No way anybody is going to repair all that in one afternoon. And if the seller is willing to admit to all that being bad, you can bet there's a lot of other little (or not so little) things wrong that he's not admitting to. This is not a "truck" -- it's a basket case.

I was going to be generous and call it a $300 truck. In reality, it's a refugee from a scrap yard. The guy had to have been on some REALLY potent dope to post that at $1200 firm.

The steering box doesn't have any idea what speed the engine is rotating at -- the pump does. So, if you have power steering at higher RPM but not at idle or low RPM, I would suspect the pump before I'd suspect the box.

$99? :EEK: I'll make my own. It's easy enough to add a second relay to the basic configuration described by Hornbrod.

For starters (no pun intended), you didn't break your solenoid, because the solenoid is monted on the starter motor. You also didn't break your starter relay, because that's under the hood. So you either broke your starter switch (which is located at the bottom of the steering column), or you broke the ignition key cylinder (which is mounted near the top of the steering column, where you insert the key. Your kit includes two single-pole, single-throw toggle switches, one of which has a safety cover; a starter button (which is also basically a single-pole, momentary-contact switch); and two relays. You don't probably need the two relays, since you already have a starter relay and a fuel pump relay in the vehicle that you can tap into. Basically, you'll use one of the toggle switches to power the fuel pump (through its relay) and the other toggle switch to power the ignition. The push button will power the starter. This presents three questions: 1) One of your toggle switches has a safety cover, which is to prevent accidental operation. Is it more important for that to be connected to the fuel pump, or to the ignition? 2) How do you control power to the accessory circuits? 3) How do you shut everything off? So maybe you use the unprotected toggle switch to control the accessories, and the protected toggle switch to control both the ignition and the fuel pump. That would essentially mimic the factory setup. And you would be shutting things off by turning off the toggle switches. Turn off the switch controlling the ignition and fuel pump, and the engine stops. Turn off the other switch, and there's no power to the accessories.

That's what I was afraid of. Looks like I'm back in the wiring harness business.

My wife's 2000 XJ has factory foglights. The 2001 XJ I picked up and am reconditioning for our daughter doesn't have fogs. I have the dashboard switch on order from the stealership. The question is: Is the wiring already there for the fogs, or will I have to make a harness?

The defrost cycles DOES run the a/c. It's designed that way.

I'd have to agree. I can't think of any other way to do it.

All available information says that the version of the 2.8L used by AMC through 1986 was externally balanced.

Correction: The '97 and newer 8.25 is basically as strong as the D44. The '96 and older have smaller shafts that are the same size as the D35, but larger tubes that are less prone to bending. Any 8.25 is better than a D35, but they aren't all equal.

You're right, of course. It's a combination of area and pressure, which together result in force. That's why the trick of using smaller wheel cylinders on the AMX was a tolerable work-around when removing the proportioning valve from an AMX -- the brakes themselves remained the same (same swept area), but the smaller cylinders at the same peddle pressure transmitted less overall force to the drums.

Mine come from Jeep tech bulletin I.S. 14E, which is Comanche specific. Considering that the information for the front is the same but the rear is different, I wonder if the above measurements might be for the XJ. According to the factory bulletin, the measurement for the front should be 17 cm (6-3/4 inches) plus or minus 13 mm (1/2 inch) for two-wheel drive vehicles. For four-wheel drive, it should be 20 cm (7-3/4 inches) plus or minus 13 mm (1/2 inch). Here's what's different: For the rear, on two-wheel drive vehicles the vertical distance should be 21 cm (8.2 inches) plus or minus 13 mm (1/2 inch). On four-wheel drive vehicles, the vertical distance should be 23 cm (9.2 inches) plus or minus 13 mm (1/2 inch).

I suspect the answer will be that you went to the effort of replacing the axle for nothing. Does the new axle have the vacuum disconnect?

You've been reading stories on the Internet again, haven't you? My '88 XJ has the BA 10/5 transmission. I'm currently at 287,000+ miles, and no tranny problems. Yes, it doesn't like shifting into 2nd when cold -- the solution is to "granny" shift it from 1st to 2nd, at a very slow road speed. News flash: the AX-15 doesn't like shifting into 2nd when cold, either. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Peugeot tranny if you don't abuse it.

Your disc brakes may or may not have more stopping power than a D44 with 10" brakes -- but I doubt it. I suspect yours feels better because of the change to the dual diaphragm booster. Stopping power essentially comes down to swept area, and I very much doubt that the disc brakes have more area than 10" x 2-1/2" drum brakes. Back when I was crewing on stock cars (local, short track stuff, not NASCAR), just about everyone was still running drum brakes front and rear. They were usually from full-size Lincolns, and they were basically the same brakes on the MJ D44 axles. They worked well enough that even with big racing slicks those cars could lock up all four wheels at speed. Keep in mind that the MJ braking system is designed such that you never get to use all the braking power in the rear anyway. If you could, you'd be locking up the rear wheels in wet conditions, or when stopping going downhill, or in panic stops. That's what proportioning valves do -- they reduce the available braking to the rear wheels. If you want more rear braking, even with the D35 and the smaller 10" drums, just remove the height sensing valve in the back. That will give you 100 percent braking power to the rear wheels at all times ... and I guarantee that you'll be able to lock up the rears and spin out in a panic stop. I don't mind that -- I grew up and learned to drive years before we ever heard of proportioning valves, so I don't miss having one. For those who have never driven anything that didn't have one (or have never driven anything without ABS) it can be a life-changing experience the first time to stomp on the brakes, and suddenly find yourself going backwards. The first rear proportioning valve I encountered was in the original, 2-seat AMX. Curiously, the AMX had a proportioning valve, the Javelin didn't. (I guess the shorter wheelbase made a difference.) When a proportioning valve failed in the AMXs, we just by-passed it. To offset the tendency for premature rear wheel lockup, we substituted wheel cylinders from 6-cylinder Gremlins, which had a smaller diameter so they transferred less overall braking power at the same pressure.