Eagle

No. I posted a picture of what I was talking about. Let's try again:

Skip the Amsoil. Use DOT-5 silicone and stop worrying. It's non-corrosive and non-hygroscopic. And IF the master cylinder ever leaks, it won't eat up the fuse panel if it drips on it.

That may be counter-productive. When I crewed on a stock car, everyone cut down the impellers on their water pumps to flow LESS water, so the water had more "dwell time" in the radiator to allow the heat to transfer. If the water was pushed through too fast, the rate of transfer wasn't sufficient to remove enough heat.

The same thing happened to one of our NAXJA-NAC members at a NACFest event at Paragon a few years ago. Got back to the campground mid-afternoon on Saturday and he and another guy made an emergency run into town, getting to the NAPA about 10 minutes before they closed. So they loaded up on steel brake line and various fittings and adapters, and then spent the evening making an all-steel line to replace the plastic. It took a couple of adapters, but they made it up without too much work. The key is to remember that the engine moves relative to the chassis, and if there's no way to allow for that -- the steel line will fatigue and crack. Best way around that is to make the line extra long, and on at least one end (both is better, if you can do it) carefully coil the line around something like a screwdriver handle about three to five times to make a spring-like section that distributes the movement through the entire coil.

Doesn't matter, in my case. I'm not changing ratios, just replacing the open carrier with a limited slip carrier. The pinion won't be touched, and I just have to set the ring gear backlash as close to where it is now as possible.

That's what I referred to as the "tuning fork." I have that covered, thanks.

I've never worked on the 8-1/4 Chrysler axle. I have one that I want to put a Trac-Lok in -- it's now an open diff. From what I've picked up by osmosis, the backlash on the 8-1/4 is adjusted with a tuning fork rather than by shimming the bearings. So is all I need to buy just the Trac-Lok unit and a set of carrier bearings? No shims?

You don't attach the motor to the bellhousing, you attach the bellhousing to the motor. The threaded holes are in the block, so unless you plan on carrying an engine block to Home depot, you aren't going to match 'em up that way.

You can do it, but it;'s not a great idea. The front is more of a problem that the rear. I looked up shock technical info on the Monroe web site. (Monroe is the same company that makes Rancho, BTW.) Depending on which shock you choose, the full travel for the front ranges from 7-3/8" to 7-1/2". In the rear, full travel ranges from 8-5/8" to 9-3/4". There's no way to know for sure, but for theory let's assume that at stock height your stock shocks have the pistol at the exact mid-point of travel. Adding lift uses up shock up-travel. The fronts have (theoretically) about 3-1/2" of up-travel ... total. If you have a 3" lift, your shocks are just about topped out. The rear isn't as bad, because you have less lift and the shocks have more travel. Up-travel for the rear will be around 4-1/2". If your lift isn't any more than 2" you won't be topped out, you'll still have a couple of inches to go. I think you're okay in the back. For the front, if you can't afford new shocks, somebody makes 1-1/2" shock stud extenders that would bring the pistons back closer to the midpoint of the travel. If you go that route, be careful about slamming into bumps, because the extenders will make it easy to bottom out the shocks unless you extend your bump stops.

The resistors only control the slower speeds. If the resistor pack is bad, the fan will still run at full speed when the control is placed in that position. If you have NOTHING, the fan is probably bad. It's easy to test -- three screws from the engine side of the firewall remove it, and you can jumper the two terminals on the connector directly to the battery to see if it runs. My '88 XJ is on its third fan, and that one's on the way out.

And you can't mix R-12 and R-134 in the same system. They are not compatible.

I would SOOOOOOOOO love to have one of those speedometers ...

43 and 14 are the tooth counts for the ring gear and the pinion gear. Divide 43 by 14 and you get 3.0714. Easy-"ish" upgrade would be any XJ axle that's a Chrysler 8-1/4. An XJ or MJ Dana 44 would be ideal, of course, but VERY unlikely to find. The Chrysler axles are much more common. 1990-1996 the Chrysler axle has the same shaft diameter and spline count as the Dana 35 but the housing and tubes are stronger. 1997-2001 the Chrysler axle got larger shafts with a higher spline count and are virtually equal to the Dana 44 in strength. All that's needed to install an XJ axle in an MJ is to cut off the spring perches and re-weld them in the correct location for an MJ. Doing a spring-over conversion won't gain you a "couple" of inches. It will be 5-1/2 inches minimum, possibly 6. To match that in the front you should be looking at: [*:3auzvas8]Lift springs [*:3auzvas8]Adjustable upper and lower control arms, or long arms [*:3auzvas8]Sway bar disconnects [*:3auzvas8]Much longer shocks (front and rear [*:3auzvas8]Adjustable track bar [*:3auzvas8]Steering box brace If what you really want is a couple of inches, do an add-aleaf in the rear springs and 2" lift spacers in the front.

The MJ has always had an accessory position. To turn it on, start with the key in the locked position. Push the key IN toward the steering column, then turn counterclockwise (top toward the driver).

It's the ignition and injection system. They work together. You can change a Renix engine to the newer Chrysler system. In fact, Jeep used to sell a kit to convert the older carbureted 4.2L Wranglers to Chrysler EFI, so there's no reason you couldn't do the same thing on a Renix engine. But you'll have a lot of adapting to do. For example, the throttle bodies are different so you would either have to change the intake manifold, or adapt a Chrysler throttle body to the Renix manifold, or adapt the Chrysler sensors to the Renix throttle body. The tooth pattern on the flywheel is different because the CPS is different, so you would have to put a newer Chrysler flywheel/flex plate on your Renix engine and use the newer style CPS. Anything can be done if you're prepared to throw enough time, money and effort at it ...

A couple of points: (a) A 2.5L 4-cyl probably came from the factory with 195/75 or at most 205/75 tires, so running 235s is already way oversized for that vehicle. In fact, a 235/75 is virtually the same as a 30x9.50, just a tad narrower. (B) Adding a transfer case doesn't affect your gearing. The 2WD position is a 1:1 ratio. If you're happy with the gearing now, stay with it. But more than likely if you find a 2.5L XJ or MJ with 4WD it will be mated to a 5-speed. In that event, going to 4.10s will allow you to take advantage of the improved crawl ratio for off-road while maintaining driveability on pavement.

You may NOT be talking about closed loop, if you disconnected the TPS. The ECU requires input from several different sensors to properly control the air-fuel mix and the ignition timing. If you disconnect one of the required sensors, I suspect the ECU may just default to open loop mode -- which will run, but it's overly rich and your gas mileage will suck. Open loop is intended only for warm-up.

But it's not a fixed difference. What does a tachometer do? It counts revolutions. It does that by counting ignition pulses. For a 4-cylinder, 2 pulses = 1 revolution. But for a 6-cylinder, it needs 3 pulses for 1 revolution. So ... Take a 6-cylinder tachometer. In a 4.0L vehicle, 2100 RPM needs 2100 x 3 = 6300 ignition pulses. Now put that tach on a 4-cylinder. Run it up to where it reads 2100 RPM. That's still 6300 pulses, but in a 4-banger 6300 ignition pulses is 3150 RPM. It's not off by 100 RPM, it's off by 50 percent.

The 4.0L tach should already have a potentiometer. The clusters from 1988 and newer do have it. 1986 and older do not, but a 2.8 is a 6-cylinder, so it will be properly calibrated for a 4.0L. 1987 is the question mark year -- I don't know if they had a potentiometer or not, or if it showed up as a mid-year change.

So you're willing to tear into an axle of unknown condition are do all the work of installing your gears (which you will have to take out of this axle) into a new one -- but you don't want to just replace the axle seals in the one you have? Doesn't make any sense to me, but it's your truck, your time, and your money.

The Grand Cherokee ZJ also uses a Dana 30 in front, but that's a low pinion so it's actually weaker than yours. What you're looking for is just late model axle shafts, which have larger u-joints.

Yes.

I would expect a tank from a pick-n-pull to be full of leaks. Just buy a new MJ tank -- they aren't all that expensive. No, a Cherokee tank won't work. They are completely different.

Use the YJ hoses. Bending the original MJ hard lines is (IMHO) a HUGE risk. The metal is 20 years old in the newest possible MJ (a 1992). There's a high probability that if you try to bend it ... it'll crack. You're buying new hoses anyway, so just buy longer ones. The YJ hoses will work fine at stock height and are long enough for about a 4" lift.

Any 4-cylinder cluster from 1984 through 1990 will work. You can also get a cluster from a 6-cylinder, 1988 through 1990 -- those have a potentiometer on the back of the tachometer to allow you to calibrate it for the 4-cylinder engine.