Eagle

????? The auto doesn't use the flywheel. It has a "flex plate" -- the torque converter mass is what does the job of the flywheel.

Does anyone have an intake manifold from a 1984 or 1985 XJ 2.5L that they could snap a photo of? I'm curious about the layout of the bore (or bores, I don't remember if the stock carburetor was a one-barrel or two-barrel) and bolt pattern. I'm trying to determine how difficult (or impossible?) it would be to adapt a small 4-barrel carb to a 2.5L engine.

You are correct about the '86 and the 228 Selec-Trac case, but I don't think the 242 was offered in the MJ in any year.

No. There should be nothing teed into the vacuum line for the brakes. This I won't be able to answer until the snow melts off at least one of the 4-bangers. Off the top of my head, I'm inclined to suggest that it doesn't really matter where it plugs in, as long as it is connected to the intake manifold. The canister isn't a vacuum motor, it is just a reservoir. The purpose is to maintain vacuum in the heater (and cruise control) circuits when intake manifold vacuum drops.

If you are referring to a round or oval canister on the right side, that's a vacuum reservoir for the vacuum operated heater controls. You need it. If you have cruise control, it's also necessary for the cruise.

Oxygen sensor.

This is often caused by a dirty idle air controller (IAC). On my high-mileage 1988 XJ, I've found that another factor is corrosion in the throttle linkage. The cable from the gas peddle doesn't go directly to the throttle body -- it goes to a lever (bellcrank) on a pivot that's mounted down below the brake master cylinder, near the frame rail. I found that soaking that with PB Blaster, then following up with motor oil cured most of my fast start-up issues.

It should be available to everyone now. (I hope)

I don't think that is a factory slider, but if it's intact I don't see any reason to replace it. The stock ones fit flush, like the one in the second photo.

Pretty much what Geonovast said. The crossmember itself is the same for both applications, but I believe the actual mount that attaches to the crossmember will be different. Personally, I wouldn't worry about adapting the neutral safety switch and interlocking to the steering wheel/column. Your manual tranny steering column has the flipper for the ignition lock. Unless you're in the habit of trying to start the engine with the shifter in gear and your foot off the brake, the NSS is a waste and a needless complication.

That would be my guess. Out of curiosity, is the non-power master cylinder a different part number than the power? You might be able to just remove your power booster and move the existing master back directly to the firewall.

Everything from the doors forward is exactly the same (within the same group of years). Rear axles and brakes are also the same, but the rear axle mounts are different. Not all years are interchangeable electrically. Chrysler changed to their own, in-house injection/ignition system in 1991, so pre-91 stuff related to fuel and ignition won't fit 91 and 92 -- regardless of whether it's an XJ or an MJ.

Other than giving you links to FOUR discussions of your question?

The very early ones were available with the base model equipped with non-power brakes and non-power steering. I've never actually seen one, but if they were like the AMC cars from just a few years earlier, there is no adapter. The master cylinder bolts directly to the firewall and the rod from the brake peddle goes directly to the piston in the master. There should be a retainer clip of some type that prevents the actuator rod from pulling out of the piston. On my '68 Javelin autocrosser, I went the other way (which is why I'm fairly confident in what I'm reporting). The Javelin I set up for racing started out life as a base model 290 V8 with manual steering and manual (if that's an acceptable word for foot power) drum brakes. I converted to quick-ratio manual steering and installed power brakes with front discs out of a '73 Rebel, because the newer design used larger rotors and calipers and the rotors were ventilated. Easy, bolt-in conversion, so I would hope that going the other way would be an easy "bolt-out" conversion. I don't know if the push rod is the same length as the one for power brakes.

It **SHOULD** not require any special access permissions. I'm not philosophically opposed to granting permissions, I just don't care to have to deal with it on a continuing basis. The intent of posting was that it would be public. If y'all can't view the link, I'd rather figure out why and fix it. Does everyone get a message saying you need permission, or is it working for some people and not working for others? DANG! Google is fubar. I just tried to access the file behind the link, and I'm getting Google in either Chinese or Japanese. Don't know how to do anything if I can't read the stinkin' menus. I'll try again later.

Hey, I'm not the guy who bumped his own thread because he didn't get an answer within six hours -- in the middle of the night. I am always willing to help, but sometimes people can help themselves, too. Most basic questions have been asked and answered numerous times, and instead of asking other people to do the searching, you could do some searching yourself.

It is static. Scroll down to your tire size, and find the gears you want to run.

No, I did NOT set it up that way. And I don't know how to change it. If anyone uses Google Docs, can you coach me on what setting I need to adjust so everyone can see it? It should not require that you have a Google account to view it. See if this link works: https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl= ... utput=html

This may help: https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl= ... utput=html

Rather than continually look up engine RPMs for various tire sizes and gear ratios, I'll let y'all do it yourselves. A friend on another (non-Jeep) forum just clued me in about Google Docs. I just uploaded my famous tire size and gear ration spreadsheet so everyone can look at it. IMHO this in the definitive reference. Most on-line calculators use the mathematical rolling circumference of a tire to calculate RPMs. In compiling this spreadsheet, I consulted tire manufacturers' printed data sheets and web sites, and for most tire sizes I was able to find a published figure for actual (real world) revolutions per mile. This takes into account the amount of "squat" in the sidewalls, which results in an actual rolling radius that's less than the mathematical value. https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl= ... utput=html

Maybe people are tired of answering the same question multiple times. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=28697 viewtopic.php?f=2&t=28031 viewtopic.php?f=2&t=27579 http://www.naxja.org/forum/showthread.p ... h+cylinder

No, it's not. That's what was used in the Pioneer and Chief models in the late 80s. Gauges, but no tachometer.

Cheer up ... just think of all the wear you WON'T be putting on 5th gear.

Mate, I'm 6'-2" and I HATED my MJ with a 4" lift. The outer edge/corner of the seat was basically destroyed from getting into and out of the truck. I'm MUCH happier after taking out the lift and restoring the suspension to stock height.

Not gonna happen. A Dana 44 out of what vehicle? NO MJ or XJ had a Dana 44 in front. Not true... Export model XJ/MJ's did... We had a member here from South America that had a an MJ with a D-44 in the front. My wife is from Chile and I have spent a lot of time in Chile, including hanging out with a fellow member of NAXJA from that country. XJs and MJs in Chile were built in the U.S. and did NOT have Dana 44 front axles. The Dana 44 was used in XJs and MJs built IN Venezuela, for sale in Venezuela. While that makes you technically correct and me wrong, for practical purposes it doesn't matter, because we aren't going to find one here in the U.S.