Eagle

Sounds like a good way to crush the frame rail to me. Why cut off a perfectly good mount when all that's needed is to weld on a new threaded section?

3-inch is for the Chrysler 8-1/4 axle. It won't hold a Dana 44 securely.

The factory MJ u-bolts are 14mm. That's larger than 1/2" and smaller than 9/16", but closer to 9/16". I've standardized on 1/2" because I work on XJs and MJs (XJs were 12mm), and I figure a new, high-quality 1/2" u-bolt straight from a truck spring shop is at least as good as a 20+ year old 14mm u-bolt that grew up in rust belt country.

Around this forum, it is axiomatic that "Friends don't let friends use Fram oil filters." ANY Fram oil filter. Filter brand aside, yes you can swap the newer filter adapter onto the older block.

Good luck finding a frame under the cab. You do know what "unibody" means, right?

First off, 2200 RPM is a lot more than 30 MPH. What you are describing sounds like the distributor is off by a tooth.

If the front axle uses the unitized hub/bearing assemblies, they are the same for 2WD and 4WD. But some years the front axles of 2WD vehicles got conventional front axle bearings. I don't remember which years were which, though.

IF the engine needs to be replaced, I would swap in another Jeep 4.0L I-6. If you want/need more power -- stroke it.

The 10-slot grille was used from 1984 (XJ) through 1987. The grille itself was changed to 8 slots in 1988 and continued through 1989. In 1990, the grille remained 8 slots but the entire grille and header assembly were redesigned to use fewer parts. The trim strip above the grille and headlights, which was a separate part (three separate parts) on the early ones was integrated into the grille and headlight bezels beginning in 1990. The front end in that photo could be made up from 1984 through 1987 parts.

The nut breaker wedge should never touch the threads. Even if it does, it's easy to clean up with a thread chaser die. Sears sells them in sets, and everyone who works on old cars (and trucks) should have them. http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_1260 ... ckType=G18

The crude test for the gauge is easy. Power on -- remove the pigtail from the sender terminal, the gauge should peg at 80 psi. Ground the pigtail to the block, the gauge should drop to zero. On the sender, check it with an ohmmeter. The range is zero to 88 ohms. Running oil pressure should be "somewhere in the middle," so look for an ohm reading in the 40 range with the engine at about 2000 RPM. If it's nowhere near that, try a new sender.

:agree: Yep. That's what I would do, too. Keep it simple, and don't dig any deeper than you have to. The stud is still solid, all you need as a thread to attach a nut and washer to. And be sure to buy a can of anti-seize ... and use it religiously so you never face the problem again (on anything you have worked on).

Then you have the early style, and the only way to correct for number of cylinders is to change out a resistor.

The impact is definitely not a good idea. Do you know what a nut breaker is? Tighten the tool over the head of the nut and it cracks, releiving its grip on the bolt/stud. The nut is toast, of course, but if it's all rusted up you probably shouldn't be thinking about reusing it anyway.

Is the damper fully pulled into place? I suspect your mistake was using the original bolt to try to install the damper. It's a press fit, and it needs the bolt to pull it onto the crank snout. But ... the original bolt is too short, resulting in a stripped end. The correct procedure is to use a longer bolt to draw the damper onto the crank snout, then replace with the original bolt for final torque-down. If the bolt is tripped, chances are the crank is okay and just needs the threads chased out.

That's the adapter for a Fey universal step bumper. Are you installing one of those, or do you have a factory bumper?

:agree: Cooper tire recommends an 8-1/2" rim for 10.50s and a 10" rim for 12.50s.

You're close. I make it 2440 RPM at 70 MPH for 31s and 4.10 gears, and 2713 RPM for 4.56 gears. With 33" tires, revs drop to 2292 with 4.10s and 2550 with 4.56s. Considering that a stock vehicle with AW4 cruises at 2230 RPM at 70 MPH, for a truck that's going to be used mostly for highway the 4.10s will be as close to stock as you can get. But ... the 33" tires have a lot more inertia to get rolling, so it may not feel as quick when accelerating. 2550 RPM at 70 MPH is not excessive, by any criterion. If you're going to regear with new gears, by all means get the 4.56s. But it'll be a lot less expensive to find junkyard axles already set up with 4.10s.

Stock XJs and MJs. The problem isn't the XJ or MJ, or me. I can drive just about anything at 150 MPH if the engine has the moxie to get it there. It's when some idiot cuts you off and you have to slam on the brakes while making a violent evasive maneuver that the high, narrow SUV chassis decides it wants to be upside down before you even have time to blink. I have survived three serious accidents (none my fault, one as a passenger) and several near misses at legal speeds. I know how fast things can turn to zhit -- and if you're going 20 or 40 or 50 MPH over the speed limit, the zhit just happens even faster. These are off-road vehicles, not sports cars.

You have about 112 horsepower trying to push a brick that weighs over 3,000 pounds. It's normal. The 2.5L is not a rocket ship.

The MJ is supposed to have a slight rake when empty. As far as I'm concerned, a stock 4WD IS level. If you're looking to eliminate the rake, I wouldn't use 2" spacers, I'd use 1" (or 3/4", which is what I think they actually measure).

Your new ones are the way axle seals have been made for ... well, like forever. The open lip faces in so the axle can slide in without damaging the seal, and any pressure build-up inside tends to force the lip tighter around the axle shaft. The factory seal was made the way it is because they were being slapped in on a mass production line by high school dropouts, so they used one that CAN'T be installed backwards.

I have not had any XJ or MJ faster than 75 MPH and I don't intend to. And that's for stock height vehicles. These trucks are comparatively narrow, and you now have yours lifted, which makes it even more unstable. It is not safe to drive it that fast ... period. I know I sound like an old lady, but FYI this is from someone who has raced sports cars, done high-speed hillclimbs, and won statewide autocross championships. In properly prepared CARS I have driven over 150 MPH. I have also been involved in a couple of accidents on highways, so I know how fast everything can go to [bleep]. In the second of the highway accidents, I was rear-ended by another car at speed, and did a 180 followed by a corrective 180, ending up stopped in the center lane facing the direction I was initially going. If I had been in am MJ, I would have been on the roof. Don't even think along these lines. You have started down the road of making your MJ into an off-road beast. It is NOT suitable for speed work.

An adjustable track bar is a good idea, but up to 2 inches is considered a "budget boost" and most people who just install coil spacers don't bother with an adjustable track bar. The amount by which that initial 2" of lift offsets the axle is small enough not be be a concern. As you go higher, the angle of the track bar is steeper, so each additional inch produces proportionally more lateral offset. Ditto shocks. Most people doing a budget boost don't buy longer shocks. Ideally, you want the shock pistol at the middle point of its travel with the vehicle at rest. However, if you install longer shocks, then you need to install bump stop extensions to ensure that you don't bottom out the shocks on compression. Mr. Gasket (or maybe Edelbrock?) makes 1-1/2" shock extenders that will allow the use of the original height shocks with a 2" budget boost. However, the same caveat applies. The bump stops need to be extended by the same amount to prevent damaging the shocks. Who has 2-1/2" spacers? I wouldn't go more than 2" personally, and all the ones I have seen actually measure 1-3/4".

So it will be stronger. The '93 shaft is mated to the larger (and stronger) u-joints, so it made sense to strengthen the shaft as well.