Eagle

Sounds like a plan. Carry on, and happy braking.

They are $15.99 each at Auto Zone http://www.autozone.com/autozone/parts/ ... u4qeZ8knm5

Andy in PA lowered a 2WD MJ a few years ago. Dunno if it's still lowered, or if his wife took it over and made him convert it to 4WD. In any case, I believe he did it purely by clipping coils off the front springs, and I believe he once told me you can't go down much more than 2 inches that way due to oil pan / axle clearance.

Hey! I resemble that remark! And you are correct. I am definitely biased in favor of AMC engines over the throw-away crap they produce today. I don't regard maximum horsepower as the holy grail of engine design. I prefer simplicity and longevity.

Yes, they did. My '87 shortbed has a Dana 44 axle, but it is not a Metric Ton package (the package was not available on the shortbeds) and there are no stickers or anything to indicate that it has any other special package. Unfortunately, although I bought it from the daughter of the original owner, she didn't have any original paperwork so I don't know how it was spec'd out. Joop, the standard MJ rear springs were three leaves plus the overload, so I believe it is safe to say that you have a Metric Ton package -- whether it says so on the window or not. But 700 kg sounds like the standard payload. As I'm sure you aware, the conversion is 2.2 pounds per kilogram. An Imperial (American) ton is 2,000 pounds. A metric ton is 1,000 kg, or 2,200 pounds. 700 kg calculates to 1,540 pounds.

Did you read what you wrote there? I have no doubt you can get a newer 4-banger that makes more power on paper, and may even make more power in the real world. But those engines are in much lighter vehicles, so they won't perform in an MJ like they do in their "native" vehicles, nor will they produce the gas mileage in an MJ that they do in their native vehicles. An MJ 2.5L is good for between 200k and 300k miles, and I don't see any of the newer "disposable" engines being good for anywhere near that. I'd go with the Jeep engine.

First, compression fittings are not for brake lines. Use the proper flare fittings. Second -- I did what you are suggesting on my '88 Cherokee a few years ago. Replaced a foot or two of rusted line where it had popped. Friend came over to work the peddle while I bled the brakes. As soon as we had most of the air out of the rear and started to get a firm peddle -- it popped again, about 6" ahead of the new section. Don't fool around. Brakes are important. Just rip it out and replace the whole thing.

What about lightly buffing the cylinder wall with steel wool, then applying a light coat of oil ... not motor oil, but thin stuff, like 3-In-1 oil ... then take a glob of fast set epoxy or J-B Weld and press it into the score and hold it 'til it takes a set? Then pull it off, allow it to harden, and then you'll have a ridge to measure the height of rather than a groove to measure the depth of.

You guys are not answering his question. He isn't asking how to measure his bore, he is asking if it is possible to measure the depth of the score mark(s) in his cylinder walls to determine if an overbore will clean it up, or if he needs a new (different) block. There MUST be a way to measure this, but I don't know what that might be.

What year is the blown-up MJ engine? If it were me and my truck, I'd put in a late model XJ 4-banger, the one with multi-port injection, and build the engine with a Mopar Stage II camshaft (maybe even a Stage III, but I already have a stage II). There's a NAXJA member from one of the Rockie Mountain states who told me he routinely gets 28 MPG out of his 4-cyl 5-speed XJ. I think he said he was running the Stage III cam but I don't remember the details.

Very bad idea. Now how far off are you at 30 and at 45 and at 75?

No, 1989 was the year they made a mid-year change from the BA 10/5 to the AX-15. It could be either. The only way to know is to crawl under and look. The BA 10/5 case is split vertically along the length. The AX-15 is split transversely into a front half and a rear half, with a spacer between the front and rear sections.

Very different then my other jeeps.I have only owned 91 and later...and some of the components are a bit different. I will try your suggestions...as soon as it stops raining. In both the XJ and the MJ, they went from an external slave cylinder to an internal slave/release bearing in 1987, then they went back to the external slave in (I think) 1994. So there were some differences, but not between XJ and MJ within a particular year. And none of the clutch differences have anything to do with whether or not the injection system is Renix or Mopar.

NAPA. Does Raybestos offer master cylinders?

It means they don't know what you have. The D30 ring gear is smaller than the D35, D44, Mopar 8-1/4, OR the AMC Model 20. 181mm = 7.126" ... which sounds about right for the D30 175mm = 6.890" ... Ummmm, don't think so.

Mechanically, the MJ is the same as the XJ. And the clutch doesn't care if the ignition/injection system is Renix or Mopar. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=25695

Umm ... yes. Have you? I already pointed out that the 343 is more efficient than the 290. When I was active in the Javelin/AMX Sports car Club, there wasn't a 290 of any flavor (low or high compression, 4-speed or automatic) that could come close to the gas mileage I got with my 343 4-speed, and my 343 on a good day would run even with or beat most stock 390s.

The resistors in the resistor pack get hot enough to burn leaves ...

They'll usually go past it any number of times. The problem (as the original poster has alluded to) is when you try to RUN at the vibration point for a prolonged period.

Part of your problem is too much theory and not enough practice. An in-line 6-cylinder engine is inherently balanced, and any imbalance that is introduced is a result of manufacturing tolerances that allow a degree of mismatched parts being used in the rotating assembly. I have NEVER heard of an I-6 engine having two vibration zones, and I'm quite certain that there isn't one between 1k and 2k RPM. The natural vibration zone for the I-6 is, IIRC, at 6,000 RPM ... which happens to be above the redline on Jeep engines so, unless we're drag racers running modified engines, we just don't worry about it. However, you're worrying about a 5-cylinder engine, and there is essentially no way for a 5-cylinder engine to be inherently balanced. Rather than gross flywheel weight, I would start off by asking if the Merc 5-cylinder engine is internally balanced (i.e. the flywheel is completely symmetrical) or if the engine is externally balanced (the flywheel has an eccentric weight on one point of the periphery).

The cable either needs to be lubed, or has a kink or tight bend in it. (Or both.) The lube part is self-explanatory. If the needle bounce is due to a kink in the cable, what happens is that a tight bend causes enough friction that the cable can't turn easily. The lower end (the driven end) keeps turning and the upper end (the driven end) stops or slows down. The cable them twists itself tighter until it builds up enough stored energy to overcome the friction, then the upper end snaps free and the needle bounces.

Yeah. We know. The holes should be there and they should have weld nuts behind them.

Does not compute. Light weight does not cause vibrations, imbalance causes vibrations. A light flywheel means there is less rotating mass to keep the engine spinning when you try to engage the clutch from a stand-still, so you have to know how to drive a clutch -- well. That said, a light flywheel is normally used for racing applications, when quick throttle response is more important than smooth operation. They are not recommended for street driving, but that doesn't mean you can use a light flywheel if that's all you can get.

What year Cherokee? In general, if it's a 4.0L with a 5-speed it's 3.07 and if it's a 4.0L with automatic it's 3.55. There just isn't much variation with the I-6s. The 4-bangers had more variations, but by around 92 (or so) Chrysler had pretty much standardized on 4.10 for all 4-cylinder XJs, regardless of transmission.

It's not .35 "gage." It's .035" wire. And most inexpensive wire welders won't take .020" wire, they have a spool that will take either .030" or .035" and nothing else.