Eagle

Ditto the above for Connecticut.

Yeah, the ratios on manual steering boxes are what brought me over to power steering. The AMC boxes were 24:1 in the larger sedans, 20:1 in the Javelin and AMX (yes, you could actually buy an AMX with manual steering), and the Javelin and AMX had an optional quick ratio competition box that was 16:1. All my Javelins and AMXs were set up with the 16:1 QRM box. I can't even imagine trying to drive something with a 28:1 ratio.

I'm not 100 percent positive but, considering that the XJ and MJ were AMC designs, and AMC used GM/Saginaw steering boxes in all their vehicles, I strongly suspect that a box out of a Javelin, Hornet, Gremlin or Concord would fit -- and might even be a better ratio. The ratio for the MJ manual box, IIRC, is 28:1 -- which is so ridiculously slow I don't think I could even drive one. I'd fall asleep while turning the wheel to go around any corner on the road.

I paid $500 just for a solid bed. I hate the idea of parting out an MJ rather than fixing it, but you could easily make back the $500 by parting it out. However, how easily (and how well) it could be repaired depends a lot on where the tree hit, and how mashed it is.

Who locks the glove box? I haven't locked the glove box in any vehicle for at least 35 years, probably closer to 45.

Nope. More likely either the shoes were set up too tight and dragged, or (perhaps more likely) the parking brake cable(s) are rusty and the parking brake doesn't release all the way.

Anything can be done ... by those with the knowledge, experience and equipment to do it. A tree fell on my brother's '78 full-size Cherokee Chief during a hurricane about 25 years ago. He had it fixed and you couldn't see that it had ever been hurt -- but it cost him well over a thousand dollars, in 1985 dollars. If you don't have experience doing body work, I'd say you should pass. Unless you can buy it cheap and afford to have it fixed professionally. You're not talking a shopping cart door ding here. The roof has an outer skin, backed up by internal ribs for structure. If you don't get it perfect, the doors won't close and seal, and you'll always be living with leaks and wind noise. Any chance you could post a couple of photos?

The deal is that the 2.5L uses the same timing chain and gears as the 4.0L, but the 2.5L has a slightly lower deck (and cam) height. Which means that the 4.0L timing chain is just long enough to have slop in it when used in a 2.5L. Rather than use two different timing sets, AMC simply decided to add a tensioner to the 2.5L.

Front fenders for the 84-96 XJ and 86-92 MJ are all the same.

The new adapter wasn't an upgrade. Chrysler just wanted to stock fewer filters, so by changing to an SAE thread they could specify the same filter they used on other vehicles. The new filter is the same size as the old one and they filter the same (if you buy the same brand of filter).

But they aren't. There is a transmission wiring harness to the TCU (which mounts under the dash on the passenger side -- did you at least get the TCU?) that you will have to install. I'm a 5-speed guy, personally, but I'm pretty certain the tranny harness is free-standing and does not require cutting and splicing the vehicle harness.

Is it possible that a previous owner already changed it to the non-metric filter adapter> How does the filter sit when installed -- horizontal, with the mouth facing forward, or vertical with the mouth down and the filter tipped slightly outward at the top toward the passenger fender?

Unlike the MJ, the XJ uses a front combination valve that provides the proportioning function. Inside that distribution block just under the master cylinder there is a spring-loaded plunger with an O-ring. That's the proportioning valve, and as best I can figure out the way it works is to NOT allow any brake fluid to the rear unless/until you really stomp on the brakes. My '88 XJ also has no rear brakes. My game plan (as soon as I get a free afternoon) is going to be to remove that nut from the front of the combo valve, which will reveal the plunger and spring inside. (Remove carefully, that spring is STRONG!) I will then remove the spring, take the O-ring off the plunger and set the plunger fully into the cap plug, then reassemble and bleed the rear brakes. That should give you better rear brakes than you ever thought an XJ could have.

The question was about the AX-4, not the AW4.

To you. Someone else reading this thread might want to know what RPM he would actually be running with a specific tire and gear combination.

I don't know how fast you drive, but even with 205/75 tires and 4.10 gears 70 MPH would only be turning 2750 RPM. 3350 would be an 85 MPH cruise. Personally, I wouldn't drive any MJ (or XJ) that fast, even if it were legal (which, of course, it isn't).

My guess would be that the more expensive one has more "meat," which would allow for the drum(s) to be turned two or three times before going out-of-spec, which the cheaper one may have only enough thickness for one turning before going oversized.

Where's the "mature" part? And where's the "humorous" part?

The right side horn. If your truck is a base model, it doesn't have dual horns.

Correction: Its torque PEAK is 2250 RPM. The torque curve below that is ramping up, while beyond that it's pretty flat all the way to about 4,000 RPM. At highway speeds, when you're pushing that flying brick through the headwind, you'll get better gas mileage running 2500 to 2600 RPM than you will running 1700 to 1800 RPM. As I wrote, the basic engine was designed to run all day at 3,000 RPM. Aside from EFI, the only basic difference in any of these engines, all the way from the original 232 c.i.d. to the 199 to the 258 (4.2L) to the 4.0L is the stroke. The 4.0L is the only one that used a different bore, and it's not different enough to affect reliability at a sustained 3,000 RPM cruise.

That depends on how heavy the draw is. For example, the clock is a constant draw, but how many dead batteries have ever been caused by the clock?

GM's later 3.1L and 3.4L V8s use the same block as the 2.8L that was optional in the '86 MJ. That would be an excellent candidate for a swap. In fact, the later 4-cylinders ('91 and up) with the multi-port injection produced significantly more power than the throttle-body version. Not in the same class as the 4.0L, but a late-model 2.5L would require no physical changes to your truck, you would just have to graft in the engine room wiring and ECU to make it a complete conversion.

If I were a betting man, I would be willing to bet that with two otherwise identical MJs, one that ran 3,000 RPM at 70 MPH would deliver better gas mileage than one with stock gears and a 5-speed, that runs 1960 RPM at 70 MPH. There's just nothing like running UNDER the torque curve to boost your gas mileage ... NOT. 3,000 RPM is not "@#$% ridiculous high rpm's" for these engines -- it's the speed they were designed to run at.

Redlining it? How fast do you drive? Redline is 5,000 RPM. With 31x10.50s and 4.10 gears, in 5th gear 70 MPH is 2440 RPM. Does your truck do 150? Eagle, it was a figure of speach. I didn't say that I DO redline it...just that I don't want to. No, you said you were worried about redlining it. And I was pointing out that with 4.10 gears you would be a LOOOOOOOOONG way from ever approaching redline even at extra-legal highway speeds. Remember these engines were designed before most people had overdrives. The standard setup from AMC typically was 3.08 gears for the I6s and 3.15 gears for the V8s, and on stock tires we cruised at 3000 RPM at 72 MPH -- all day, for hundreds of miles. Y'all (not just you, Pat) have gotten so accustomed to the ridiculously low engine speeds the factory pushed out the door that you think anything over 2,000 RPM is going to blow up the engine. Not so.

Redlining it? How fast do you drive? Redline is 5,000 RPM. With 31x10.50s and 4.10 gears, in 5th gear 70 MPH is 2440 RPM. Does your truck do 150?