Eagle

Only you can answer this question. It all depends on what YOUR goals and priorities are. If you want to learn how to rebuild an engine, then go ahead take it out and rebuild it. It's heavy and awkward. You'll be disassembling a significant portion of the front of the truck, and you'll need an engine hoist and an engine stand. You'll also be looking at several hundred dollars (minimum) between parts and machine shop work to do even a half-assed rebuild. You'll be disconnecting a lot of lines and wires -- you'll have to be very careful to take a lot of "before" photos and tag every single line and wire you disconnect or you'll never get it together again. If your intention is to have a driveable MJ, it is possible that you can get it running by just removing the head and freeing up the pistons, as we have been discussing. It's a LOT less work to R&R (Remove & Replace) a head than it is to pull the entire engine and driveline. If you can get it running by just pulling the head, that makes good sense. If you pull the head and find something seriously broken inside -- you're just a little closer to pulling the engine because you will already have disconnected some of the things that would need to be disconnected anyway. It all comes down to what YOU hope to accomplish.

An '86 with Command-Trac should be an NP 207.

It isn't the alternator. You can drive for a long way on the battery, and if the battery gets so weak it won't power the fuel pump and injectors, it sure isn't going to crank the starter motor. The symptoms you describe are classic signs of a dying CPS. Been there, done that, ruined the tee-shirt crawling under the Jeep to change the thing.

Rebuilding an engine is a good way to learn and I'm all in favor of that. However, that is NOT what you indicated when you started this discussion, and frankly if you had stated from the beginijng that you planned to pull the engine and do a complete overhaul you would have saved several of us a lot of time we wasted trying to guilde you in accomplishing what you originally asked about -- getting it running:

Bypass to the front brakes? The front brakes are completely independent of the rear brakes. Moving the arm up does not "close" anything, and moving the arm down does not bypass anything to the front brakes. Wherever you found that explanation of how the valve works, it is incorrect. You either bleed the rear brakes the way the FSM says to bleed them, or it isn't done right.

This is what we deal with around here: http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2009 ... 993326.txt 94 MPH in a 40 MPH zone, racing another patrol vehicle when not responding to a call. Result: two young adults killed. Video is from the other patrol car's dash cam. Speed is at top of the screen. The unit with the dash cam was going almost 70 MPH (in a 40 MPH zone) when the other patrol car blew by him on the right (passing on the right is also illegal in Connecticut).

I don't understand why you are removing the engine BEFORE you know what's wrong with it. It would make a lot more sense to pull the head, inspect the cylinders, maybe cut the carbon ridge and hone the walls, and then tap each pistol with a wooden block to try freeing them up before you go through all the work of removing the engine. Many years ago I was given an old Javelin with a frozen engine. That's what I did. It freed up, I slapped in a new head gasket, and used it as my daily driver for over a year.

??? Is it broken down, or did it restart and let you drive home? What's an 88 American? AMC discontinued the Rambler American in 1970.

No. What the height sensing valve does is severely reduce the amount of braking force to the rear wheels when the truck is running unloaded. I don't know how much it reduces it, but I'd guess between 75% and 100% (meaning NO rear brakes at all when empty). If you upgrade the booster (I don't see how changing the master cylinder can in any way "improve" the braking, unless you swap in a master with a very different piston diameter), you improve the braking pressure in the system. That means the front brakes work better/harder. If the rear proportioning valve eliminates most of the pressure going to the rear brakes, then by definition it eliminates 75% to 100% of any improvements you make to the system. IMHO the single biggest and easiest improvement you can make to MJ brakes is to eliminate the height sensing valve.

That's called threatening. It's illegal and your friend the cop should have encouraged you to file a formal complaint so they could arrest the guy. But ... I'm sure he was one of the fraternity, so there's no way they would encourage you to do that.

In 13-plus years of law enforcement I have run into a few folks who have this very short sighted opinion. I always try to be fair and listen to opposing views, but I'll put it like this: While there are certainly individuals that are comissioned officers that should not be, by far the number that are honest folks trying to do a job outweigh them. Please remember that the next time you call 911 for assistance or do something else spectacularly silly that requires your upper-most appendage removed from your defecator. As a civilian, no matter how "John Wayne" your are feeling it is almost always a bad idea to confront an aggressor (unless you have no choice). As God has given most of us the ability to see and record the details of events that go on around us, it is far better to be a good witness rather then a possible hero....as it is very difficult to relate the facts to the police later if you are dead. If you are a "good cop," you are in a very small minority. Maybe it's a regional thing. Around here (and I'm in the same general area as CWLongshot), most so-called police officers are low-lifes who have a power problem. They almost all have shaved heads and think of themselves as "operators." They act like laws don't apply to them, they think nothing of lying to cover when a fellow officer screws the pooch, they treat victims like criminals, they speed whether on or off duty, they yak on their cell phones while driving even though that's against the law ... and then they have the nerve to wonder why the world isn't kissing their posteriors. When I was a kid, I knew every cop in town and was on a first name basis with all of them. Except the chief. He wasn't "Richie" ... he was "Chief Richie." Back then, if you called because of a trespasser or someone suspicious in the farmer's field across the street, they went after the subject of the call first, found out what was going on, and came over to fill you in and take your complaint after the fact. Now, they roll two or three "units" for every call ... and they all come to my house first, clog up the driveway, and while they're busily writing down my full name (including the spelled out version of the middle name), date of birth and social security number ... the perps are making tracks. By the time our intrepid boys in blue finally get around to investigating ... there's nothing left to investigate. Had to call State Police headquarters one day to ask a routine, administrative question. Female trooper answered. Before she would let me start my question, she asked my name and date of birth. I told her I wasn't making a complaint or filing a report and she didn't NEED my name and date of birth. She immediately shifted into "command voice" and demanded that I give her my full name and date of birth. After a couple of volleys of this idiocy, I hung up, called back and got her sergeant, had a nice chat AND got my question answered ... and didn't ever mention name or date of birth. We have a big problem here in Connecticut about open carry of handguns. CW probably knows about this. It's legal if you have a carry permit; the permit and the law say nothing about "concealed." but the police have decided that they don't like open carry, so they arrest you if they see you open carrying. When they can't find a statute that says open carry isn't legal, they use the old stand-by: "disturbing the peace." How's that for a crock of manure? Yeah, I just LOOOOOVE cops.

Yeah. So build cute utes and crossover vehicles and AWD mini-utes ... but don't try to call them "Jeep." Call 'em Dodge, or Chrysler, or Plymouth, or any damn thing, but not Jeep.

Ford didn't, but I think Willys did. But not for long. By the time I was a kid (in the early 1950s), Jeep was sponsoring several of my favorite cowboy shows, and Jeep at that time was Kaiser-Jeep. I think then it was the CJ3A. I thought the CJ2 was a Willys. I know for a fact that Willys made the old, narrow grille, flat-fender pickups and station wagons. Those bore the Jeep name.

Removing the rear height sensing valve ... that thing you're so worried about. Not "double booster." "Double diaphragm" booster. Typically from a late model Cherokee, although I would probably go with one from an older AMC car that still uses the old style master cylinder. Don't trust plastic. I am one of those who recommend that. Nothing. One of the lines serves no purpose and should be removed. That leaves you with only one line to worry about, and no special bleeding procedure. The rear valve allows more braking force when the rear is loaded. If yours is working correctly (which it may or may not be ... most of them aren't), you'll have more brakes when towing. With the rear valve removed, you will have maximum braking when towing. No problem there. Is there a possibility of premature rear wheel lock in slippery conditions when NOT loaded? Yes. If that's a problem for you, put a Wilwood manually adjustable proportioning valve in the line to the rear where it exits the front distribution block, and use that to dial back the rear brakes when you run empty. It isn't BS. The procedure is spelled out in the factory service manual, and if not followed you may have NO rear brakes. That's for Cherokees, and it's in the front proportioning valve. The front metering block in the MJ is not a proportioning valve and does not have the spring and O-ring you can remove.

Yupp. Yes ... if you get the ones that are machined from solid billet, not castings. They are expensive. My opinion: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

If you can't shift while the engine is running, then you DON'T have great release. It may feel like you have good peddle, but you obviously don't have release. Are you certain you didn't put the disc in with the wrong side facing the flywheel?

You seem to be under some confusion. For a 1994 XJ, the rear axle may not be a Dana-Spicer. IF[/i] it is a Dana 35, it is a Dana-Spicer. Chrysler never manufactured any Dana axles. However, by 1994 Chrysler was also using their own 8-1/4" axle in the rear of many XJs. Both are C-clip axles, both are 27-spline and have similar shaft diameters. However, the Chrysler axle has larger tubes and a stiffer housing, making it overall a somewhat stronger axle than the Dana 35.

HEY! Dinosaurs are people, too, ya know. It ain't easy being a member of an extinct species.

Dunno where you live but around here that would get you a ticket for tires extending beyond body. That's what my '88 looked like when I bought it, and I got ticketed within a couple of weeks after I registered it and put it on the road.

But an '87 had the 10" drums. Chrysler switched to their 9" rear brakes beginning in 1990. I don't have a 1990 FSM but I do have a '94. It shows several exploded views that don't show the wheel cylinders, so it's unclear if the push rods were omitted or not used. The view of a wheel cylinder mounted to the backing plate DOES show the push rods. Ah! Another view, of the wheel cylinder assembly (only) for the 9" brakes shows something they call the "link," that seems to be the same as the push rod but looks like it has a threaded inner end to perhaps thread into the piston(?). Dunno - I haven't yet worked on one with the 9" brakes. Wheel cylinders are wheel cylinders. They do not include the push rods/links. Those usually come in the small parts kits that include the hold-down and return springs.

I don't see any reason at all why that could possibly work.

2" is all you need. I really REALLY wish you had asked before you started trimming, because in terms of running 31" tires you haven't gained anything at all, but you've ruined another Comanche. Just get a pair of 2" front coil spacers and a 2" (or 1-1/2") full-length AAL for the rear and you're done. Be sure to have the front end aligned after the lift has been installed.

When the power window regulator died on my wife's 2000 XJ, I replaced the part myself (at over $100 for the part, I couldn't afford to pay shop rates to install it). First try, I somehow got the glass outside the channels and it was scraping when I tried to close the window. I had to take it all apart and do it over to get the window running smoothly. I'd suggest taking a close look at how the glass sits relative to the channels, and then compare to the other door, which (I assume and hope) operates correctly. The fact that the passenger door lock also doesn't work is a strong clue that someone has been inside that door ... someone who did not know what they were doing.

You need them.

True, as far as flow rates and volumetric efficiency are concerned. But Renix heads aren't programmed to self-destruct at 90,000 miles.