Eagle

Yeah, he's probably talking about the C101 connector. It's the big box that the main harness runs into and out of, high on the firewall directly in front of the driver. There was a factory TSB about cutting it out and splicing all the wires together, and by mid-1989 the factory had eliminated the C101 connector. I don't think that's likely to be the problem in this case. If it were the C101. the engine wouldn't start at all. My money is on the ballast resistor.

That's the outer shift boot. I think the question is about the one on the floor, under the console -- the one we don't see.

No, that won't take the slop out of it. He reported that the inside opening dimension is 2-3/16". That's more than 2-1/8" almost 2-1/4", when it should be approximately 2-1/32" . The ONLY way that could happen is if they used thinner wall tubing to make up the receiver. I originally guessed maybe 3/16" wall instead of 1/4", but when you run the numbers, it seems like they would have had to use 1/8" wall tubing, and that's just not right. The lighting isn't good in those photos, but if you look closely and compare against the photo of the Grand Cherokee hitch, you can see that the wall on the MJ bumper receiver tube looks pretty thin. There's a photo where you can see it up against the ruler, and it does look like 1/8" tubing -- with a reinforcing collar around it. But my XJ factory hitches are 1/4" tubing with a 1/4" collar around it, so they measure a full 1/2" on each side of the opening.

Dare I ask if you have checked the bulbs to see if they are burned out? The instrument lights are delicate little things. They don't even have normal screw-in bases, like most light bulbs. They just have a blown glass base with two wires sticking out that are folded over to make contact when the bulb is pressed into the socket. If the bulb looks dark instead of clear when you look at it -- it's dead.

I'm sorry, but this is incorrect. The sensor in the front distribution block (which is NOT a proportioning valve in the MJ, although it is in the XJ) does not in any way sense fluid level. All it does is move if you completely lose pressure to the front of the rear brake circuit. That only happens if you have a serious leak of some kind, such as a ruptured hard line or hose. As long as both the front and rear circuits have any brake fluid at all and can generate braking force, the sensor will not warn you of low fluid level.

What the original post describes is what happens when the ballast resistor for the fuel pump goes bad. The ballast resistor is that grey/white ceramic thingie on the inside of the driver's front fender, next to the air box. Normally, power to the fuel pump goes through this resistor, which drops the voltage to around 9 volts (IIRC) to reduce noise and make the pump last longer. During starting, the ballast resistor is bypassed so the fuel pump gets the full 12 volts. So when the key is in the START position, there's 12 volts going to the fuel pump through the bypass circuit. When the key is released to the RUN psition, the bypass circuit goes away and power goes through the ballast resistor. If it's broken -- the fuel pump stops when you release the key, and the engine dies. Simple test -- find the ballast resister, and jumper across the two terminals. If the engine keeps running -- there's your problem.

Calling the Machine a Mopar is an insult to AMC. The article also had some inaccuracies that I caught, and probably some I overlooked. [*:26yhehru]AMC got into Trans-Am racing in 1968, two years before they signed Penske as the lead team. The first two years the program was run by Ronnie Kaplan Racing, and they did ... nothing much. [*:26yhehru]I don't remember about the Machine, but the 1969 and earlier AMCs used Carter AFB carburetors, in 1970 they changed over to Autolites. If the Machine still used a Carter, it was unique in the product line. [*:26yhehru]The Hornet wasn't in design in 1970, it was introduced in 1970. The Rebel Machine did not replace the Hurst SC/Rambler (American), the SC/Rambler was replaced by the SC/360 Hornet.

Isn't Jeeps Unlimited still in Providence? They should be able to fix you up with a used stock UCA for not a lot of money until your WJ arms arrive. Or head up to Henry's u-pull in Blackstone on Saturday morning. They usually have a lot of XJs.

I did a bit of Googling about and found that square steel tubing in the 2", 2-1/4" and 2-1/2" sizes is only available in a few wall thicknesses. Actual wall thickness varies from nominal. 2 1/2 x 2 1/2 x 5/16 = 0.291 2 1/2 x 2 1/2 x 1/4 = 0.233 2 1/2 x 2 1/2 x 3/16 = 0.174 2 1/2 x 2 1/2 x 1/8 = 0.116 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 x 1/4 = 0.233 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 x 3/16 = 0.174 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 x 1/8 = 0.116 2 x 2 x 1/4 = 0.233 2 x 2 x 3/16 = 0.174 2 x 2 x 1/8 = 0.116 A 2-1/2" square tube with 1/4" walls would leave 2.034" inside opening. A 2-1/2" tube with 3/16" walls would leave 2.152" clear opening, which is approximately 5/32" (just over 1/8") larger than a 2" drawbar. If they used 1/8" wall tubing, the inside dimension would be 2.268", or slightly more than 1/4" bigger than a 2" drawbar.

Obviously, they used the wrong tubing to build the receiver. Square structural steel tubing, unlike pipe, is specified by the outside dimension, not the inside dimension. The hitch adapter itself is made using 2" tubing, and it should measure pretty close to exactly 2". The receiver has to be some larger size, and then the inside clear dimension is arrived at by subtracting the wall thickness (times two) from the nominal outside dimension. I just measured the factory Mopar hitches on two of my Cherokees. The receiver tube is a nominal 2-1/2" with 1/4" wall thickness, which results in a pretty close fit with a 2" hitch adapter. The people who made your bumper must have used 3/16" wall tubing instead of 1/4" to save some bucks. Not good, IMHO.

I disagree. If the warning lights in the array on the left work, the panel has a ground. Have you tried rotating the headlight switch? It's a rheostat dimmer -- there's a contact that scrapes along a coiled (spring-like) resistant wire that controls the brightness of the instrument lights. One extreme is OFF. As the headlight switch gets old, the resistance wire often develops dead spots. On my '88 XJ, I can't run the lights at full brightness because there's a dead spot there. If I turn the switch slightly toward dim, they come on.

"But now it's happenin' now." Ohhhh, yeah. BAN LAWN SPRINKLERS!. (It's for the children.)

CW is correct. This is why 4.56 is the lowest ratio you can get for the D30 from Dana. All 4.88 gearsets are aftermarket.

Actually, 5.somethings would be better for 35s, but since 4.88 is as deep as you can get for the Dana 30, that'll have to do. With 35" tires and 4.88 gears, your highway RPMs in overdive will be approximately 2190 at 60 MPH and 2558 at 70 MPH.

Ring and pinion sets do not have a spline count. The splined ends of the axle shafts go into the spider gears. [EDIT]Left out a word. BIG "oops"

Yes but that will probably give you more lift than you need. The ZJ coils are going to give you about an inch in the front. Using cut-off MJ main leaves as AALs should give you between 1-1/2" and 2" in the rear. Rancho's XJ/MJ AAL is rated at 2-1/2" but that's for the XJ. Rancho told me it lifts an MJ about 1-1/2".

Yeah, WHY would you want to do this? Most people want to go the other way and get rid of the internal slave. I'm not 100% certain, but I think you'll have to replace your bellhousing. IIRC the internal slave is mounted to a pair of threaded bosses inside the bellhousing. I doubt the mounting points will be there in a bellhousing that was set up for the external slave.

Aside from what Geonovast posted, you should keep in mind that '86 thru '92 covers basically three "generations" of the XJ and MJ, and other than body parts there isn't a lot of interchange. 1986 had the 6-cylinder engine as the 2.8L GM V-6. From 1987 thru 1990 the 6-cylinder engine was the original "Renix" 4.0L I-6. 1991 and 1992 the 6-cylinder engine was the same 4.0L I-6 but it was set up with a Chrysler injection/ignition system that shares nothing with the earlier Renix system. Also, begining in 1991 the speedometer went to electric instead of mechanical, and the polarity of the fuel gauge and sender were reversed. For the 4-cylinder, it was the same from 1986 thru 1990, and in 1991 and 1992 followed the 4.0L and got a new Chrysler injection/ignition system. Again, 1991 and 1992 electronics are not compatible with or interchangeable with the earlier years. They also made some changes to the axles and to the front hubs, knuckles, and calipers. Especially when dealing with the front axle, it is critical to keep all components correct for the year of the vehicle the axle came from or there will be problems. You can bolt in a complete axle from another year, just don't forget what year the "new" axle is when ordering replacement parts for it.

I strongly suggest that you NOT do that. Especially if you're going to be checking them to 120 ft-lbs. You'll pull the lug nuts right through the rims within a month. The FSM specifies 85 to 115 ft-lbs as the service torque for lug nuts. Among all the XJs and MJs I own and have owned, I must have put on close to a half million miles (the '88 XJ along has 287,000 on it). I always use a torque wrench, and I always torque to 85 to 90 ft-lbs ... no more. I have NEVER had one loosen up on me. I HAVE seen lug nuts pull right through the wheel as a result of obsessive re-torquing. It happened to one of the guys in the old Javelin/AMX Sports Car Club. He autocrossed with us, and he would go around and re-torque his wheels after every run. One season was all it took -- actually, he didn't even make it one season. It was an expensive mistake, too, because he had more money than brains and the wheels he ruined were custom-made racing wheels. If you must check the torque every few days, be sure to use a torque wrench and aim for the low end of the allowable range rather than a setting that's over the top of the high end.

I have a very strong bias -- see my signature. As someone else noted, a lot depends on what you plan to do with the truck. If you plan to restore it and use it as a basically stock daily driver, buying the rust-free truck makes a lot of sense. If you intend to modify it, chop the heck out of it to fit big tires, and beat the crap out of it off-road ... why destroy one of the few remaining straight, solid MJs when you could buy a candidate for modification a lot cheaper?

How many miles? I have been noticing a tapping in my wife's 2000 XJ. I'm pretty certain it's caused by the exhaust pipe (not the tail pipe) hitting the cross member. If so, it means the cushions in the tranny mount are getting compressed.

For looks, the Coursers. But if you actually plan to drive the thing on the street, forget those tires. I picked up a used set of very similar mud tires and I hated them. This forum doesn't have type sufficiently large to properly emphasize that they were NOISY!. Worse than that, they didn't track on pavement. I had to really work to keep the vehicle going straight. Since we have lost most of our wheeling venues here in southern New England, my XJ (the vehicle I had those tires on) is now mostly a daily driver, and I just could not tolerate those tires for daily driving.

I haven't done it yet, but my guess is ... almost zero. I hope to test that this summer. My guess is that cut-off XJ main leaves will add carrying capacity without adding much lift, thus replicating the Metric Ton spring on a budget. Using cut-off XJ main leaves as AALs in an XJ yields 1-1/4" t 1-1/2". Most people say 1-1/2" but the one I did came in at 1-1/4" gross. The rear had sagged some, so the actual net lift was really only about 3/4" over stock height. (Which was perfect for the purpose with that vehicle). If you're looking for around 2 inches, I think you need to use cut-off MJ mains, or mains from some other spring-under vehicle. XJs are spring over and the springs have a lot less native arch.

That has been my experience, as well.

WANT!!!