Eagle

An MJ with a 4.0L and a 5-speed should have 3.07 gears. Did you change your gearing or axle(s)? Also, your tires are 16" and those were never offered on the MJ, and 245/70-16 is oversized for a late model XJ. My wife's 2000 XJ came from the factory with 225/70-16 tires ... they are the same size as 225/75-15. So they are oversized, and as you note the speedo should read slow. But if you have 3.55 gears and the speedo drive gear still thinks you have the original 3.07 gears, that would make the speedo read higher than actual speed. You need to pull the speedo drive gear, count the number of teeth, and compare it to the chart for your axle ratio and tire size.

Considering that the range starts at 100, what you're saying is that the needle barely moves at all. If it's anywhere between 100 and 210, you really have no idea what temperature it's telling you. The scale on the temp gauge is logarithmic, not linear.

There is no Cherokee V8.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19352&p=197902&hilit=caliper+knuckle+rotor#p197902 Scroll down about 2/3 on page 1 of 3

Could also be a thermostat that's stuck open so the engine never gets warmed up. Out of curiosity, how are you getting 110 degrees, since the scale on the temp gauge isn't linear and there's no mark for 110 degrees?

Yes, the large reservoir is for the front discs. If the small reservoir went empty, you have a leak. The most probably place is naturally the least accessible -- where the lines run along the frame above the fuel tank.

One of my NAXJA friends had this with an '89 XJ. He replaced just about everything in the system, with zero improvement. What finally fixed it was removing the factory proportioning valve and replacing it with an adjustable proportioning valve. However, I recognize that the MJ does not have a proportioning feature in the front metering block. So some diagnosis is in order. Back to basics: Have you removed the cover from the master cylinder to see if one or the other chamber is low -- or empty? That's the first step. The large chamber feeds the front brakes, the small chamber feeds the rear brakes. Check it out and let us know.

Over the years, I believe between the XJ, MJ and ZJ there are (were) at least four different diameter sway bars used. I would always go with the biggest, fattest sway bar I could get. Keep in mind, however, that with a stock vehicle (with any vehicle, actually) when you increase the roll stiffness in the front, you also increase understeer. That means you increase the tendency for the vehicle to plow off a corner nose-first if you hit the corner too fast. Conversely, if you add a sway bar to the rear or stiffen up the rear springs, you increase oversteer -- the tendency to let the tail spin out and go off a corner sideways or backwards. Personally, I prefer driving a vehicle with slight oversteer and I always try to set up my suspensions that way. Detroit (or Tokyo, I guess) builds cars for the average driver, and more drivers seem to be freaked by oversteer than by understeer, so just about any vehicle you can buy has the suspension tuned for slight understeer. Which is great if you sell replacement airbags.

They already can't. Drive down any street that has parallel parking and pay attention to the way cars are (allegedly) "parked." Seen the new Lincoln ads? Automatic parallel parking! Where's that :barf: icon when you need it?

I have no idea. First guess would be that the chain snapped, but that's only a guess. You'll just have to drop the transfer case and open it up for inspection, I'm afraid.

I've driven ABS once, in a rental car in Ann Arbor, Michigan, in winter. It was one of the more frightening experiences of my 60+ years of life. Think about it -- what does ABS do? It releases the brakes when you are trying to apply them. There is simply no way they can make a vehicle stop any faster than the driving conditions allow, but because people who buy them have been brainwashed into thinking that ABS magically makes the brakes work as well on ice as they do on dry pavement ... they drive accordingly. It's like 4WD -- on any given snow storm morning, it's rare in my half hour commute not to pass at least two SUVs in a ditch because they thought having 4WD (or AWD) meant they didn't need to slow down in slippery conditions. I want no part of them.

They don't return to zero when you shut off the engine. Let it sit for a couple/few hours, and when you turn the key ON they'll go to zero (or 100, in the case of the temperature gauge).

I have also thought about the fact that a carburetor makes a lot more sense for a serious trekking vehicle. With EFI (throttle body or multi-port), if you're way out in the boonies and you lose the fuel pump or injection, you're basically toast. In the past, I have hooked up a drip can under the hood to provide gravity feed for a carburetor and been able to drive the vehicle several miles to get back to home base. I'd like to try it just to say I did it ... what holds me back is that Connecticut has mandatory emissions inspections, and I don't think a retrofit of an EFI vehicle to carburetor would pass emissions.

All of the posts provided pretty specific information that was directly responsive to your question. If you don't understand what any of it means, with all due respect how can you possibly expect to do anything with the vehicle?

The 4.0L HO started with the 1991 model year. It has the ECU in the engine compartment, on the left front fender near the air box. The older Renix vehicles have the ECU in the cabin, above the driver's right foot.

It's pricey, but you can buy carburetor setups for the 2.5L. Whatever you do, do NOT try to use the factory carburetor. It's partially computer controlled, and it's a horror. I haven't done it, but I see no reason whatsoever that you can't swap the throttle body for a carburetor and retain the existing ignition system. It'll just be sending a signal to a dead circuit for the injector -- so what? Rusty's used to sell the carb conversion. I don't trust Rusty's springs and track bars, but the carburetor is from a reputable company and Rusty just sells it, and the reports have all been good. Also, Google "Nutter bypass."

That would be incorrect. They were discontinued because they were TOO popular, and Dodge didn't want another truck in-house that was in direct competition against the Dakota. So the Comanche got the ax. So how old WAS this DMV clerk? The last "Super Six" I know of was the Hudson in-line 6 that predated the engine series culminating in the famous Hornets. The last Super Six Hudson was the 1947 model year.

Most likely vacuum problems. The transfer case shifts into 4WD by the lever. The front axle disconnect shifts by vacuum. The indicator light is also controlled by vacuum, I believe by a switch on the firewall where the vacuum harness feeds down to the axle. If the light goes off and on, your vacuum is intermittent.

Looks like Hermes' rack is significantly longer than the roof, and the aft end is supported by the relocated roll bar rather than the roof. I like the Surco Wrangler rack better as a potential MJ roof rack.

The REAL answer has been posted here, somewhere. One of the early members of NAXJA named Matthew ___, NAXJA screen name ComancheGuy IIRC, has been a member here. "Back in the day" his father sold truck/camper caps. The authoritative answer was that the best fit is the early Chevy S10 caps. Unfortunately, I don't remember the exact range of years he gave, but probably the range that was contemporary with when the MJs were being built.

You are comparing an HO against a non-HO. The Renix (non-HO) version of the 4.0L engine has a torque peak at around 2400 RPM. It isn't meant to be a street rocket, it was designed to produce torque at low RPM. The torque peak on the '92 HO version is at 4,000 RPM. It breathes much freer at high RPM and revs easier, but it doesn't have the low-end power/torque that the Renix version does. That said, the Renix easily cruises at extra-legal speeds and volunteer firefighters are not authorized to exceed the speed limit under any circumstances, so I fail to see a problem. My MJs and my original XJ are all Renix models. I don't drive that fast but 80+ MPH is not a problem. But 5th gear is useless under 55 MPH -- if you're trying to use overdrive at lower speeds, you're lugging the engine and just beating up on the entire drive train.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. While a new track bar and/or new shocks might (or probably might not) help with death wobble, in this case it has been established that the original poster does NOT have death wobble. He has wheel shimmy, which is always caused by tire balance (unless there's a bent rim). Track bar and/or shocks won;t do anything to eliminate shimmy.

The mutt is the vehicle in the photo Pete posted, with the horizontal grille slots. Pete is correct -- the WW2 Jeeps were all the same, regardless of who made them. The mutt was a different vehicle, that followed the WW2 Jeeps. We had the mutts in Vietnam, and they were very prone to tipping over. Your source definitely does NOT know what he's talking about.

Then what you have is not death wobble. You have wheel shimmy, caused by tire balance, and 55 MPH seems to be the magic speed where it shows up. If you accelerate to 65 or so, it probably disappears, right? If you had death wobble, there would be no way you could describe it as "nothing major," and you would NOT be able to drive through it to a faster speed.

XJs use 5/16" pins. I haven't disassembled or rebuilt any MJ spring packs but didn't someone post awhile back that they are 3/8"?