Eagle

I literally HAD to stop watching. I have an intense fear of heights, and that was more than I could take.

I'm thinking Idle Air Controller (IAC)

A new one is $35 at Auto Zone -- with a lifetime warrantee. I just picked one up about an hour ago.

NAPA will probably have the parts. A Jeep dealer will either have them or be able to get them. Having doe the job a couple of time, I agree with Pat's advice. The centering ball parts are not cheap, and they are a nuisance. I'd strongly recommend taking it to a driveshaft shop and letting them do it for you.

I believe he's referring to taking an MJ main leaf, cutting the eyes off, and putting it between the top and 2nd leafs on your truck. Like this: No, I'm referring to doing that, PLUS trimming the "donor" MJ second leaves and inserting them into the packs as an additional AAL. The sequence would then be: Original main leaf Trimmed donor main leaf Original second leaf Trimmer donor second leaf Original third leaf Original overload leaf

If I have succesfully sabotaged your freebie spring acquisition (sorry!), you can achieve what you want with a Rancho AAL kit. It's Rancho part number RS60913. (Note: The footnote in the Rancho catalog says it is not recommended for Cherokees or Comanches with 3-leaf springs. It doesn't say why not, and I don't see any reason not to use it.) The last time I bought one of those sets, it cost $50. It may be closer to $65 by now.

Dunno. It depends on what you hope to accomplish. I don't think it will generate much lift, but I am not certain because I haven't done mine yet. If lift is your goal, I think a good, full-length AAL or a pair of cut-off MJ or Dakota main leaves will be more appropriate. If you want to increase the capacity, the XJ leaves would seem to be a good choice. Keep in mind that if you get your boss's XJ springs, you're not limited to using just the main leaves. You could also add in the second leaf to get some more lift. I remember one of the guys in NAXJA from California was running something like 9-leaf springs in his trail XJ, and he said it flexed great. Many years ago, I bought an old Hudson pickup (most of you never even heard of Hudson) that must have had about 12 leaves in the rear springs -- and they seemed to be factory. I had three Hudson POs, and the springs on that one were twice as thick as the other two. Who has used MJ main leaves for AALs, and how much lift did they produce?

Not mine.. You said yours was a CJ. The CJ model 20 axle did not have one-piece shafts. The MJ/XJ model 20 axle did.

Yes

I have been considering using XJ main leaves to convert standard MJ springs to Metric Tonne springs. I think you'll get more carrying capacity but very little lift. Here's why: A lot of us in NAXJA have used cut-off XJ main leaves as AALs in XJs. The result is typically about 1-1/2" of gross lift. I did it on an '88 and got a gross lift (measured before and after) of 1-1/4". But the rear had sagged 1/2" before the lift, so I netted a grand total of 3/4" higher than "stock," or about the same as a later model Up Country suspension would have provided from the factory. (It rode very well, by the way.) But the XJ is spring-over-axle, with the springs almost flat when installed in the vehicle. The MJ is spring-under, and the springs are arched when installed. If you hold those XJ main leaves up against the MJ springs in the vehicle, I think you'll find that the free arch of the XJ leaf is close to the installed/loaded arch of the MJ springs. Which means sticking the extra leaf in there won't add much (if any) height, because it won't be deflecting and taking any load. Once you start adding load in the box, though, the XJ leaf will start to deflect, and at that point it starts adding some carrying capacity.

Problem is, the article is chock full or errors and misinformation. The editors did a lousy job of fact checking. This article should never have been released. As Ronald Reagan said, "Trust ... but verify." A quick sampling: Wrong. The 2.5L had a carburetor in the 84 ans 85 models. The TBI version didn't show up until the 86 model year. OBD-II didn't show up until the 1996 model year, and in the 96s it was somewhat of a kludge implementation. The real OBD-II started in 97. There was no "later" involved. The AX-4 4-speed was the base transmission. The AX-5 was always optional. The only real change was that somewhere around 1990 or 1991 they stopped using the AX-4 entirely and made the AX-5 the base transmission. The AX-15 was introduced in mid-year 1989, and it stayed thriough 1999, not through 2000. I have a 2000 XJ. It has the NV3550. That's all I could stand. I couldn't force myself to read any deeper into that mess.

Yeah. Just like Renault did not buy American Motors. AMC's purpose in "partnering" with Renault was to get some smaller, more economical cars in the showroom, too, while Renault's motive was to get access to an established dealer network. And the cars were junk. Which is why Renault had never been able to sell them, and which was why AMC was not able to sell them. Now here we are, 30 years later, watching an instant replay. "Partnership." Riiiiiight ...

I think he said he doesn't want a 4.0L because if the weight. In that case, I'd look at the GM 3.4L, since it uses the same block as the 2.8L V6 and you can source the mounts, brackets and manifolds, etc, from 84 - 86 Cherokees with the 2.8L.

I don't think that's correct. I'd say the 4+1 is the more common configuration by far. I have never seen any metric tonne MJ with anything other than the 4+1 springs, and the first I ever heard of a possible 3+2 version was in reading this thread.

www.huskyspring.com

I have the NV3550 in my 2000 XJ. It's a MUCH smoother tranny than the AX-15, and it has better ratios. The AX-15 will be less expensive and more available, but IMHO the NV3550 would be far better if you can do it.

TJ Dana 30s are not a good choice -- they are low pinion. The XJ Dana 30 was high pinion through 1999, and in 2000 the XJ also switched to a low pinion front axle. The best choice for a front axle is an XJ Dana 30 with the larger u-joints, which would be one with ABS from about 1992 up, and I think any XJ from 1997 thru 1999.

^^^ :agree: :thumbsup:

The 2.5L and 2.8L share the same bell housing bolt pattern and use the same transmissions. On paper the 2.8L puts ot a bit more power, but in real life it is (as Pete wrote) an inferior engine. It is absolutely not worth the effort of replacing a 2.5L with the 2.8L. The 2.5 is an inherently superior engine, and can be tweaked to put out more power than the 2.8L.

No, it goes to the fuel pump. You're thinking or older Mopar cars that used a resistor on the coil.

What color and type of fabric do you need?

It depends on the AAL. Longer shackles allow the spring to flex more. Flexing more (meaning a wider range, not more frequently) induces fatigue faster than with a stock configuration, with the amount of flex limited by the suspension design and bump stops (if you still have them). An AAL that when disassembled doesn't match the arch of the other leaves will produce some lift for awhile, but it fatigues quickly because in essence it is fighting the other leaves. However, a "home-brew" AAL using (for example) another set of MJ main leaves with the eyes cut off the end doesn't have this problem. The arch in the AAL matches the arch of the other leaves, so the result is a stronger, longer-lasting spring. But ... you won't get a huge lift that way. Adding just an extra main leaf might generate an inch and a half of lift. But if you have a complete set of MJ springs, you can also trim the tips off the second leaves and splice them into your spring pack. You'll get more lift, a VERY durable spring, and if you don't use one-piece rebound clips that prevent the leaves from opening up a bit, you'll still have good articulation. A flexy spring with a lot of leaves is generally a better spring than one that has fewer, stiffer leaves.

You have a 2.5L 4-speed. Unless you have re-geared, your axle ratio is only 3.55:1. The 2.5L is a good engine, but it's not a powerhouse, and it does NOT make low-end torque like the in-line 6 does. The 2.5L needs to be up above 3,000 RPM to be making much power or torque. That's tough on a clutch. The reason it didn't feel like it had any power is simply that it doesn't have any power.

I'm not sure what kind of competition it is. The video title said "gymkana," which is pretty much the same as Autocross. The driving in the video, though, was more like drifting.

eeeeasssy trigger.........if we'd have known you were communicating via phone, as Pete correctly guessed, I don't think it would be a big deal. it's all good now. It's all good, except he's complaining about not getting any useful information, and I don't think anyone really knows what he's asking. I'm sure I don't.