Eagle

OUCH! I wonder if the driver survived ...

Yes. Fully interchangeable.

Transfer case drop helps with the angle, but doesn't add any length.

Track bars are not specific to 4WD. Any bar that fits a 4WD will also fit a 2WD. The issue will be to ensure that the one you buy allows for correct adjustment for lifts as low as 3". Some of them won't go short enough for that amount of lift.

CORRECT! You want to remove the steering box from the chassis -- that's the three bolts through the frame into the side of the box. The three bolts on top just open the box up to work on it.

Unfortunately, I could have helped you a month ago, but not now. I kept the FSM from my ill-fated 1999 WJ, but a friend recently acquired a used 2002 WJ and I sent the shop manual to him. Sorry.

5-1/2 inches is too much on an XJ for the stock drive shaft. Tell him NOT to drive it. Several years ago a friend in NAXJA bumped his lift up from 3" to 5". He went for a test drive and the drive shaft fell out half a mile down the road. Mangled the drive shaft, but fortunately didn't trash the rear pinion yoke, so a different drive shaft and he was good to go. The YJ yoke is, as Pete said, a suitable compromise. It is slightly longer, and it's more open so it will operate at a higher angle without binding. Long term, your friend needs a different drive shaft and, ideally, a SYE.

There's a switch inside that tach to set it for 4-cyl, 6-cyl or 8-cyl. Did you set the switch in the right place? 1500 RPM is too high for idle speed.

You're still not reading it correctly. It's 235/75R15. These sites may help you understand the numbers better: http://www.car-videos.net/info/tirespecs.asp http://www.buicks.net/shop/reference/tires.html http://www.wheelmax.com/Tire-Size-Descr ... icle34.asp

There are three possibilities: the slave cylinder, the clutch master cylinder, and the line/hose that connects them. I've not had a master blow out on my (yet), but I have had both a slave cylinder and a hose blow out on me while driving.

Looking at some tire data I compiled awhile ago, a 195/75R15 was rated at 760.7 revolutions per mile. A 225/75R15 was rated at 713.1 revolutions per mile. That's a difference of 6.26 percent, which is how much the speedometer and odometer will be off (assuming they were somewhat accurate with the stock tires). If we apply that to a calculated fuel consumption of 14 MPG, the corrected figure comes out to 14.8 MPG. Still quite a bit short of what it should be.

It's not only possible, it is probable. Is that what's listed on the sidewall as the tire size? I never heard of that size. A stock 2.5L MJ should probably have had 205/75R15 or 215/75R15 tires. Either of those would be quite a bit larger than a 23" tire. If you are running a tire that small with the stock speedometer gear, you are not really traveling as far as your odometer says you are traveling. Which would make your real-world gas mileage WORSE, not better. Check those brakes.

Is your Chebby 350 injected and computer controlled, or "old school" carburetor and distributor? Back in "the good old days" we always ran colder thermostats than the factory, and got better performance and better fuel mileage. Probably didn't help emissions much, but testing was rudimentary back then. The Jeep computers don't come out of open loop (warm-up) mode until around 168 degrees, so running a 160-degree t-stat is indeed (as explained above) likely to result in a truck that runs "pig rich" all the time. Since the purpose of a thermostst is to keep the temperature UP, not down, there is no reason whatsoever to run a colder t-stat than the factory 195-degree. Let's face it -- if your radiator is so fubarred it can't cool the engine down to 195, how do you think it's going to cool it to 180 or 160? Also, be careful in reading that factory gauge. Aside from the tolerance, remember that it does NOT read on a linear scale. I see posts like "My Jeep runs at 231.3 degrees" and I wonder "How the hell can you read that gauge to any semblance of precision?" "Cold" is marked as 100 degrees. Halfway, or straight up, is 210 degrees. So the first half of the needle's range is 110 degrees. "Hot" is what -- 280 (IIRC)? So an equal swing on the upper end of the scale is only 70 degrees. So the needle isn't on a linear scale, folks. Good luck guessing what it's actually reporting if it's anywhere other than right on 210.

Nope. Not automatics behind the 4.0L. Only one -- the Aisin-Warner AW4. It's one of the best automatic transmissions ever made, so don't worry about searching out something else tp "upgrade."

Around here we refer to it as "the 5-pound Ford carburetor adjusting tool."

After the second time my rear brakes blew out, I replaced the entire hard line all the way from the front distribution block (combo valve, which isn't really a combo valve in an MJ) to the rear flex hose. The brake warning light was on when I finished and all the bleeeding in the world wouldn't make it go off -- which had never happened before. Finally, one day with the engine OFF, so I had no vacuum assist, I just stomped on the brake peddle as hard as I could. When I started it up, the brake light was off.

Any chance you could snap a few pictures while it's all opened up to show people how to replace bearings "on-the-fly"? Are you doing all the bearings (rods and mains) or just the mains?

The steering components will certainly work. You might have to transfer some switches and/or wiring over from your 86 column but those two years were both firmly AMC vehicles. I think there's a good chance the 87 column may just drop right in.

You can do the same thing with Marvel Mystery Oil, Seafoam, or a product GM dealers (used to) sell under the clever name of "Top Engine Cleaner." Don't do any of those in your driveway if you live in a compact subdivision or neighborhood. It's mind-boggling just how MUCH smoke a little bit of Marvel Mystery Oil can create.

Many years ago I had an old 6-cylinder AMC that had sat for too long and the rings seized to the cylinder walls. I needed to get it on the road and I had no money. I popped off the head, used a ridge reamer to cut the carbon ring off the tops of the bores, tapped the pistons with a wooden block to free them up, and then ran each piston all the way down in the bore and honed the cylinders with the pistons in place. Then I put on a new head gasket and buttoned it up. It ran fine. Was it the "right" way to do it? Heck no, but it was an expedient way to get the thing running. The car wasn't worth what it would have cost to put in even a junkyard engine, so this was worth a try. New pistons are certainly the "right" way to go with an old engine, but I have rebuild a couple just honing the bores and putting new rings on the original pistons. If the engine has only 62,000 miles on it, the bores shouldn't be badly out of round so, unless one of them is too deeply scored to hone out, a "quicky" rebuild with just new rings and bearings should do the job for you.

Your problem is in confusing optimum operating range with "power." The actual torque and horsepower ratings for the Renix and HO engines are very close, but the Renix has a torque peak around 2200 RPM and the HO has a torque peak around 4,000 RPM. The Renix is a true Jeep engine, intended to produce good usable torque at low RPM for off-road applications. If you try to drive it like a passenger car engine on the street, winding it out to 4,000 or 5,000 RPM before shifting, you're only fooling yourself. The optimum shift point for a Renix is around 2500 RPM, but most people don't believe that because they think revving up to higher RPM "should" produce better performance. If you wish to turn a Renix 4.0L into a passenger car engine, you need to port and polish the head, install larger valves, install a true header, replace the camshaft with one that has a higher torque peak, and install larger injectors. You'll end up with an engine that feels stronger above 3,500 RPM, has lousy low-end torque, and gets crappy gas mileage. Personally, I prefer the Renix. I have an 88 (Renix) and a 2000 (post-HO) XJ, both 5-speeds. On the normal route to work, there are two stretches with 30 or 35 MPH speed limits. In the 88 I can motor along both in 4th gear with no problem. In the 2000, I have to be in 3rd gear for those stretches.

I sympathize. Been there, done that ... I probably even have the tee shirt somewhere. A word of caution ... before you put ANY money into the Hondas, find one of the same year and model, rent it, borrow it, steal it ... do whatever you have to do, but get in one and make about a 2-hour drive. I say this because my back was crunched in a car accident when I was 14 years old and I have had recurring issues ever since. And I will say straight out, that without ANY doubt whatsoever, Honda (and Acura) seats are absolutely the WORST possible seats in the known universe for someone with a bad back. And I say that as a Honda lover. I think the cars are great (I've owned two) and I think the motorcycles are great (owned two of those, also), but the seats in the cars are instruments of torture, pure and simple.

All I see is a white rim. I can't see what the wheel web design is. Are they the spoked style? 6-spoke or 8-spoke? Do the center caps have a chrome(like) outer rim, or are they all black? Your front rims were definitely not S-10 rims, because they aren't on the same bolt circle.

Wasn't that carb computer controlled (partially)? I know it was a horrendous POS. One of my friends in NAXJA had an 86 2.8L. I pulled the carb of a parts XJ I had here and took it to "Mr. Carburetor," who is locally reputed to be an absolute genius with automotive fuel systems. He confirmed it-s a pile of excrement, did a budget rebuild on it, and it got the truck running. Which was all that was called for. I would start looking for a different carburetor. Anything that's old, mechanical, and reliable, like maybe a Holley 2-bbl around a 350 or 400 CFM range.

What style of Jeep rims are on the other three corners? I should be able to send a rim to SC for less than the $25 your yard charged you. That's a rip-off for a used steel rim, BTW.