Eagle

Remove the vacuum lines. Plug the ports at the transfer case. Remove the shift motor from the axle, manually lock up the sliding sleeve, move the fork over and shim it with washers to hold it in the engaged position.

YJ fronts work, but you have to re-bend them a smidge.

The fact that one particular applicator franchise is less than ethical doesn't mean that Line-X is a bad product. You shouldn't bad-mouth the product, but I certainly would agree that you not only should not recommend that applicator, you probably should also tell anyone who asks exactly why you're unhappy. However, be careful to stick to facts. You don't want to exaggerate to the point that the guy can nail you for slander. Saying, "I'm unhappy and I think he overcharged me for a poor job" is clearly your opinion, which you are entitled to express. Saying, "He's a crook and a rip-off" is slanderous ... unless you can prove that he's a crook and a rip-off.

^^^ Wasn't talkin' to you. Somebody posted that they should not rotate. They do, should, and must.

Also http://comancheclub.com/forums/viewtopi ... ting+valve

Once you make the modification described, you will ALWAYS have full power braking to the rear wheels. The by-pass port does not block the primary port for the rear wheels. If you find that thread with the photos, there's a shot I took of an MJ front metering block I sliced open to show the way the fluid is routed through the housing. Yes, and it does it so effectively that most older XJs have no rear brakes at all. I'm considering putting an MJ metering block in my '88 XJ to get some rear brakes. I tested during the winter -- on ICE, if I slammed on the brakes at low speed the front brakes would lock up and the rear wheels just kept turning. I do not consider an XJ proportioning valve a useful swap for an MJ. I would much prefer to deal with having too much brakes at the rear than having none.

Not temp sensors, plural. Temp sensor, singular. And the oil pressure sender. If you want to stay with the idiot lights, buy a Sun Super tach and strap it to the steering column. Mine has been just fine for 8 years.

x2 Anyone who has ever adjusted toe-in knows that. Even brand-new tie rod ends have some rotational free play. They have to, or they'd bind up in use.

No. Any cluster with a tach will have full instrumentation. Why would you WANT idiot lights? The answer to your original question, BTW, is "Yes." My '88 MJ already had gauges, but no tach. I couldn't find a cluster I could afford, so I stuck in a Sun SuperTach. Works fine.

There is a discussion of how to bypass it, complete with photos. Try a search -- you'll need to go back a few months, maybe a bit more than a year. You have been led astray by a common misunderstanding. There is NO "return" line. There is a line that runs from the "nose" of the front metering block to the rear proportioning valve. That line is what you run on under normal conditions, and it provides proportioned braking to the rear wheels. There is another line to the rear, that by-passes the proportioning valve. This is the line that comes out of the bottom of the front metering block. That port is normally blocked, but if the front brakes fail the piston that actuates the brake system warning light also opens the port and allows fluid to flow through the by-pass line, allowing full braking force to the rear wheels. Essentially, what you need to do is remove the line that runs from the bottom of the metering block and plug that outlet. You then want to splice that line into the line coming out of the "nose" of the metering block, so that there is only one line and it goes from the "nose" outlet directly to the hose at the rear axle.

Yep. You have to get a cluster that fits your year, though. They used mechanical speedometers from 1984 (Cherokee) through 1990, and electronic speedoometers from 1991 up. There were two types of the mechanical speedo, and they don't interchange. The early type ran from 1984 through either 1986 or maybe mid-1987, the new type from 1987 through 1990. Also, if possible get a tach out of a vehicle with the same number of cylinders you have. Some of the tachs have a potentiometer and can be adjusted for four or six-cylinder use ... but not all have that.

U.S. Army, Vietnam veteran. Started off as a combat engineer (I think that was 12B), then after I got to 'Nam they didn't know what to do with me so I spent the last part of my tour in 4th Infantry Division HQ. I think they reclassified me 71H. I made SPC5 about 6 months before my ETS.

A '69 Wagoneer has 6-bolt wheels, doesn't it? You're going to need custom-made axle shafts no matter what you do for brakes, unless you swap in a matching 6-bolt front axle.

I wasn't suggesting that you buy a kit. I was suggesting that by buying the '91 Cherokee you are getting the kit, "on the hoof." You should not need to swap in the interior harness unless you really have your heart set on tearing out the dashboard and then reinstalling it. My whole point in mentioning the Mopar kit was to show that the engine controls can used used stand-alone.

As Pete said, they are totally different. The 89 has a Renix ignition/injection, the '91 is a Mopar. The 89 has a mechanical speedo, the 91 has an electronic speedo. The good news is that I believe the engine controls from the 91 can be used stand-alone. Jeep used to sell (and maybe still does) a MPFI conversion kit for the older 4.2L Wranglers that originally had a carburetor. The conversion is basically the entire MPFI setup for a '94 Wranger 4.0L. If it can be retrofitted to an older, carburetted vehicle, I can't see any reason why you can't drop in the motor and assciated controls without rewiring the dashboard and chassis.

Clogged catalytic converter, maybe? Bad oxygen sensor? The O2 sensor isn't used during warm-up, when the engine runs in open loop mode. The ECU uses input from several of the sesnors only after things reach normal operating temperature and switches over to closed loop mode operation.

Good question. I wish I had a good answer ... but I don't. I've never even considered it.

Thanks, CW. Man, the rest of you dudes make me feel OLD. I came back from Vietnam in 1968. Looking at these other terms of service, I get the feeling most of you weren't even born then. Where's my walker?

"Intimidation" should not be a consideration. The bottom line is, you should NOT be opening the door to a stranger at 3:00 a.m. Period. Not even if it's an innocent-sounding female voice. Scum bags have girl friends, too, and they have been known to use same as decoys. If someone says they need help, ask them who they want YOU to call and what the number is or, better yet, just tell them you'll be happy to call the police for assistance and see what happens. To hell with intimidation. Don't open the door. The gun is for shooting someone who tries to break through the door, not for posturing after you've let the scumbag in.

Once the cables get rusty, you can't bring 'em back. They're $17 from Advanced Auto (a.k.a. Shucks or Kragan in some parts of the country). Just replace them. I'm on my way to pick one up at my local Advanced emprium in a few minutes.

Some '87s were retrofitted with a ballast resistor under a factory TSB. It was not standard from the factory on 1987 models. I keep it in my '88s, too, but not because I fear any problems from NOT having it. I also have an '87 MJ and that's been chugging along fine without it. I keep it because part of me is of a collector/restorer/purist mindset, and I prefer not to remove parts the factory put there just in case I enter one of the trucks in an AMC Owners Group show. You won't hurt anything by bypassing it, and you won't hurt anything by replacing it. If you replace it -- buy two and keep a spare in the glove box. That's pretty much S.O.P. for any vehicle with a ballast resistor. Chrysler was notorious for using them in their ignitions and having owners get stranded as a result.

www.car-part.com

Nope. It is there for a reason. The 87s (XJs and MJs did NOT have it, and people complained that the fuel pump was making too much noise. So for 1988 they added the ballast resistor to reduce the voltage to the fuel pump, which makes it run slower, which makes less noise. The fuel pump and regulator are exactly the same for an '87 and an '88. You will NOT damage anything by soldering those two wires together.

This is for a 4.0 is it the same as 2.5? For 1988, yes. Your TBI is still a Renix system, same as the 4.0L. Most of the sensors are the same. I know the CPS is the same part number.

Always look for the obvious. Coils and ignition modules do go bad ... but very rarely, and virtually never right on cue after you did work unrelated to them. So I suggest you stop looking in that direction and be open to the very real probability that, regardless of what you THINK you didn't mess with -- somewhere in the process of changing the valve cover you disconnected something related to the spark. My guess is the CPS. The wire runs right behind the back of the head and valve cover. There's supposed to be a clip back there -- I don't know if that clip is attached to a valve cover bolt on the 2.5L. Are you certain you didn't disturb the CPS wire or connector? Keep in mind that you may not have had to unplug it -- it runs near the exhaust manifold, and if your wire was even damaged, it could have worked but then jostling it when you changed the valve cover might have shorted it out. There is a way to test the CPS with a multi-meter. Somebody posted a link awhile back to an article by a guy with screen name Jabba the Hut who posted a description of how to test all the sensors in the Renix system. See if you can find that article. Does anyone have it book-marked?