Eagle

Since it's New Years and you're probably either drunk or hung over, I'll let this slide. In the future, please try to be a little more genteel in your use of language. I am not now, and never have been, a German fighter plane.

:eek: Why would you even consider trashing the FRAME to adapt it to a pair of wasted control arms? That's a pretty backwards approach. The idea is to modify the cheapest, easiest to replace part, not the part that can never be replaced. If you have stock control arms, the bushings are replaceable, and even new stock control arms aren't that expensive from Crown Automotive or Quadratec. If you have aftermarket control arms, must either use stock bushings or rebuildable Johnny joints. IMHO you should fix what's broken, not mess with the frame of the vehicle to avoid buying a $20 part.

Yepp. Probably not.

Happy New Year to all of you and your familiies.

Early 1950s Hudsons with drum brakes on all four wheels stopped shorter than any 4-wheel disk street sedan on the market today -- with no power brakes. Yes, disc brakes dissipate heat better, and for racing that's a concern. For normal street driving and for trail use that's not a consideration.

Semantics. In order for me to consider something an "upgrade" it has to be significantly better than what it replaces, not just different. I grew up working on modified stock cars that would lock up all four big, fat racing tires being driven by full-race 427 Chevy engines -- using drum brakes with no power boosters. You're going to have to work very hard to convince me that disc brakes are inherently "better" than drum brakes. If you think they're better and you want to go through the hassles of making the conversion, be my guest. Personally, I just don't see any point to it.

I know I'm in a minority, but I would replace the seals and buy a pair of brake drums. You're not running NASCAR, there's no need for disc brakes in an MJ.

Extremely rare. Jeep only offered the 5-speed in the Grand for the 1993 model year. They discontinued it because they didn't sell very many.

You got the labels right. I don't have any other MJ junction blocks to cut open, but I did slice an XJ combo valve. I wanted to see how it works. Even after cutting it open and studying it, I still don't understand how it provides any proportioning. I *WAS* going to replace the MJ junction block with an XJ combo valve. Now that I have looked inside the XJ unit, I have given up that notion. I'll stick with the MJ junction block and bypass the rear proportioning valve. I can deal with excess brakes in the rear much better thah I can deal with no brakes in the rear.

I hope you realize that the 3" lift is not going to do anything to correct that rubbing on the LCAs. I had a 4" lift on the '88 MJ and the 31s rubbed on the LCAs. That was one of the reasons I decided the lift provided zero advantages, compared to several disadvantages.

Nope. When you add load to the bed, the axle stays where it is and the truck bed drops. The link rod pushes the arm on the proprtioning valve UP. If you shorten the rod, you pull the arm on the valve DOWN, which reduces your braking. If you want more brakes, make the rod longer.

31x10.50s will fit with no lift ... IF you use factory rims. The backspace on OEM rims is 5-1/4", which allows 31s to tuck inside the front flares when the suspension is compressed. There are NO aftermarket rims with that much backspacing, so any aftermarket rim will place the tires farther outboard. Which means they will hit the flares in the front when the suspension compresses. 31x10.50s on stock rims also sit very close to the rear leaf springs and inner fender walls. They clear, but not by much. Note that for both situations, lift is NOT going to make a difference. The only way to make bigger tires on aftermarket rims clear in the front is either trim heavily, or radically extend the bump stops (which doesn't do much to improve your articulation. A bit less backspacing in the rear gets the tires away from the springs and inner fender walls, but again you have to worry about the flares, and again a lift doesn't solve anything unless you also extend the bump stops to reduce travel. Personally, I prefer 30x9.50s on factory rims, but I have run 31s with no lift.

That was what I suggested that you check. Yeah, if it's an '88 you have a short, and it probably is draining the battery. You might start your search with the ignition switch, since that's what SHOULD turn the guage off. The actual switch isn't in the steering column at the key, it's mounted on the base of the steering column.

Broken ring on #1? How many miles on the engine? Could also be a sticking valve, but that shouldn't contrinute to massive oil consumption. Those are rather poor numbers across the board. #1 being the worst is a surprise, though. Usually #6 is the worst.

Ballast resistor. The grey/white ceramic thingie on the inside of the left front fender, by the air box. Two wires coming off it. Jumper them and see what happens. Yes, you can drive it jumpered. The 87s didn't have it. The only reason to drop the voltage was to reduce the noise of the fuel pump -- which was more noticeable in an XJ than an MJ.

I can't tell from that pic if it looks to have 4WD or not. I don't know what you guys are seeing. And that grille is the same that was in my 1978 Cherokee. I didn't think Jeep used that grille as early as 1972. I would definitely get the serial number and run a CarFax on it.

Dynamite works. That's one of the dumbest setups I've ever seen. Yeah, AFAIK you have to remove the a/c compressor. If you find a trick to avoid that, let me know.

It can't work. You must have gotten 6-cyl clusters. Either that or you don't know how fast your engine is turning. The tach gets its signal from the negative terminal of the coil. That's upstream of the distributor -- there's no way it can read only the #1 cylinder. Plus, I've been through this with a friend who put an 89 6-cyl cluster into an 84 4-cyl XJ. He had to adjust the potentiometer to calibrate the RPMs to the 4 cylinder engine. It isn't a case of "there are supposed to be different pulses/frequencies ..." There ARE different pulses. I explained it above. A 4-cyl engine has two pulses per revolution, a 6-cylinder engine has three n and a V-8 has four. That's why aftermarket tachs (such as my Sun Supertach) have a 3-position slide switch on them.

Did you replace the oil pressure sender and the temperature sender in the head? The senders for the idiot lights are nothing but ON-OFF switches. The senders for the gauges are variable resistors. In your 86 the gauges don't receive input from the ECU, so forget the computer. Just replace the two senders. Be sure the new ones are for an XJ/MJ with gauges.

The "name" in heavy-duty aftermarket alternators is Mean Green. I just went to Auto Zone and got one of their NEW (not remanufactured) house brand alternators. It has a lifetime warranty, so if I ever wear it out I'm covered. The one in the MJ is about 4 years old now and seems fine. The one in the XJ is about a year old.

$270 labor to replace the clutch in a 4x4 is a bargain.

Is it staying on, or not returning to the left when you shut off the engine? What year is your MJ? I believe the 84 - 86 models had gauges that didn't zero when shut off. It's easy to check. Shut off the engine. If the gauge stays pointing at whatever your normal voltage is (around 13.5?) -- disconnect the battery. If the gauge still reads 13.5, it's not staying on, it's just not returning to a "rest" position when not energized.

Are your front rotors cast, or composite? If you don't know the difference, look at the outer edges/corner of the "hat" section that fits over the hub. If the outer corner is square(ish) and sharp, you have cast rotors -- which are the old style. If the corner is sort of rounded off, it's sheet metal "hat" indicating composite rotors, which would need the 90+ hubs.

I paid $500 for one a couple of years ago. It was complete with tailgate and lights.

It isn't just the shafts that are different. The newer hubs have a different spacing from the face of the disk mounting surface to the surface where the hub mounts to the knuckle. This is due to changes in the rotors and calipers between 90 and 91. You can't run the newer hubs on the older knuckles and vice versa. The above is copyrighted by me and by posting it here I am NOT granting anyone permission to re-post it anywhere else. Each member here may print ONE copy to stick in your technical notebook. That's it. It's part of a book I've been working on, and I would appreciate your being honest and ethical enough to not give away my intellectual property.