Eagle

What, you like pics of rust and dents? I have a guest here this week from Europe, whom I met through the NAXJA forum (he's a Cherokee owner). He asked, so we counted. I'm down to eleven Jeeps in the yard. Of the eleven, four are running. A couple of others are future projects, and the rest are (as long as you promise not to tell the neighbors) ahem ... junk. I'll see what I can do, but don't expect anything earth shattering ...

No, it also "softens" the shifts by allowing the torque converter to slip more. This creates more heat, and heat shortens the life of the converter. Correct.

Ding! I saw the first picture and thought the piston looked like it had sucked in some kind of projectile, then I got to the bottom, saw the bent valve, and said "Yep ... that'll do 'er." The question is, why/how did it suck a valve? Must have had a keeper break.

gas mileage is better in comfort. seems to be alot better, like 2-3mpg better. but power does have a more firm shift. Something is wrong. "Comfort" allows the trans to slip more. Fuel economy should be perceptably better with it set to "Power." The transmission also lasts longer when it's set to Power.

It's not a bolt and it doesn't go into a housing. A tie rod end has a tapered stud that goes into a tapered hole in a bracket. If it won't go in far enough to put the nut on the threaded portion, either there's something blocking the hole, the bracket is damaged, the stud is broken, or somebody sold you a tie rod end with a fatter stud thatn what your vehicle calls for. I'm here, you're there. I can't help much more than that from a distance.

The unit bearing would have to be virtually unusable before it could affect camber. Remove the tire and rim, grab the brake rotor at the top and bottom, and try to rock it in and out. If it moves, there's too much play in the bearing. I'd be looking at ball joints long before I'd consider the hub/bearing. They usually start growling long before they develop excess slop.

A front Lock Rite doesn't lock when you're running in 2WD on pavement. When things get slick and you engage 4WD, it makes the front end want to "push" rather badly in turns when you're on the power.

...that would have to mean that your shock is fully extended at ride height. just sitting on the ground it is fully extended and your axle cannot move another inch down? My question exactly. The right way to approach this would be to not guess, but to remove the existing shocks -- or at least one end of each shock. That'll let the truck sit at whatever ride height the modified springs bring it to. Crawl underneath and measure the distance between the upper and lower studs. That dimension should be as close as possible to the mid-point in the range of movement for the new shocks, equalizing the available up-travel and down-travel. You can find all those dimensions on the Monroe web site. Which doesn't mean you have to buy Monroe shocks (although you could do worse). Once you find a shock with the right end fittings and the right length, you can then look up the shock number to see what vehicle(s) it fits. Once you know the application, you can shop any shocks for that application.

The reality is that in a pickup, running empty, the front brakes do probably 65% to 75% of the work. That's WHY they have a load-sensing proportioning valve in there. Until mine blew out (the arm had been disconnected by a previous owner), the rear brakes on my '88 locked up before the fronts in any kind of quasi-panic situation, or when the pavement was at all wet or slippery. Mind you, I'm an olde pharte who grew up before we had proportioning valves, so it wasn't a big deal to me but for many people it would be ... unnerving. "Upgrading" the brakes (and since my XJs all have 10" rear drums I'm still not conceding that discs in any way represent an upgrade) would only make that problem worse. You'll need a functional and properly adjusted proportioning valve with rear discs much more than you ever did with drums. No matter how you slice it and dice it, you can't fight physics. Most of the weight is on the front wheels. They do most of the work, and the proportion shifts even more to the front in a panic stop scenario. However, that's just one olde pharte's opinion. YMMV.

The problem is the lining material on the shoes taking in moisture and swelling up. This has been a problem with the XJs since they first came out. Best cure that I know of is to replace the rear shoes with semi-metallic or carbon-ceramic shoes, which aren't as prone to taking in moisture.

There's nothing wrong with the rear drum brakes on the MJ. As CW has postulated, a large part of the problem is the proportioning valve. Another part of the problem is the single diaphragm brake booster. Changing over to rear discs won't correct either of those problems.

The Monroe catalog is available on-line, and in the back is a tech data section that will give you the physical dimensions of each shock, and the mounting type. I believe ZJ Grand Cherokee shocks are about right for a stock height MJ rear if you remove the cross pins. Don't know if they're long enough to be of much help with an AAL -- how much lift did you get (or expect)? The other one I would look at is the shocks for a YJ Wrangler (the leaf spring version, not the newer TJ with 4-wheel coils).

Let's put it this way: The 1994 XJ FSM has more pages devoted to XJ wiring diagrams for one model year than Haynes has pages in the entire book that covers 16 years and three generations of the XJ. 'Nuff said?

Actually, in a stock XJ or MJ the drag link isn't far off horizontal. When you factor in the length, the angular defelection under normal suspension movement on the street isn't a very large angle, and it's well within the range that type of joint is designed to accomodate. When off-roaders lift their rigs and start building for flex and articulation, though, they eat tie rod ends a lot faster than a street vehicle does. Guess why.

I haven't looked but I doubt you can get 4 inches. Check the clearance between the axle and the oil pan. If you can drop it that much, you'll have to be sure you have good bump stops because you won't be able to allow ANY down travel in the suspension.

Why don't you just drop in a TCU? I have a 2WD MJ with a blown 5-speed that I'm going to convert to automatic so my wife can drive it. I could just drop in the shifter and shift it manually, but there's no trick to popping a TCU under the dash and connecting the wires. It's completely independent of the ECU. I know the ECUs are different for the 5-speed and the auto, but I'm sure it'll work with the "wrong" ECU.

I know what you mean, but the YJ series of Wrangler was the series with leaf springs all around. You're referring to the latest all coil spring Wranglers. Somebody makes killer ladder bars for the MJ. A friend of mine has them on his pro dragster MJ. I don't think he ever mentioned who made 'em, or if he said it I forgot. Let me know when you're ready and I'll ask him. BTW -- If your MJ is 4WD you can't lower the front very much at all, or the oil pan smashes down on the front differential housing every time you go over a bump. 2WD is the only game in town if you want to slam an MJ.

Put the right ends on it and poop pipe (at least, the old steel pipe, not the new plastic stuff) would probably work better. Plain old schedule 40 steel pipe isn't DOM structural tubing, but it's not putty, either. The amount of weight you can support on a single 3-1/2" Lally column is astonishing.

Rancho offers on. They list the same one for the XJ and the MJ. Despite what their catalog says, it produces less lift in an MJ than it does in an XJ. I used to have the exact numbers I got from a Rancho engineer, but I've forgotten. Should be fine for a 2WD MJ budget boost. The advantage an AAL offers over a drop shackle is that the AAL also raises the spring rate. This increases carrying capacity and helps the spring live longer. A drop shackle allows the spring to flex more than stock, which allows it to wear out faster. Hmmm ... stronger and lasts longer, or the same capacity and wears out faster. I know which I'd choose.

I don't agree. I just stated why I think they WON'T work.

Angularity. A tie rod end is designed to rotate around an axis, with minimal deflection off the plane it's designed to operate in. Don't recall for sure, but I think the range is about 15 degrees. For big truck steering, since the front suspension doesn't move a whole lot, the range may be less. An off-road suspension, on the other hand, needs to be free to move in several different planes or axes. I don't see a tie rod end, even a big one, providing the range of movement you'll want. I think it's going to bind up. If it's beefy enough, it may not break -- but it'll then limit the suspension travel to less than what you may be expecting.

There's a house down the road from me that has what seems to be an Army surplus full-size Chevy pickup in camo, and I keep thinking it might be fun to camo one of the MJ clunkers. The 87 shortbed I hope to restore is the medium grey metallic, and I think with the body work all fixed up and fresh paint that'll look really nice. Almost like pewter.

Johnny joints.

Alex, it very definitely is not as easy as just swapping the wing vents for fixed units. That's about 10 or 15 minutes per side. Maybe half an hour for the first side since you probably haven't been inside the doors before. You are looking at a LOT more time and effort to physically swap over the entire door, plus Mickey Mouse the latch. It's a nice swap, I guess, but don't fool yourself into thinking you're choosing the easier route.

I remember reading his write-up awhile ago. He sort of glosses over the problem. It's not as simple as changing from the post type strike in the MJs to the loop style in the newer XJs. The location of the strike in the door is physically higher in the new doors. Anything can be done. The questions are: how much effort do you want to throw at it, and do you want it to be done "right" or just hacked together? I consider Remi's (Kejtar's) to be closer to hacked than "right."