Eagle

Or the roof AND the rafters peel away from the wall. I can't begin to count how many houses I've looked at that had rafter "hurricane" clips installed to tie the rafters to the wall plates (and/or studs) and the clips were installed on the wrong side of the wall, which reduces their effectiveness about 75%. I looked at one new house where the contractor put a "few" (a VERY few) anchor bolts into the tops of the concrete foundation walls ... but he didn't bother putting nuts or washers on them. How do you fix that after the fact? Code calls for anchor bolts every six feet. If they're only installed every twelve or fifteen feet ... how do you retrofit something that's supposed to have been cast into the concrete? (There are ways, of course -- but they're not especially easy, and they're not especially cheap.) Same with "hurricane" clips -- if they're not there at all, or they're on the wrong side of the wall ... how do you retrofit them without tearing the house apart? Many years ago, when my parents were alive, my father allowed an "energy auditor" to go through the house and suggest ways to make the place more energy efficient. Our huse had a walk-out basement. The walls weren't insulated (built in 1950), and half of the basement had later been finished as a recreation room. The rec room didn't have sheetrock or cheap plywood paneling for wall finish. My parents were after the feel of my grandparents house in Maine, so the walls were done with tongue-and-groove pine boards. The energy auditors suggestion was to insulate the basement walls. "How?" we asked. "Just remove the wall finish," the kid responded. Anything can be done, but to do that would be so expensive that it would have taken fifty years (or more) to amortize the cost of installing that insulation. The pine was nailed to 3/4" furring strips, which were nailed to the concrete. So the most you could get in there would have been 3/4" bead board insulation. That has an R-value of about 2, IIRC, which is just slightly better than nothing at all.

Just about all of the measures discussed in that link are good ideas, and required by the latest residential code, but not what I would call "mitigation." When talking about an existing house, to me "mitigation" addresses things the homeowner can do to lessen the risk of {whatever] WITHOUT having to take the house apart and rebuild it. Want "hurricane" nailing on your roof shingles? Too bad -- the only way to get it is to remove the roof and start over. Same with closer nailing of the roof sheathing to the rafters, or the latest code requirement -- taping the joints between the sheets of plywood on the roof. Sure, all that helps resist damage from high winds, but ... how can you do those things without tearing the house apart? It turns out that I'm familiar with the procedures and philosophy of "wind mitigation," but I've never before heard it called that.

I have a question: I'm a licensed architect and a licensed building inspector. I've been doing this for more than 40 years. I have never heard of "wind mitigation." Explain, please. What the heck is "wind mitigation"?

In this corner of the world, "washroom" is another word for "bathroom" or "toilet room." Shall I assume that what you mean by "washroom" might be "laundry"?

Correct. Which is why for stock tires 3.54 gears are a much better choice than 3.07. With 3.07 gears either you're below the optimum "fat" part of the torque curve at highway speed, or you don't use fifth gear. Seriously -- on stock tires with 3.07 gears, 65 MPH is 1800 RPM. Really? What were the engineers smoking when they made that decision? And that's with an overdrive ratio of 0.75:1 -- I think the ratio for the Peugeot tranny is 0.72:1, which just makes it worse.

1. While I'm not saying that Knucklehead needs his own realtor, points are not paid to either the buyer's or the seller's realtor. Points are paid to the bank, as part of the mortgage. 2. The realtor's fee is split between the buyer's and seller's realtors. Around here, the fee is typically 6 percent of the selling price. If the buyer also has a realtor, then 3 percent goes to the buyer's realtor and 3 percent goes to the seller's realtor. That said ... I see no reason for Knucklehead to bring in a realtor at this point. The role of a buyer's realtor is to find him a house. That's already been done, so a realtor for Knucklehead at this point would be about as useful as tits on a boar hog. It's an appraiser he needs, not a realtor. And a home inspector.

That sounds like something I would do -- or might have done. Be thankful it was a tee shirt, not a nut or a washer.

If it has a SOA, how did you determine that the springs have sagged?

I use numbers from my own spreadsheet, which I compiled using actual tire manufacturers' revolutions-per-mile data. I think that's more accurate than numbers based on a theoretical tire diameter. My spreadsheet is up on Google Docs -- there's a link to it somewhere in this site, lemme see if I can find it ... See if this works: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pHFuhGgj6dQDfzyfFJH5z7NCDLW2KX3ABQgAJr3lBvM/edit#gid=0 FWIW -- I ended up running 3.73 gears in my '88 MJ with 31" tires. The gears were purchased for installation in my '88 XJ, which I ran on 30x9.50-15 tires. Then I bought the MJ, which had a 4" lift on it, so it was crying out for at least 31" tires. It was a 5-speed, though, and 31" tires with 3.07 gears and a 5-speed is rather awful. 4.10 gears would have been better but I already had the new 3.73 gears sitting there in a box, so they went into the MJ. The result was that the overall final drive ratio was almost exactly the same as stock tires with 3.54 gears. Very nice on the street, but I would have preferred the extra gearing of 4.10s off-road.

They're gone now, but I've owned very early example of both the XJ and MJ. I rescued them from oblivion, and eventually passed them along to brethren from NAXJA. The XJ was a very early '84 XJ Wagoneer. I've had two '86 MJs, one of which was rescued from a scrap yard. All of the early ones I had were four-bangers. The reason I think at least one of the '86 MJs was very early is that there was something (which I don't remember now) that was different about the rear suspension than any other MJ I've ever seen. Production changes are often a clue. I encountered the same thing with AMC Javelins. The one I bought new (1968 production) had staggered rear shocks, to combat axle hop over bumps. I later picked up another, 1967 production, on which both shocks came down behind the rear axle. It did make a difference.

I'm glad to know the brute force method prevails. Years ago I asked the shop foreman at my dealer about borrowing their tool. He said they had it on the shelf for more than ten years and had never used it, so they eventually threw it out to make room for new tools.

4.10s with 32" tires is hardly "overgearing." Stock tires with 3.54 gears turn 2336 RPM at 70 MPH. 32" tires with 4.10 gears turn 2375 RPM at 70 MPH. You're basically matching stock final drive ratio.

My personal rule of thumb is 3:54 for stock tires, 3.73s for 30" tires, 4.10s for 31s and maybe 32s, and 4.56 or 4.88 for anything larger than 32".

From time spent in South America with my wife, visiting her family, it is my understanding that those rumors are true. However, I can't say that I've seen one. My wife was from Chile. I've been wheeling with a friend in Chile, but the Jeeps in Chile are built in the U.S., not Venezuela.

I wonder what the breakover angle is.

I see a bunch of crap on the roof, and I don't see gutters. That stuff on the roof holds moisture and accelerates deterioration of the roof.

Before you get any deeper into this, you need to realign your thinking. The landlord's realtor works for the landlord. He or she gets paid a percentage of the selling price. It should be obvious, then, that he or she has ZERO incentive to in any way help you buy the house for a lower price. The landlord's realtor CANNOT tell you "what the price should be." He or she can tell you what he or she and the landlord would like the price to be. You do not have to accept that as gospel, and you should not. This is why you need a qualified appraiser. You tossed out a number of $98k. Suppose you think you're willing to pay $98k for the house. You go to a bank, and they don't think the house is worth $98k, so you're not getting a mortgage. As Jeep Driver said, realtors sell. Appraisers appraise. But even an appraiser can't tell you what the price "should" be. All an appraiser does is look at the house, and then look around the neighborhood to find what roughly comparable houses have sold for recently. You'll hear the term "comps" thrown around. That's shorthand for "comparable values." But virtually no two houses are exactly the same, so the "comps" are only an approximation. If the owner's realtor thinks the house "should" sell for $98k, that's a starting point. Unless your appraiser thinks it's worth more, then you use the home inspection report to negotiate down from the $98k starting point. For example, you've told us that the electrical system is substandard. Make sure the home inspector takes a close look at that. If it's unsafe, then get a couple or three estimates from licensed electricians for bringing it up to snuff. Don't figure on doing it yourself. Maybe you have the time and the skills, but you have a job, and a life. If you figure only the cost of materials, then basically you are giving the seller the value of the labor, when that should be factored into the selling price. Other things to be sure the inspector looks at: Roof. Be sure it's in good shape. Check how many layers there are. Codes only allow two layers, but a new roof put over an existing roof never lasts as long as doing a tear-off. Furnace or boiler. How old is it? What;s the burner efficiency? Has it been maintained regularly? Plumbing. It's an older house, right? My house is 69 years old. All the water piping and most of the baseboard heating piping is copper. The water here is hard. The copper pipes are beginning to spring leaks, just due to age and chemical action. If you have copper joining to iron or steel pipe, look for corrosion. Especially check for lead pipes. Is there a masonry chimney? If so, does it have a tile-lined flue? Check the tiles for cracks. Check the masonry to see if it needs to be repointed. Lead paint. You're going to be starting a family. Lead paint is bad for children. Some states require lead paint to be abated. Who pays for that is part of the negotiations. Ditto for asbestos. You may have it on pipes or on or in the furnace or boiler.

All correct, and excellent advice. Most realtors, in fact, aren't qualified as appraisers.

Test 5

Test 1

That's actually not a bad price, considering that it includes the header, the grille, the headlights and the parking lights. It makes a Cherokee look at bit like a Commander. IMHO it just looks strange on a Comanche, though.

Looks good. How much did you take off to get it cleaned up like that?

It is what it is. But you wrote " i found a leak on the passenger side manifold, bad idle and a small low end hp and torque loss ..." A "loss" means that on Thursday that particular vehicle has less torque and/or horsepower than that particular vehicle had on Tuesday. If that particular vehicle doesn't perform the way some other vehicle performs, tjhat's not a loss -- that's a difference between two different vehicles. Look at the chart that JMO413 posted. The horsepower peak is at 5200 RPM. That's higher than most engines I've ever driven -- pretty much anything I've ever owned was redlined at 5000 RPM. And the torque peak is at 3600 RPM. It's no surprise that it feels flat at low RPM. I don't think it "lost" anything. I don't think it ever had what you were expecting to find.

What is your baseline for diagnosing a torque and HP loss at low RPM? Loss compared to what? I briefly owned a 1999 WJ with the 4.7L engine. It spent more time in the shop than it did with me. During one lengthy shop period, the dealership gave me a 5.2L ZJ as a loaner vehicle. Based on the seat-of-pants dyno, the older 5.2L had GOBS more low-end torque than the brand-new 4.7L. The 4.7L didn't start to wake up until it was over 3,000 or 3,500 RPM. Since I never flog my rides like that, the only times I ever saw those RPMs were in passing situations on 2-lane roads when the tranny kicked down as I was accelerating to pass. On those occasions it would take off like the proverbial scalded cat. Under normal driving, it was like driving a brick. I have one of those cheap, Harbor Freight Tools folding utility trailers. I had that behind the WJ with some bags of topsoil from Lowe's for my then-girlfriend's garden. The load was WELL under the rated towing capacity for the vehicle, but it felt like the parking brake was on the whole way. To be honest, my 4.0L XJs and MJs pulled better when towing than the 4.7L. Bottom line: IMHO, the 4.7L engine is a passenger car engine that should not be used in Jeeps or pickup trucks. It's not a torque engine, it's a high-revving RPM-oriented engine. I hope I never own another one.

This doesn't pertain directly to MJs, but a number of XJs came with ABS and the paper I'll provide a link to is fairly technical, so I'm going to post this here rather than in The Pub. I have often mentioned that I use and recommend only silicone brake fluid, especially in older vehicles such as our MJs and XJs, some of which aren't daily drivers and which may sit for extended periods of time. Internal corrosion due to moisture in the system, a result of the hygroscopic ("attracts water") nature of glycol-based brake fluids, is the culprit. Silicone brake fluid isn't hygroscopic and doesn't collect moisture vapor out of the air over time. This means that if you use silicone brake fluid you don't need to flush the brake system annually. But ... I have always heard and read that you can't use silicone brake fluid in anti-lock brake systems, but nobody ever said why not. I knew that the U.S. Army had long ago standardized on the use of silicone brake fluid (for which they have, of course, an acronym: SBF). I just discovered that they performed a formal evaluation on the use of their silicone brake fluid in commercial anti-lock brake systems. It makes for an interesting read. https://events.esd.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Silicone-Brake-Fluid-Compatibility-with-Anti-Lock-Braking-Systems-for-Identifying-Future-Military-Brake-Fluid-Requirements.pdf In my case, even though most of the 2000 XJs on the dealer's lot had ABS, I special ordered both of mine, and one of the reasons was that I specifically did not want ABS. I'm not sorry that I didn't get it.