Eagle

So it's down 3/4 of an inch. Not terrible for a 30 year old vehicle. Certainly not cause to replace them.

Since there are no relays involved in any of the above, follow the first couple of suggestions. First check fuses, then check multi-function switch.

XJ leaves are always inverted. They're designed that way. Take everything out of the back. Measure from the center of the wheel/hub/axle straight up to the bottom edge of the flare. You're looking for 17 inches.

No need -- you are correct. The factory white wagon wheels had a pinstripe. BTW -- You do realize that this thread is over 5 years old, right?

No. Look at an XJ that has the operable vents. There's a metal track along part of the lower edge of the glass. That's the problem. Where the metal track/frame ends, there's a step. It isn't possible to mold the rubber seal with a step that perfectly aligns with the step from the metal track to the exposed glass edge. This is where they leak -- at the point of that step.

If I remember correctly, Hornbrod used a steering wheel out of (I think) a Buick in his truck. I know it's from some GM car, not from an AMC or Jeep vehicle. Here it is -- Buick Regal:

Absolutely on the shock when touched. I don't think they should arc if sprayed, but I'm not certain about that.

$200 seems fair. Several years ago I paid $500 for one, but the one I got was rust-free, had no dents, and was complete with tailgate and taillights.

Converting Victor's numbers to the metric fuel consumption system, 10 liters for 68 km extrapolates to 14.7 liters per 100 km, which isn't too far behind the second of your two figures. I think that's rather poor fuel mileage for a 2.5L MJ, but at least Victor now knows that he is not the only person getting such numbers.

Normally I would agree with Smokeyyank and advise you not to bother with the XJ Dana 35. But -- since you already have it, and you're not looking for a lift so I assume your MJ is stock and not running huge tires, the Dana 35 should be okay. The one in my '88 XJ has gone 287,000 miles, and that includes having wheeled it at Paragon Offroad Park a number of times, as well as fire roads and such around New Mexico. Dzimm posted a diagram with the key information. Bottom line is that you will need to weld perches onto the XJ axle to exactly match the location and angle/orientation of the MJ axle. You can either cut off the existing perches and relocate them, or buy new ones. You'll have to cut them off to avoid interference with the U-bolts, so IMHO you might as well cut them off neatly and reuse them.

Bienvenido. 68 km is 42 miles, and 10 liters is 2.64 gallons. Your fuel consumption in the terms we use in the U.S. is 15.9 miles per gallon (MPG). That's pretty bad for a 2.5L. Even a 4.0L should deliver better fuel economy than that. However, you mentioned a big mountain. That doesn't help.

Dexron/Mercon

It may fit, physically, but it almost certainly won't balance. The GM 2.8L V6 version that GM sold to AMC/Jeep was externally balanced. There's no way an externally balanced V6 would use the same damper as an in-line 4 cylinder.

From the 1986 Jeep parts catalog: There are two dampers listed. J324 2885 is the damper for 1983-1986 without serpentine belt. J324 2857 is for 1983 with serpentine belt. J324 2886 is for 1984-1986 with serpentine belt. For the GM 4-cylinder (used 1981-1983): J813 2264 So ... nowhere does the Jeep 2.5L damper cross with either the GM 4-cylinder engine or the Jeep 4.2L engine.

I was looking in the 1987-1990 parts catalog. Interestingly, there's a different part number for the 2.5L damper in the Wrangler YJ. That part number is J324 2885 ... the damper for the 2.5L in the XJ/MJ is J324 2886. The damper for the 4.0L is 3300 2920. The damper for the 4.2L is J323 7196 with the V-belt pulley, and J323 7723 with the serpentine belt.

Keep in mind that AMC/Jeep/Eagle for a time used the Pontiac Iron Duke 2.5L 4-banger in the Eagle. That has caused a LOT of people to believe absolutely that all Jeep 2.5L engines are the Iron Duke.

Now THAT's a Gladiator! Sounds like you have a great wife and a great friend. Be good to both of them.

2.5L damper ==> J324 2886 4.0L damper ==> 3300 2920 These are from the 1987-1990 Jeep parts manual

I have always read that the Renix 4.0L injectors are 19.x lb/hour. The 746 injectors, at 20.2 lbs, should be close enough that the difference wouldn't show up in practical application. All of which begs the question of whether the flow rates are measured at the same pressure ...

I've considered converting my '88 2.5L to a carburetor. That single injector is pricey, and it's a bit of a kludge of a system. I'm old enough that I had almost 30 years of wrenching under my belt before I encountered my first fuel injected engine, so carburetors are easy peasey for me to tinker with. Much MUCH less work than converting a Renix TBI 2.5L to the Chrysler multi-port system (which is a far superior system). I think the ignition could remain untouched, but it would also be easy to swap in a distributor from an '84 or '85 Cherokee. But I don't think those used points. I think they were transistorized.

I've seen it in action. When the original exhaust in my '88 Cherokee 4.0L went bad, my brother was managing a Speedy Muffler shop. For my birthday he brought it into his shop and installed a 2-1/2" turbo muffler and a 2-1/2" custom-bent exhaust pipe. It sounded ... bleh. It was louder than factory and had an annoying harmonic at highway speed, but aside from that it still sounded like a very old Maine lobster boat. As for performance, I could instantly feel the loss of power in my operating range (which doesn't exceed 2,500 RPM). It's a five speed, so differences are easy to detect by the seat-of-the-pants dyno. And the gas mileage dropped by anywhere from 2 to 4 MPG, depending on whether a tank was mostly highway or mostly local roads. I'm 75 years old and I've been driving since I was 12 (legally since I was 16). This was the only time in my entire life when I couldn't wait for an exhaust system to rust out so I would have a reason to replace it. When the time finally came, I went with an AutoZone OEM replacement, 2-1/4" tailpipe and a Walker OEM replacement muffler. One of the better choices I've made in life.

To whom was this addressed?

Wow! Three tiny little fans, and they claim that it will maximize cooling and increase air flow by 30 percent. Which is ridiculous, since it's the same radiator. It looks to me like that setup will reduce the airflow by at least 30 percent compared to a factory double fan setup.

Your priorities seem to be different from mine. I prefer to tune for the RPM range where my engines "live" most of the time, which is typically at my normal highway cruising RPM. That gives the best fuel economy, and that's where I'm most interested in maximizing performance.

Really? How much time do you spend at 6,000+ RPM?