jpnjim

95' (IMHO) would be a much better donor. You still have the late model seats and airbag column issue, but you don't have all the wacky 'one year only' parts like a 96' does. There are some decent parts on a 96, I just wouldn't want one for an HO drivetrain swap. 91-95 donor = perfect for an HO swap. I don't think I'll have seat issues, I'm keeping the stock interior seats etc that I currently have. But now you bring up another point, quote: "airbag column issue"? I think the 95 column,airbag and steering wheel is a hideous piece of "safety equipment" that I really don't want on my truck. Besides, It never came with one anyway. Can I keep my stock column? Will it cause computer issues? If it just throws a "airbag" light could I just unplug it? If I keep my stock 89 column will I have problems wiring it ? Lastly if I use the 95 column, does that mean I'll have single key use for the doors, ignition, glove compartment? That might be a deciding point to keep the 95 column. Had to ask this question because my 95 XJ is 20+ miles away, can't just go outside and look. Hmmm, Swapping in a 95' XJ harness + keeping the GM column would make things tougher. If it's that much of a dealbreaker, you'd be ahead of the game starting with a GM column HO (or atleast grab the harness/column out of one). Defeating the airbag could be an option, but you'd still be left with the Mopar column. Hacking the harness, and keeping 1/2 the renix, and 1/2 the HO harness is an option. Tho probably a long, painful option. I ended up keeping the Renix controls with an HO engine swap, someday I'd like to do the HO wiring harness swap, or even a 97-99 dash & harness swap, I had pulled a whole 01' XJ harness/dash, but decided against the 01' California emissions, 3 cat's, multiple O2 sensors, distributorless ignition, and the crappy Mopar Column.

If you lived in Alabama you could daily drive it, as is. :yes: I'd like it for a little pocket sized trail truck. :thumbsup: If you're running stock sized tires, you can even get it back & forth to the trails inside the bed of a LWB fs pickup.

Been daily driving it since the day I took it home. Running well, but kinda a shame watching the OD click past 35k miles. I have a full box of stuff I'm waiting for time to bolt on (AMC mudflaps, NOS metal 'Mopar' rain guards, late model electric fan, lift shackles, CB with AMC microphone, and some other random stuff), and I AM going to Comanche hell for still NOT YET pulling the rug out of it to check for/grind out rust :doh: I also had very squeeeeeekie balljoints (non-greasable lowers) for a month, or two that I need to replace (they stopped squeaking, but that doesn't make me feel any better about still driving on them everyday). There's also still a few dozen push pins holding the headliner up, and the roof section is screaming for a repaint. (I did replace the dented ft bumper in the sig pic tho). Since it's the end of September, I guess the thing I should be working on most is to come up with anything else to drive over the winter.

I modified one of the 01' XJ seats in the trail-MJ (pass side). It was a while ago (so details are fuzzy now), but I had to cut out a piece of the seat back support, and IIRC I welded something back in to make it fold/stop the way I wanted it to. When I ever get around to doing the drivers side, I'll take some pics. The only negative is there's no latch to keep the seat from folding forward (not an issue/problem for me tho).

I would use the D150's brakes, Mopar had some decent size brakes, I think even the 'small' ones were 10"x2.5" (vs 10"x1.75" for your 87' D35). I run a Mopar rear in my trail-MJ, and use Mopar 11"x2.5" drums, with beefy finned cast drums, decent upgrade over the stock 9-10" Jeep drums, and the XJ e-brake cables connected right up (= reasonable assumption that MJ cables 'should' also bolt up)

It was a class (racing) thing, but the road racing MJ's did have a (2wd) solid ft axle :yes: and they SMOKED the IFS competition :thumbsup:

Text said it used to be red. I was looking inside the scratched up bed for traces of red, but I missed the one you found. :thumbsup:

Eliminators all had tachometer's, this one has the big fuel gauge. Also, the VIN check thing they posted said it was a Pioneer (I didn't check the VIN myself, so :dunno: ). Decent MJ, but no where near the '$10k MJ' ballpark. BTW, ALL Eliminators were 2wd, at first. Later on they offered them in 4wd as well.

Yeah, it's kinda a catch-22, it's probably never *really* going to matter to anyone if an MJ is a 'real' Laredo/Eliminator/Chief/X/etc, but 'real' is real. I can guarantee that right now as I type this, somewhere someone is arguing that their 88' Ford Escort is really a GT model. :yes:

Scarcity is what makes it cool and unique. If you tear apart a Laredo Comanche, you can't add those parts to another Comanche, and 'make' that one a Laredo. The 'new' Laredo would be a 'Laredo Clone', just like putting all the Rubicon parts on a non-Rubi would make it a Rubicon-Clone, or adding all the Street Comanche parts to a plain Jane MJ would make that a Street-Clone. I agree that collectors don't spend much time looking for MJ's, but if you can't *make* a Lemans into a GTO by adding a badge, then you can't *make* a base MJ into a Laredo with a badge either. (especially since AMC/Jeep documents their trim levels with the VIN)

I was telling a story at work the other day about a Junkyard we visited in Pa, on vacation, there were two Fiero's side by side (front end showing of one, rear of the other), when I walked around them, I saw it was one car that had been torn in half. :eek: Instead of reacting to the Fiero, the subject quickly changed to "you visit junk yards on vacation?". :rotfl2: I didn't mean to let that one slip (for a second I had forgot I was among 'normals'. :nuts: )

95' (IMHO) would be a much better donor. You still have the late model seats and airbag column issue, but you don't have all the wacky 'one year only' parts like a 96' does. There are some decent parts on a 96, I just wouldn't want one for an HO drivetrain swap. 91-95 donor = perfect for an HO swap.

Depending on how you attach the drag link to the cross over, you could end up with the dreaded "1/2 turn of dead space in the middle" of your steering. The more lift you have, the worse it is, as the drag link rotates the whole steering linkage before it pulls the wheels in one direction, then reverses the process to move the wheels in the opposite direction. Some have made up little Delron bushings to go over the TRE's, so the knuckle TRE's bottom out sooner, and cut down on the size of the 'dead spot', but it doesn't completely cure the problem. The Rugged Ridge kit is a cheap way to do this type of steering: http://www.shopjeepparts.com/heavy-duty ... -8010.html http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayI ... 0473994939 but you can probably find it cheaper used, as lots of people try it, and can't live with the dead spot. If you don't have alot of lift, it might work OK for you. IMO, a better way to do a crossover would be with WJ knuckles, and custom links. Tho you have to raise up your Trac-Bar mount if you use the higher steering arm on WJ knuckles.

x50 bazillion. :waving:

so it good for up to 325CID ? Mike Following the 'rule of thumb', yes. But I take that rule of thumb meaning a good radiator/stock engine/normal conditions. A high horsepower engine, above average conditions (hot climate), or high stress usage (towing/wheeling/racing) would all push a setup that only marginally passes the 'rule of thumb', over the edge. Just look at how often our 242 cu" engines overwhelm their 325 cu" radiators. It probably doesn't help that they were designed to run hot, and were considered high HP for their size back then (even the Renix).

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayI ... 0585476396 Not the nice R/W/B "AMC" ones, but they are Comanche specific, with brackets: (sorry if anyone here is the current bidder :no: )

Column shift MJ's don't have the gap/cutout in the center of the bench. :brows: ( :ack: pic before scrubbing PO's filth off carpet :ack: ): But yeah, MJ seats are usually stained, beat up, worn out, and without headrests. Why do you want a bench vs buckets? This is also an option if it's for a kid: (little kid seat for the middle):

Honestly, the 96' XJ is one of the worst donor XJ's you could get (seriously). It's good, because it's the last year for this body style, so you get the 'newest' old body panels possible. It's bad because it's a changeover year, and the most b@sterdized XJ of all (not counting the 84-86's). The engine is OBDII, for someone that wanted to swap the more complex OBDII setup into their MJ, using a 96' for a donor would a good way to do it, but you will run into issues trying to get the OBDII fuel system to work in an MJ (OBDII = no fuel return line). People have done it (mostly those doing the complete conversion to 98-01 'everything'), but I believe most end up relocating the XJ gas tank into the MJ. You can convert your OBDII engine to OBDI, but you'd still need to find a source for OBDI parts (harness/computer/fuel rail/etc etc). You can try to swap the OBDII engine, and use the Renix controls you already have (assuming your 88' is a 4.0L already), but you'd still need to find a 91-95 fuel rail, since the Renix one won't bolt to the OBDII intake, and Renix uses a return line. You'd also have to build a hybrid throttle position sensor (or two if you have an auto), and swap over the Renix sensors & flexplate/flywheel to your new engine. As far as seats go, they 'can' swap, but you need the seat brace welded to the 96's floor. They redesigned the seat mount to better support the seats (when they added the airbag), and it meant the seats bolt in totally differently. I run 01' seats in my MJ (very similar to your 96's) I drilled out the spot welds on the seat mount bracket (same as you'd have to), welded it to my MJ's floor, shortened the XJ seat's rear mounts (MJ floor is higher in the back), and modified the seat backs to fold forward (mine was a 4door, so the seats did not fold forward). There are other differences between an 88' & a 96' too, some good, some bad, but if I was going to go to the trouble of using a 96' as a donor, I'd just get a 98'-01', and do the late model swap thing.

It's about the cubic inch surface area of the XJ/MJ radiator. Measure the width x height of the XJ/MJ radiator, and compare it with a FSJ radiator, or even a ZJ radiator. They built the XJ with a low hood height (comparatively speaking), then designed the 4.0L radiator to sit on top of the 'frame' rails, making for a very short, wide radiator. When they did the XJ version II (ZJ), they rethought this (presumably for the V8 option), and made the radiator much taller, with a greater cubic inch surface area. The rule of thumb you used to hear, regarding that the core size of a radiator, is that engine cubic inches should not exceed the cubic inches of your radiator core's frontal surface area. A ton of variables get ignored in this rule of thumb (engine HP, number of cores, use, etc), but it's a pretty good starting point. FWIW, XJ radiator core = 31 x 10.5" = 325.5 frontal surface area. Edit: pre-4.0L radiators were not short & wide like the 4.0L radiators, I measured one of those a long while back, and seem to remember the surface area was actually a little greater. Not sure that translates into an early MJ being better equipped to cool a V8, but it is one more thing to think about.

Nice going DC, you just ruined the big surprise birthday party we planned for you at work tomorrow. :doh: JK, Good luck man, hope things work out for you OK.

X2, the Commander was a train wreck, and you just know marketing looked at the sales figures for it, and said "see what happens when we give the public what they ask for". :headpop:

There was a thread on this a while back, the grill itself is ginormous compared to the MJ ft end: You could probably scale it down a bit, but I'm not sure I'd want to wreck a Rhino Chaser Grille like that. Other pics taken that night: Overlapping the bumper:

Jeep made pickup trucks for almost 50 years (1947-1992), so they shouldn't need us to point out the pickup's absence over the last 19 years. :( It's sad too, since Jeep mainstreamed the 4x4 pickup in the first place, then was the first to go luxury on trucks in the 1970's (almost all the Waggy's luxo options were available in the J10/20's, try to find a non-Jeep 1970's P/U with A/C, full time 4wd, auto, pow windows/locks, etc etc). Their biggest problem was brand loyalty in this market (try to get a 'Chevy Truck guy', or a 'Ford Truck guy' to buy a 'Brand X' pickup), and later, the lack of an extended cab P/U. In the end regular cab trucks were viewed as cheepo, baseline, entry level, etc. Try selling a regular cab P/U with $5,000 worth of luxurious, price driving extra's tacked on. The third thing that seems to have turned Jeep off of P/U's was the poor sales of Scramblers. But you can't look at those numbers without looking what happened 10 years after they stopped making them, EVERYONE wanted them, and the price of even rotted out throwaway Scramblers went through the roof. My view is all of the above (brand loyalty, no extended cab, a history of poor sales) could've been turned around if they wanted to invest in the market. I see tons of Full Size Toyota Pickup's out there now, no one thought that they could ever crack that market (full size = where the $$$ & American brand loyalty is). Jeep, lets go, putting a V8 in the JK, and making a 1/2 cab version available would be a good start. Do it for crying out loud.

All 87's had non-C-clip axles, so if it's a Dana 35, or a Dana 44, it will have bolt in axles. C-clip 35's didn't start till 1990. The best way to tell if it's a D44 is to look at the diff covers, D44 has a more symmetrical cover, seems almost as tall as it is wide, D35 has a squished down appearance, almost lemon shaped. edit: if we're talking about the D150 axle, the 9.25" cover looks exactly like a stop sign, really easy to spot. For 87' MJ's you could have gotten the D44 rear by ordering the Towing package, the Off Road Package (NA for 2wd tho), Metric Ton package (LWB only), or even as a stand alone "HD rear Axle" package. There's a few threads where it's described what the MT leaf packs look like, but I never had a set, so I'm not the best one to describe them.

You *should* have 3.55's: but some of the 87-89 factory literature claimed 3.07's for 4.0L/auto MJ's. I figured the 3.07/auto data was in error, but never verified it either way (my 89' is 2wd/4.0L/auto, but I still haven't pulled the cover). Does your's have the D44 rear? (longbed-metric ton). Tho even the D44 Limited slip (Trac-Lok) isn't that great. If you have the D35, LSD, or not, it's not worth hanging on to for most of the MJ's out there. If you have a D150 to check out, maybe you could post the true wheel mounting surface to WMS distance, so we could see exactly how much wider the rear is. I don't know enough about the D's to know if the slant 6 versions got the big 'stop sign' axle, or not. Not the greatest pics, but here's some more MJ racing scans: