Karlo

Well it turned out the deciding factor became the axles, because to change the entire brakes includes changing the brake backing plates and the axles have to be pulled out to do that. Takes a special axle puller hammer tool which I don't have and the Haynes book I have sort of suggested there are clips inside the pumpkin that have to be released too and I already had it sealed up with new synthetic gear oil in it. So I went with the older 1987 brakes already on the replacement 35 rear end which use a wider diameter drum that is however less in thickness but the drums do have vent fins on them whereas the '92s didn't. Testing them hard they seem to work just as well as the old ones so apparently there's not a lot of difference in their functionality. Sure would be nice to have discs on the rear though :wrench:

I'm surprised there's no mention on this thread of synthetic oil, maybe it's already covered elsewhere? Synthetics offer huge advantages in lubricity and wear reduction. First thing I do whenever I buy a vehicle I intend to keep is change the oil in the engine, tranny & rear end with synthetics and begin using synthetic grease as needed. Haven't had to rebuild an engine for wear since I started doing this years ago when synthetics first came out. Other than the added cost there's no downside I know of. Sorry if this isn't the right thread but I'd like to know what some of you think about synthetics.

My tire winch is broken ('92 2WD 6-cyl MJ) apparently missing its cable and whatever attached it to the wheel, and I don't have the handle either. Does anyone have these parts for sale or can you recommend who to order them from, cheap? Doesn't have to be stock replacement especially if there's something that works better.

I have the same problem too: one busted pane in my rear window, the fixed one behind the driver. Nobody seems to have come up with a good solution yet so I am posting so I can be notified if anyone ever does.

Hi folks I'm new here and amazed at some of the utter pricelessness of the advice offered. Damn if I don't have a leaking rear oil seal too and here I discover it could be a VALVE COVER problem? @64Cheyenne could you take a few pics of your engineering and post them for us?

Thanks for those who've replied (and hi MJRemi thx for letting me know this place existed!) but I still don't have an answer to my question: which are the better brakes? I'm inclined to think that 1992 engineering would have taken into account more information than 1987 engineering and therefore later brakes are going to be better, all else being equal, but there's really no reason that has to be the case. Probably more important is that if I keep the brakes that were original to the truck then in the future when I or someone else changes brake pads we're less likely to pick up the wrong set at NAPA. But most important would be the braking capacity before fading, I'd like to know next time I'm going down a mountain heavily loaded that I picked the better brakes. Okay maybe I'm obsessing, the front brakes take most of the load anyway yada yada but I still would like the better brakes on the rear since I have a choice. HELP! :doh:

I blew out my original rear end from my '92 6-cylinder 2WD Comanche with about 214,000 miles on it and am replacing it with the rear end from a 1987 4WD Comanche. Aside from the gear ratio being different the main difference seems to be in the brakes: the '92 has much wider brakes and drums than the 1987 but the drums to the 1987 are ribbed for better heat dissipation and even though they're narrower (viewed from the top) they have a wider diameter. Should I go to the trouble of moving over my old brakes to the replacement 1987 axle or are the 1987 brakes a better design?