DirtyComanche

Buy whichever one is the longest and on sale? I have a Hi-Lift and a Maasdam Jack-All. Both are quality units. The Maasdam does not have a removable handle, which is a bit of a minus, but I've honestly never been in a situation where it have been handy to remove the handle or anything like that. The Hi-Lift has more features in general, it came with a spring clip to hold the handle up and an attachment for the top for pulling. Neither are really needed, I made a wire clip for the Maasdam, and I always carried the correct shackles and chain to use it for pulling, without needing any attachment on it. I always bring a scrap of plywood to use as a base in soft mud, or you could buy the base Hi-Lift sells. There's a fab shop that's part of RuffStuff that sells a really nifty base now too, actually. Come up with a way to secure it so it doesn't walk away... Or hit you in the head if your truck stops suddenly/rolls/etc.

My XJ had one. The PO removed the bulbs from every single interior light on it for some reason. I haven't had time to dig into it, but I'm assuming one of the door switches is stuck/bad.

If the angles are right it won't vibrate. But unless it's a pavement princess I would be getting a SYE.

That one was pretty bad. I need to look at the other one I have in more depth. A tree fell on it. Unfortunately it might meet a fate like this one.

The 3 piece/slider windows I have all seen are glued in. But I'm sure there's more than one style. I absolutely hate everything to do with glass and would pay to have it done. Granted, I did manage to cut the windshield out of my parts Dodge Ram and install it in the other one without breaking it.

That's more Eagle's comment. :D But here's what I will tell you, all the early XJ/MJs (with 4.0L engines) used the highest pressure TC style steering pump that was available. They can also be turned up more safely... However, IF you install a reman pump you may get ANY TC pump back, as they are all 'the same' in the opinion of the people who overhaul them. Also, many of the remans do NOT bench test them for pressure output, or if they do they have a very wide acceptable range. The factory new pumps had the regulators adjusted to +/-25PSI of spec, IIRC. The remans are obviously nowhere near this level of quality. I believe the TJ pumps were also the best of the TC pumps. If you swapped a worn out, or bad reman, for a good factory pump I KNOW you would see a difference, as it could easily be as much as 30% more pressure from the good pump VS the marginal one. 4cyl TJ pumps also came with a remote reservoir, if somebody needs that to address packaging issues. It's somewhat less than ideal with a 3/8 supply line, but it work for factory type applications. The WJ pump with the factory hydraulic fan is even more hot-rodded than the other Jeep ones, they ported it for high flow and installed a different reservoir to reduce cavitation issues. Pressure remains the same though. Now, if you go and buy a reman version of these, you might just get a junk TC pump with the WJ fittings on it, which actually would be really far from ideal as it would probably cavitate in any application.

^^^ This is my issue with the spacer, 3 holes or 4? Three holes, and it's just a beefy spacer. Four holes and its a stronger steering box mount/spacer because it's bolted through the frame to whatever you have on the other side (like mine will be, I'm in this process right now with the 88 along with a winch bumper). My 4 hole spacer when mounted to the box, has no adjustment because of the three steering box holes in the frame, then causes the the fourth hole to not line up. Are you not using the fourth hole? My plan, bolt up the three, drill across from the outside, pick up the fourth. Kind of think not using the fourth hole gives away structural strength. Weld that plate on if you want it to be really making a difference. The 4th hole is too far away for it to matter anyways, given the direction of the forces that are being applied to it, if you're just to bolt it on. That said, as long as the other side has a plate on it, and the holes are to a reasonable tolerance (something the factory got wrong), you should be fine with it just bolted on there. I would slip (read that as file or die grind) the holes in the frame so that plate can be aligned correctly to use the 4th hole... Then make sure the plate on the outside is drilled absolutely correctly for where the holes need to be. Most guys were seeing loss of torque on the bolts before they really started tearing up their frame. The poor tolerances of the factory holes along with the aluminum spacer deteriorating were often to blame. Also, remember that just because a bolt feels tight, as in it can't easily be removed, does not mean it actually has the correct torque (tension) on it; instead it may simply be seized into the steering box or retained by the factory thread locker. The factory steering box bolts also featured high tolerance hardened washers for a reason, it was the band-aid for the poor tolerance on the holes, be sure you retain them. The other real big secret, which I don't know of the aftermarket actually addressing (I don't buy fabricated parts much, so I am not always up on what is available), is to tie the outer steering box brace into the bracket for the track bar. I don't have a picture of how it is done on my XJ, and I am packaging things differently than most people would, but the whole point is that as your steering is pushing the axle around, the same force is transmitted back through the track bar, so by tying the two of them together you are addressing the critical area. Most aftermarket track bar brackets are a garbage clone of the factory design, which was adequate for the intended usage and lifespan of the vehicle, however it is less than ideal when larger/heavier tires/wheels/axles are thrown at the vehicle. Mine is tied in from the 4 factory attachment points plus all of the steering box bolt holes and bumper/tow hook holes (and I welded the thing on). Basically, I don't want excessive movement in this area, as it is a high stress area, and movement will result in metal fatigue and lose of torque on fasteners.

Chrysler then went the other way with that. My JK has damn near zero feel to it. Drive it, get used to it, learn to love it. But yes, the early XJ/MJs have very light steering if everything is working correctly. That's a big if though.

The bearing supports for the sector shafts are a gimmick. Yes, they're popular, people say they work wonders, but hear me out. Once you're seeing the levels of force required for it to be doing anything, you will instead see a torsional failure of the sector shaft. The way the box is built from the factory it is very capable of taking the load applied to it, as well, that's what it was designed to do. You won't see a failure of the frame rail with it properly plated on each side; beyond that you need hydro assist or better.

I've seen XJ/MJ boxes blown apart and I don't see how they could be variable. I also have seen no reason to believe they are based on all the stupid things I have done trying to make steering work. I also don't feel they drive wrong. Anything you're noticing while driving them is the result of the pitman arm being a different length than the steering arms, but the effect is fairly minimal. The factory didn't always get it wrong.

Looks good. However, if you want it to be quite a bit stronger, I recommend you add pieces to it like this: Image Not Found I'd say the red ones for sure, the blue ones are a bit more optional. Unless it really is just for looks. Otherwise the pieces that are sticking out will get bent rather easily. As I said, it's more about design than materials.

Not butthurt, just have zero use for installing a downgrade. The front driveshaft is so nicely protected on a HP setup, and the angles are so much more happy. Going to a LP front axle throws the driveshaft right into the fodder zone, unless you have really low mounted control arms. Either way, the operating angle increases by a couple degrees and you get closer to maxing the double cardon out. All u-joints live longer if they are 'working' (misaligning) less. Economics will sway me though, but my wheeler has a HP D60 in it for a reason.

We put Amsoil synthetic in all the Honda/Subaru pumps, generators, etc at work because they start easier in the cold with it. I doubt you would go wrong using a good synthetic.

I think the Durango box is 3 turns, but the ratio is the same, it just has larger internal stops. Basically, you might not hit your axle stops anymore and instead bottom out the piston in the box. I did not consider it a viable candidate because of this.

It isn't worth rebuilding. Because it isn't worn out. I'm serious. The bearings in these tcases go an extremely long time. Unless you're getting play with the case halves bolted together and the yoke on the front output, those bearings are fine. Likewise, on the rear (with the slip yoke off), unless you're getting play (up/down/side/side) the bearings are fine.

See Hornbrod's picture... Anything other than the top example is not okay, even if the yokes are only misaligned by a few degrees (the 90* example in the lower part of the picture is the worst case scenario). Reason being is that the shaft speeds up and slows down as the u-joints misalign, but this affect is canceled by the u-joints being in phase (the output, or pinion in this case, will not see a rhythmic changing of velocity). The wikipedia entry explains what's going on better than I can, if you care to read it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_joint

Korea would be fine. QC should be well in line with any domestic facility.

The ECU is what does the magic with it. The HO ECU has no provisions for this. But somebody in this thread hates the Renix and thinks it's 'weird', his loss.

It's an accelerometer or velocimeter and it has been filtered for the specific frequency of detonation. Honestly, they're standard equipment on most FI setups. I have never been able to wrap my head around the HO not having one.

IMHO, you do not need a double sheer setup for a tire carrier spindle. The entire point of a spindle (with tapered roller bearings) is to be able to run with support only on one end. Look at a front (or rear) spindle off a full floating axle. There's potentially thousands of pounds of static load on them, and umpteen thousands of pounds of dynamic load on them. They work fine. I believe a lot of what people ran in the past was poorly designed, poorly machined, used poor quality components, and poorly assembled... And the results were predictably poor. Now, if you wanted to run the Ruffstuff one with a bracket on it to make it double sheer, it's probably pretty easy to mod it to do so. They've left a center point in the top end of the spindle from when they turned it on a lathe. I'd just throw it back in the lathe, then drill the center with a 9/16" bit, and tap it to 5/8NF. You're a little tight on the tolerances using a 9/16", but most people don't have a 37/64" bit lying around. Anyways, I'd assume you don't have a lathe, but it would be quite feasible to do this by hand or in a drill press. You only need to drill it 1" deep as long as you have a bottoming tap (or an old tap to cut the end off). Then you can just bolt your bracket to the top of it. Unfortunately that wouldn't be doing much for the included cap seal, but I think one could put a tie rod end boot on it instead, or mod the cap they gave you, with a washer added between the spindle and bracket to allow clearance for the boot or cap; minor creativity required. Safety the castle nut with a spring clip or screw instead of a cotter pin. Also, Ruffstuff would probably drill and tap it for you for an additional charge. Of course, me telling you this now doesn't help much. But for future reference.

They absolutely are. If you sign up for their newsletter they will give you a discount code on a regular basis. I've never had any real issues with their products. I think the worst I can say is they build their diff covers larger than they need to be (for fluid capacity), which doesn't help if you have clearance issues. I've probably bought $4000 worth of parts off them over the years, so I've handled a lot of their stuff. Also, they user a laser cutter and a C&C bender with P&O steel, so the surface finishes are always nice, the bends are the correct angle and location, and the holes are to a reasonable tolerance.

Regarding the alternator, personally I think you're better off relocating it to the top of the engine. I haven't done that yet, but it's on my list. If I'm to do it I will probably delete the mechanical fan and extra idler at the same time, so it will be involving and is not a huge priority.

Weird. The two I have are not built like that. Either way, if the u-joints aren't in phase then it will vibrate, and the shaft is effectively garbage.

I'd buy a whole floor panel, XJ ones are cheap, then cut out the piece you need. Where those holes are, that should be a large patch. You don't even want to leave deeply pitted metal, even if it isn't through. So as said, wire wheel back from there and see how far you have to go. Get a good quality weld through primer and use it religiously. Use good paint and seam sealer when you're done, then undercoat the bottom again. Do not half @$$ rust repairs, it's just a complete waste of time if you do.

I doubt it. Pull the shaft and lay it on a flat floor, or look down the length of it. Are the u-joints still in phase?