Another Death Wobble Question

[brigarpeon]

I did a search on 2WD AND Death (11), and Death and Wobble (89) but couldn't find my answer. Since I'm in process w/ an '87 2WD Comanche w/ 2.5, 5 speed and a 4:10.

 

The question is; Do 2wd Comanche/Cherokee's do the Death Wobble boogie? Everywhere I looked seemed to be 4WD's doing it. :hmm:

[Eagle]

Seems to be mostly 4WDs that do it, but that's because it's mostly 4WD trucks that get tall lifts and big tires. The 2WD has a solid front axle, so it's potentially susceptible.

[brigarpeon]

Potentially susceptible is kinda what I thought too looking at the 3rd page of JEEPCO's project. He has a nice shot of a 2wd front axle and everything looks the same with the exception of the axle tube.

http://comancheclub.com/forums/viewtopi ... 7&start=30

 

But I guess that's why a 4WD conversion is so EZ. To tell the truth I know ABSOLUTE ZERO about the front end workings of a 2WD JEEP but I'm learning things pretty quick. My original plan was to do a 4x4 conversion but with fuel prices I wanted to check what kind of difference in MPG I could get in a 2WD. I Still have that TJ 44 w/ 4:10's for the front if I don't do that well w/ 2wd. Looking for 3-5 more MPG.

[Pete M]

I don't recommend focusing too much on mpgs with an old Jeep. I fear you'll be setting yourself up for disappointment. :(

[brigarpeon]

To tell the truth, the "Wing and a Prayer" Comanche really suprized me when it read 26 mpg everytime I checked it. It's a 4x4, 2.5L, 5 speed, 3:31's on 215/75/15, all factory. It even read out 28 once when I kept it in fifth as much as I could. I figured w/ 4:10 in the other truck and 2WD I would get around the same but probably less. But I hear ya. I think I'm starting to get a little ancy to start driving the new truck so I don't want to follow through with the plans

[mjeff87]

brigarpeon, the 2WD beam axle is exactly the same as the 4WD version, less the gears and axleshafts, and the outer C's have spindles bolted to them instead of unit bearings. Brake rotors on the 2WD incorporate the inner/outer wheel bearings. All of the bolt points (control arms, trackbar, sway bar links, shocks, coil buckets, drag link/tie rod) are the same.

 

It's a 100% "take the 2WD axle out and bolt the 4WD one in" deal for a 4WD conversion.

 

Jeff

[brigarpeon]

THANK YOU mjeff87,

That's some of the info I'm trying to gleen from the cube. Bummer is, I was hoping to be able to use my Brand New brake Assemblies from the front of the "Wing and a Prayer" Comanche. Darn it!

[Eagle]

Front brakes for the Comanche are very year-specific. Be sure to keep EVERYTHING -- hubs, rotors, knuckles, and calipers -- from the same block of years or you're setting yourself up for huge problems. I've posted the breakdown by years a few times, including once within about the past ten days or so.

[brigarpeon]

I'm totally ignorant of this stuff I'll search for the Front Brake "Break down". The ones I have are an 86 4x4 and an 87 2x4 both have 2.5L and 5 spd.

 

EDIT: Found it

 

Quote:

Steering knuckles: There are two designs of steering knuckle, and within each design the left and right sides are mirror image and carry different part numbers. The early knuckles were used from 1984 through 1989. The late knuckles were used from 1990 through 2001.

 

Hub/Bearing: Three different hub/bearing assemblies were used. The hub/bearing assembly is the same for both sides of the vehicle. The first type was used from 1984 through 1989, and must be mated to the early steering knuckle from the same range of years. The early hub/rotors used tapered roller bearings, which are available as individual replacement parts, and in theory can be rebuilt. In practice, removing the old bearings and installing new ones requires a large arbor press and bearing splitter, equipment not available to the average owner. In practice, even dealerships simply replace the entire assembly, because the labor cost to rebuild would exceed the cost of a replacement assembly.

 

The second type of hub/bearing assembly was used from 1990 through mid-1999. This hub/bearing assembly mates up with the newer style steering knuckle and is used with composite rotors. Certain years of XJ with composite rotors were subject to a safety recall if they were located in northern “rust belt” states, because of problems with the rotors (see below). When replacing hub/bearings in vehicles within this range of years, unless the vehicle recall history is known it is wise to call a dealer or DaimlerChrysler customer service to determine whether or not the vehicle has undergone the brake rotor recall. If so, confirm which hub/bearing assemblies should be used as service replacements..

 

The third type of hub/bearing assembly was used from mid-1999 through 2001. This hub/bearing is also used with the new style steering knuckles, and is mated with the newer style cast rotors.

 

Rotors: Three types of rotors were used. Rotors are the same for left and right sides. The first style of rotor was used from 1984 through 1989. The second style of rotor was used from 1990 through mid-1999. This second style rotor was a “composite” design—the braking surface disc was separate from the center “hat” section, which was stamped from comparatively thin sheet steel. After several years of service, it was found that in states and localities where salt is used on the roads in winter, corrosion of the “hat” section could result in the disc portion separating from the assembly, causing a loss of brakes. A factory recall was issued to correct this problem. The recall affects only vehicles within a range of years, and only in certain states. Anyone owning a Cherokee or Comanche in the range from 1990 through 1999 is advised to call a dealer or DaimlerChrysler customer service with the VIN number to determine if the vehicle is subject to this recall.

 

Mid-year in the 1999 model year the front brakes were changed to an all cast rotor design. Although the original, early style rotors were also all cast, the new rotors are different from the early ones and carry a different part number. The new cast rotors were used from mid-1999 through 2001. Because 1999 was a transition year, owners of 1999 Cherokees will need the VIN number to determine the correct parts to order when servicing the front brakes or hub/bearing assemblies.

 

Calipers: Two styles of caliper were used. The calipers are mirror image for the left and right sides and carry different part numbers within each group of years. The early style caliper was used from 1984 through 1989. The later style caliper was used from 1990 through 2001 and is used with both the composite rotors and the newer cast rotors.

 

As previously noted, a complete front axle assembly from any year Cherokee or Comanche can be installed in a Cherokee or Comanche of any other year. It is only when attempting to swap components among different years that the above parts differences become critical.

Thanks for pointing.

[Wildman]

My original plan was to do a 4x4 conversion but with fuel prices I wanted to check what kind of difference in MPG I could get in a 2WD.

 

My first MJ 6 years ago was a 2.5, BA10, 2wd, I pulled about 20 mpg with it, and a dog going up a hill :roll:

 

The past 2 years I've been running a 4.0, BA10, 4wd and pulling 20 mpg on it, and it climes a hill like nothing. :D

 

Of course, this is all street/highway driving. The mpg is good for what I drive, and what I can do with the truck, sure beats my E350 cube van that gets 9 mpg on it, but that's a work truck, and I make $$$ with it, and the mpg's don't bother me for that reason.

 

You want to get 40 mpg's, get a little car for 2 people and one bag of groceries, and your set ;)

[WyoCherokee]

To tell the truth, the "Wing and a Prayer" Comanche really suprized me when it read 26 mpg everytime I checked it. It's a 4x4, 2.5L, 5 speed, 3:31's on 215/75/15, all factory. It even read out 28 once when I kept it in fifth as much as I could. I figured w/ 4:10 in the other truck and 2WD I would get around the same but probably less. But I hear ya. I think I'm starting to get a little ancy to start driving the new truck so I don't want to follow through with the plans

 

ive gotten 28 from winnemucca to reno, nevada on my 2wd 2.5 4speed, and average around 25 all with 255,000 miles on it. I can see 26 on a 4x4, since you wouldnt be adding all that much weight because the 2wd also has a solid front axle all you would be adding is the t-case, driveshaft, front gears, hubs and front shafts

[brigarpeon]

Ya, I forgot to mention that that truck has a new(JY) motor and tranny that only has 60,000 so it's still pretty tight and healthy. When I did run in 5th as much as I could, try'n to see what I could get, I was dogg'n it up hills everytime and on the flat couldn't have past anything. Unless it was going the other direction. The more we talk the more I'm coming to realize and hope it will work out about the same 25-26 MPG. The 2WD has 4:10's so 5 th might be more usable and I will see a lower range power pick up. Starting to sound like a trade off.