Jeep Trailduster..... coming to a dealer near you.

[Pete M]

My Libby has a 2.8...

 

 

 

...CRD that is. :brows:

[jpnjim]

2wd and/or IFS far preceed Chrysler in Jeep's history. Remember the VJ? DJ? Delivary vans? Heck, the first Wagoneers and 1/2 ton J-trucks ahd an IFS Dana 27 front option in (IIRC) 1964.

 

The KJ is a better vehicle than haters will believe. Properly optioned, like with a 6spd, will get you a 5.0 first gear NSG370 and a 241 transfer in place of the 231. 29-spline 8.25 rear > than 95% of the rears in all of the XJ's sold. And body stiffness: no comparison. The XJ flops like a newspaper when stacked up to its replacement, the KJ. The 4.0 is a great motor with longevity for sure, but the 3.7 is a dandy. And no KJ came with a 2.5 or 2.8 .... Sure, there were some few 2.4's, but very very few.

 

The TJ Rubicon was the most capable off-the-shelf Jeep ever sold to the public. And it was a Chrysler.

 

Folks need to look up "CAFE." Without fuel-efficient models, the jeep line-up has to die. Thank whoever makes the CAFE caps for that.

 

For the youngin's: NOTHING was more hated than the '84 XJ. "Real jeepers" said they were k-cars with a front axle. And the drivetrain choices sucked badly. They were poor vehicles by most measures and pre-dated Chrysler. The first YJ's were hated so badly that people refused to wheel with YJ owners. But it sounds like jeep history ignorance and lack of acceptance didn't stop in '87... :ack:

 

 

EDIT: Anyone checked out the new Power Wagon proposal? Everything it has now on a SWB frame! Awesome. But yes, on a personal level I hate the Trail Duster as much as I hate the Dodge Calibers that they call Compass or Patriot.

 

 

Chrysler bought Jeep as much for their Jeep engineering team as they did for the brand name.

 

 

That's why they attached the truck division to the Jeep line, so the Jeep engineers could improve their failing Dodge Truck division.

 

So to call the TJ was a Chrysler product is a stretch,

they did own Jeep when it was built, an they were holding the purse strings,

but it was more a case of Chrysler being smart enough to let the Jeep engineers do their job, and footing the bill for it all.

 

Jeep engineers took the (designed under AMC/Jeep) XJ front suspension, modified the (designed under AMC/Jeep) ZJ rear suspension, and slid them both under a modified version of the (designed under AMC/Jeep) Wrangler platform.

 

Mechanical engineering aside, you can see what I'd guess is Chrysler's hand in the other aspects of the TJ (interior, body panels, improved soft & hard tops),

but the things that made the TJ great (platform, size, wheelbase, suspension) were all Jeep ideas well before Chrysler came sniffing around to buy Jeep off Renault.

 

I'd be more likely to agree if it was said the TJ was the third 'Renault Jeep', since they had hired the engineer who designed the 4 link coil suspension.

 

 

 

As far as the KJ, I don't think improved stiffness, and it using the 2nd strongest XJ rear end makes up for it's limitations.

FWIW, I'd agree to the KJ being almost an 100% 'Chrysler' Jeep, in design, and execution.

[terrawombat]

The difference between the 'Chrysler' Jeep in the 80's and 90's and Jeep in the 00's is that they were able to recognize engineering deficiencies and correct them. Even though the '84XJ (and I realize Jeep wasn't Chrysler owned then, but try to stay with me) was considered a disaster with a poor powertain, Jeep recognized this and evolved, stayed true to their name and gave it a bulletproof 4.0L and AW4. Granted, the manual transmission option (pukegoat) still sucked, but they recognized that tranny was better off as a paperweight and threw in the AX-15 (and even gave us an easier to work on external slave cylinder in the mid-90's). Even the YJ got some upgrades in the powertrain category going from the carb'ed 4.2L to the bulletproof fuel injected 4.0L. The death of the XJ is arguably the end of the true Jeep era. Although the TJ lingered on for several more years relatively unscaithed by the idiots at Chrysler, it's death finally gave their engineers full authority to start pumping out some true pieces of s**t. Instead of refining their product lines like they used to do with the XJ, TJ, and YJ, they just continually dump models, add new ones, and build existing ones on entirely new platforms. As an engineer, it's blatantly obvious to me what has happened in the company. The true 'Jeep' engineers are either dead or retired and the new, young engineers of the company are just doing what they're told by the higher-ups - creating crap to fill market niche's. Chrysler doesn't have the money nor balls to actually produce anything that will appease us Jeep folk so there is no bother holding your breath.

[kastein]

You guys know 2wd Jeeps date back to the 1950's, right?

 

just sayin' ;)

 

2wd jeeps yes, 2wd wrangler no. when this has come up before someone tried to convince me of a 2wd yj being built for govt somethin or other, to my limited knowledge, there has been no 2wd wrangler untill the jk.

 

its not a market to avoid, and i never said all jeeps should be rubicons, for repetition sake i won't repeat my previous statements about what they've done.

 

2WD YJ's do exist. Seen one with my own eyeballs.

 

Rob L.

 

so was it govt. or what, i've actually read where no 2wd yj left the factory from regular production. these must have been made for some sort of special deal. tell me tell me tell me :rant:

Not from 87-90 they didn't exist, far as I can tell (no such beast as a SUA leaf front beam in the YJ section of my catalog.) 91-93 and 94-95 likewise. 97 TJ catalog shows the same, I'm too lazy to dig up any other TJ catalogs.

 

Maybe they were special order like you said but I would think the parts to fix them would be in the parts catalogs.

 

For the youngin's: NOTHING was more hated than the '84 XJ. "Real jeepers" said they were k-cars with a front axle. And the drivetrain choices sucked badly. They were poor vehicles by most measures and pre-dated Chrysler. The first YJ's were hated so badly that people refused to wheel with YJ owners. But it sounds like jeep history ignorance and lack of acceptance didn't stop in '87... :ack:

Agreed. There is a reason (I forget who I'm quoting here, one of the CO chapter guys on NAXJA) the 84-86 vehicles were called "a mismatched sack of wet turds."

[knever3]

I am not a fan of the Liberty only because of poor crash tests although it is a nice looking Jeep.

 

For me when the New Commander was pictured I thought it would be a replacement of the Cherokee until I saw it's size, then I saw the price. There goes that!

 

To me a Wrangler is not practical for a daily driver in Michigan. They are the ultimate Jeep though with great break over angles.

 

My girlfriend and I own a '06 Grand Cherokee and we love them. It's still a Jeep and it rides and has the amenities of a Cadillac. If I wanted to go extreme off roading I wouldn't take it. Everyone needs a car to suit their needs and one isn't going to do all. When chrysler made the Grand and every Jeep they had a target audience in mind. The target audience has changed and their sales reflect that. I don't agree with the changes but you still have to make a buck and that's the bottom line.

 

If you still want a new Jeep like the old one, build one! It just takes money and time. I love my 2 door '00 Grand Prix GTP and although it sucks they don't make it anymore that's the way the cookie crumbles.

[jpdocdave]

You guys know 2wd Jeeps date back to the 1950's, right?

 

just sayin' ;)

 

2wd jeeps yes, 2wd wrangler no. when this has come up before someone tried to convince me of a 2wd yj being built for govt somethin or other, to my limited knowledge, there has been no 2wd wrangler untill the jk.

 

its not a market to avoid, and i never said all jeeps should be rubicons, for repetition sake i won't repeat my previous statements about what they've done.

 

2WD YJ's do exist. Seen one with my own eyeballs.

 

Rob L.

 

so was it govt. or what, i've actually read where no 2wd yj left the factory from regular production. these must have been made for some sort of special deal. tell me tell me tell me :rant:

Not from 87-90 they didn't exist, far as I can tell (no such beast as a SUA leaf front beam in the YJ section of my catalog.) 91-93 and 94-95 likewise. 97 TJ catalog shows the same, I'm too lazy to dig up any other TJ catalogs.

 

Maybe they were special order like you said but I would think the parts to fix them would be in the parts catalogs.

 

For the youngin's: NOTHING was more hated than the '84 XJ. "Real jeepers" said they were k-cars with a front axle. And the drivetrain choices sucked badly. They were poor vehicles by most measures and pre-dated Chrysler. The first YJ's were hated so badly that people refused to wheel with YJ owners. But it sounds like jeep history ignorance and lack of acceptance didn't stop in '87... :ack:

Agreed. There is a reason (I forget who I'm quoting here, one of the CO chapter guys on NAXJA) the 84-86 vehicles were called "a mismatched sack of wet turds."

 

 

ok, so you're saying you see no evidence of a 2 wd production wrangler correct? this is what i've also found in my searches untill the jk. but i wanna make sure i'm understanding what you're saying fully.

[Incommando]

I was not knocking the XJ at all: I was merely pointing out that it was not loved when new, and it only got a huge following after the first ones were paid off and became cheap enough for more people to make trail rigs out of them. The YJ was hated when new. Again, once they got beat on enough to make 'wheelers, their popularity with the jeep cult took off.

 

Jeep/ChryCo/Fiat/whoever does not care at all what we plan on doing with a 25 year old jeep as it makes them no money. They do not care if a jeep is easily modifiable 25 years from now. Selling a new vehicle to someone who may come back in 3-4 years and buy another new vehicle is all they care about. And unfortunately, many of us jeep nuts fall well out of the realm of people buying new jeeps every few years.

 

When you figure how many D44 XJ's were actually made, you would have to admit that they are a statistical non-entity.

[jpnjim]

 

When you figure how many D44 XJ's were actually made, you would have to admit that they are a statistical non-entity.

 

 

 

Only because Chrysler interceded & killed the XJ D44 shortly after AMC introduced it.

 

When the 4.0L was released, (real) D44 rears were a cornerstone of the drivetrain.

 

You could order a 1987 XJ with the Offroad Package, HD tow package, or even just a stand alone HD rear axle option, and get the D44 rear.

They also upgraded the D35 axle shafts in 87' for anyone not ordering the HD option.

 

By 1988 the D44 was off the XJ order sheets, and out of the brochures & data books.

Some claim to have gotten XJ 44's in 88 & 89, but officially it was dead by then.

 

By 1990 even the D35 was downgraded to 9" minivan brakes & C-clip axles.

 

 

So you can praise Chrysler for putting the 2nd best XJ axle in the Liberty,

but I would take all that credit away, and more for killing the best XJ axle ever, just to satisfy their notorious bean counters. (even worse than AMC's)

[Incommando]

I didn't see a relative response: We can praise D44's all day ( I currently have 5 under 3 vehicles and in the past have swapped them into vehicles) but they are so rare in XJ's as to not be worth mentioning, statistically. It doesn't matter why they are rare, just that they are rare. Could you track down the # of factory D44 XJ's versus the entire XJ production run so that we could see the percentages that we are talking about? My guess (and it is only a guess) would be 1 or 2 percent.

 

Does anyone know if the '86 MJ's had Cj-style Model 20 rears, or FSJ-style Model 23 rears?

[Automan2164]

I didn't see a relative response: We can praise D44's all day ( I currently have 5 under 3 vehicles and in the past have swapped them into vehicles) but they are so rare in XJ's as to not be worth mentioning, statistically. It doesn't matter why they are rare, just that they are rare. Could you track down the # of factory D44 XJ's versus the entire XJ production run so that we could see the percentages that we are talking about? My guess (and it is only a guess) would be 1 or 2 percent.

 

Does anyone know if the '86 MJ's had Cj-style Model 20 rears, or FSJ-style Model 23 rears?

 

They had their own style of 20, with one piece shafts.

 

Rob L.

[Incommando]

The FSJ's had model 23's, and the main difference was the one-piece shafts. Everyone called them M20's because of the more well known CJ version, but they have their own designation as M23. It sounds like MJ's had M23's, as well. Good to know. They are an under rated axle that eliminated the M20's biggest weakness.

[jpnjim]

I didn't see a relative response: We can praise D44's all day ( I currently have 5 under 3 vehicles and in the past have swapped them into vehicles) but they are so rare in XJ's as to not be worth mentioning, statistically. It doesn't matter why they are rare, just that they are rare.

 

I think it matters why they are rare,

 

They are rare because Chrysler was foolish enough to think small lug patturn Jeeps didn't need anything stronger than a D35. (aside from MJ's)

They showed that when they killed the XJ 44.

 

They were even more foolish in waiting 10 years to decide some kind of an upgrade axle was needed.

(in the form of thin tube 44's in TJ's, aluminum 44's in 96+ V8ZJ's, and 29 spline 8.25's in XJ's).

 

Sorry, but I can't praise a company for taking away a very good axle, only to replace it with a handful of axles 'nearly' as good 10 years too late.

 

 

 

 

That's the relative post,

it's not praise worthy that Chrysler came to their senses 10 YEARS after AMC did that the Jeep line needed some kind of a stronger axle option over the D35.

 

 

 

 

I think the 29 spline 8.25 is a decent axle, but I'm not going to get crazy praising it.

 

That hang down lip in the center of the diff grabs EVERYTHING,

and when you hit a stump you STOP, instead of glide/grind over it like a 44, or 60 will.

 

The axle shafts are actually smaller than other 29 spline shafts (like the AMC-20).

 

Tiny brakes, thin tubes & C-clips. (it did keep the original Mopar housing pattern, so you can swap bigger Mopar brakes on if you want.)

 

Lockers & LSD selection is limited, more $$, and doesn't even scratch the surface of what's available for the 44.

Before the 29sp Aussie came out the cheapest lunchbox option for 29sp 8.25's was a $400 "No-Slip".

Even the 29sp Aussie is more expensive than most of the rest of the line (like their 30/35 & 44).

 

Gear ratios are limited and, (like all Chrysler axles) much more $$ than similar Dana axles.