ComancheFan1991 Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Did they ever put the Peugeot BA 10/5 behind the diesel? It would seem fitting if they did, as it would be a French car transmission behind a French car engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minuit Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Nope. The stick-shift diesels got a modified AX5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 that's just too much french for any one vehicle. :D oh wait, any french is too much french... :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minuit Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 The blistering 132 ft-lb of torque the diesel produces IS more in line with the Puke-Box's strength, though. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogmorgo Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 It would be a bit odd to put a Peugeot trans behind a Renault engine, in my mind. A bit like putting a GM trans behind a Ford motor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minuit Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Stranger things have happened. Almost all of our AMC-designed trucks with either Renault-Bendix or Chrysler electrical systems, have Toyota transmissions. The 86s could get a Chevy engine with a Chrysler automatic. With that said we do tend to lump all the French "contributions" to our trucks into a single category of badness, at least I do. The Comanche is a hodgepodge of parts from pretty much everyone. They called it All Makes Corporation for a reason, after all. (or the alternative @$$holes Making Cars) :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 The 86s could get a Chevy engine with a Chrysler automatic. Technically, the 2.8L V6 wasn't a GM engine, because AMC actually paid money to GM and bought the rights to the POS. They weren't buying GM engines from GM. Talk about dumb decisions. The 2.8L didn't produce significantly more power or torque than the I4. Apparently, shortly before the Cherokee was introduced in 1984, the thinkers at AMC decided that they needed to offer a V6 engine as an option, and GM was only too happy to sell them the old 2.8L, since GM had given up on it at that time. For GM, it was a win-win -- they unloaded an albatross, and got paid for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComancheFan1991 Posted September 28, 2015 Author Share Posted September 28, 2015 The 86s could get a Chevy engine with a Chrysler automatic. Technically, the 2.8L V6 wasn't a GM engine, because AMC actually paid money to GM and bought the rights to the POS. They weren't buying GM engines from GM. Talk about dumb decisions. The 2.8L didn't produce significantly more power or torque than the I4. Apparently, shortly before the Cherokee was introduced in 1984, the thinkers at AMC decided that they needed to offer a V6 engine as an option, and GM was only too happy to sell them the old 2.8L, since GM had given up on it at that time. For GM, it was a win-win -- they unloaded an albatross, and got paid for it. So GM ended up putting AMC engines in the S10/S15 vehicles, as 2.8 was used up to 1986 in those as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOrnbrod Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Stranger things have happened. Almost all of our AMC-designed trucks with either Renault-Bendix or Chrysler electrical systems, have Toyota transmissions. The 86s could get a Chevy engine with a Chrysler automatic. With that said we do tend to lump all the French "contributions" to our trucks into a single category of badness, at least I do. The Comanche is a hodgepodge of parts from pretty much everyone. They called it All Makes Corporation for a reason, after all. (or the alternative @$$holes Making Cars) :yes: Just a technicality, but Jeep transmissions were made by Aisin-Warner. Toyota was just one of their many customers. As well as General Motors, Ford, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Porsche, Saab, Audi, VW, Volvo, Hyundai, MINI, Lexus. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minuit Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 I see I have plunged this conversation DEEP into the levels of technicality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOrnbrod Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 I see I have plunged this conversation DEEP into the levels of technicality. :rotfl2: :agree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-man930 Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Yea the 2.8 is the granddaddy of the entire 60degree V6 engine family put in all kinds of GM cars for three decades or so... its a GM engine, they didn't unload anything. The 86s could get a Chevy engine with a Chrysler automatic. Technically, the 2.8L V6 wasn't a GM engine, because AMC actually paid money to GM and bought the rights to the POS. They weren't buying GM engines from GM.Talk about dumb decisions. The 2.8L didn't produce significantly more power or torque than the I4. Apparently, shortly before the Cherokee was introduced in 1984, the thinkers at AMC decided that they needed to offer a V6 engine as an option, and GM was only too happy to sell them the old 2.8L, since GM had given up on it at that time. For GM, it was a win-win -- they unloaded an albatross, and got paid for it. So GM ended up putting AMC engines in the S10/S15 vehicles, as 2.8 was used up to 1986 in those as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-man930 Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 I see I have plunged this conversation DEEP into the levels of technicality. See if you ever ask a question like that again! :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComancheFan1991 Posted September 29, 2015 Author Share Posted September 29, 2015 I think they might have used some Ford parts in Jeeps as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComancheFan1991 Posted September 29, 2015 Author Share Posted September 29, 2015 The blistering 132 ft-lb of torque the diesel produces IS more in line with the Puke-Box's strength, though. :D So a pairing of the diesel engine and the Puke-Box, might have a shot of the transmission lasting, if the can be connected together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 far as I know, the bolt patterns are different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComancheFan1991 Posted October 2, 2015 Author Share Posted October 2, 2015 far as I know, the bolt patterns are different So the stock bellhousing wouldn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 nope. nor do I know of any that would help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now