Swap question

[Kyleinreallife]

I have an 87 xj Wagoneer. What are my (best) swap options. I’d like to keep everything underneath: np242, d30 hp ncad, d44, aw4. It’s a limited, but I could take or leave the interior, wouldn’t mind an update. I love the renix torque but would like to be able to go over 65 on the highway without burning half a tank on the way to work (exaggeration). Averaging about 200miles a tank, I believe it’s 15 gallons. On 33s with stock gearing, I think.
 
I'm thinking buy a complete donor vehicle but don’t know what years to look at for engine/interior compatibility.
 
Here she is trying to fakie crooked grind off a cliff. Skaters know what I mean lol

 
 
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kyleinreallife]

*bump

[DirtyComanche]

So you want a 97+ HO so you can steal the interior and get a few more ponies out of it?

 

Because the interior really didn't change until then, it's all just minor differences or colours.

 

Just don't get a donor motor with a 0331 head that doesn't have 'TUPY' on it.

[Kyleinreallife]

So you want a 97+ HO so you can steal the interior and get a few more ponies out of it?
 
Because the interior really didn't change until then, it's all just minor differences or colours.
 
Just don't get a donor motor with a 0331 head that doesn't have 'TUPY' on it.

Yes? Lol I guess I’m wondering exactly what years to look for..what does 97+ mean? 1997 until?

Correcto mundo on the pony bonus..will the HO bolt right in?

What’s an 0331 head and how do I tell the difference? What is TUPY?

[omega_rugal]

if you put an HO better get the engine+trans combo, your 87 AW4 uses a separate TCU and the HO combines the ECU and TCU in one unit, also there`s the spline count issue

 

long story short, early 0331 heads were faulty, they crack down the middle. latter a brazilian company called TUPY made 0331 heads that were good and have the "TUPY" logo stampep, you want those

 

http://www.tupy.com.br/ingles/produtos/

 

info here...

[DirtyComanche]

3 hours ago, Kyleinreallife said:

Yes? Lol I guess I’m wondering exactly what years to look for..what does 97+ mean? 1997 until?

Correcto mundo on the pony bonus..will the HO bolt right in?

What’s an 0331 head and how do I tell the difference? What is TUPY?

 

97+ XJ, the redesigned body style.  So 97 until 2001 or whenever they happened to stop making them.

 

If you want to use that HO engine, you're probably best to swap it and the transmission and all the wiring and controls in, which means you're going to want the tcase too since your current one is 21 spline input, so you'd need to find one with the 4.0/AW4/NP242, which isn't rare so it should be doable.  This is helpful if you want the newer "nicer" interior, as it means you can do the swap as a full feature affair and everything will work.

 

98ish? (somebody correct me if I'm wrong) they went to coil pack ignition, which is a worthwhile thing to have, but they changed to the 0331 head as part of this.  The early 0331 heads were bad, and they've all either cracked or will crack.  The factory fix was a later casting which was still an 0331 but had "TUPY" cast into it as well, who knows what that means but they did fix the cracking problem.

 

(and Omega replied just as I was going to hit reply)

[HOrnbrod]

2 hours ago, omega_rugal said:

your 87 AW4 uses a separate TCU and the HO combines the ECU and TCU in one unit,

 

Wrong. The TCUs were separate units from the ECU throughout the XJ years.

 

98-01 XJ TCU

[omega_rugal]

8 minutes ago, HOrnbrod said:

 

Wrong. The TCUs were separate units from the ECU throughout the XJ years.

 

98-01 XJ TCU

 

all years? great, and my bad...

[schardein]

Your XJ Wagoneer would have had the "top of the line" interior trim.  Early XJs had much nicer interiors than later XJs (93-96).  It seems to me that Jeep tried to save money in those years by making the interiors very plain.  The changes are subtle.  For example, early years the higher trim levels had chrome trim for the hockey stick style inside door handles.  This was non existent in later years.

 

If by interior upgrade you mean more modern looking, than 97-2001 is an option.  My opinion, if that's what you are looking for, then buy one.  I'm not a big fan of the 97-01 interior swap, but to each his own.

 

You could swap an HO motor (and electronics) in to gain some HP.  1991 and up were HO.  96 and up were OBDII.  My opinion, swapping to HO is a lot of work for not a lot of HP.  I think you would be disappointed after spending the time and money.  A better option might be going to a stroker motor at the same time as going HO.  Swapping to HO will gain you some reliability (my opinion) and better availability of replacement parts.

 

Your perceived lack of performance might be your gearing.  You say it's stock, but not what it is.  If you don't know, you need to find out.  It's likely 3.55 which is the most common, and that's not ideal with 33s.  Money spent on proper gearing will make it feel like it has more power and probably improve mileage.  Going down to 31"s would have a similar effect.  It's a question of your priorities.  Is larger tires and off road performance important, or is better on road handling and mileage important?  Way back in the day  I had a Toyota with 35" (bias ply) tires on it.  I replaced them with 33" radials and it was like driving a completely different truck.  Power, mileage, braking, and handling improved.

[cruiser54]

The HO isn't gonna help. 

 

What gears are you running? What kind of shape is your Renix engine in? 

[omega_rugal]

it`s an XJ so instead of regearing you COULD swap in a 3.07 axle (trade torque -> max speed) is a bolt on swap which is a pro but manual XJs are not that easy to find, and again you will be downgrading from D44 to D35 not a good option...

 

are you sure that XJ is 100% stock? if so it has the Tow package which means the D44 is like 3.73 or 4.10 which would explain the $#!&ty mileage and the renix sweating to go above 65

 

but you want better MPGs and go fast? the HO can go fast but it doesn`t do it for free

 

if you could check your current gearing and post it

[schardein]

8 minutes ago, omega_rugal said:

it`s an XJ so instead of regearing you COULD swap in a 3.07 axle (trade torque -> max speed) is a bolt on swap which is a pro but manual XJs are not that easy to find, and again you will be downgrading from D44 to D35 not a good option...

Are you tracking that he is running 33" tires?  3.07 gears would be a bad choice, and 4.10s would be close to ideal, for a daily driver/sometimes off roader.

[omega_rugal]

yes, i though ditching the 33s was already established

 

he wants to be able to go above 65 and get reasonable MPGs ... with fat-@$$ 33s i doubt it...

[Pete M]

gearing, gearing, gearing, and a general tune up.  oh, and make sure  the trans is not slipping.  

[cruiser54]

15 hours ago, Pete M said:

gearing, gearing, gearing, and a general tune up.  oh, and make sure  the trans is not slipping.  

Yep^^^^. Nothing else other than a ton of horsepower is gonna help you. 

The measly 6 or 8 horsepower difference in an HO versus Renix is like peeing in the ocean and expecting the level to rise. 

[HOrnbrod]

On 3/31/2018 at 7:34 AM, schardein said:

Your perceived lack of performance might be your gearing.  You say it's stock, but not what it is.  If you don't know, you need to find out.  It's likely 3.55 which is the most common, and that's not ideal with 33s.  Money spent on proper gearing will make it feel like it has more power and probably improve mileage.  Going down to 31"s would have a similar effect.

 

This. All the blabbering that's been posted means nothing until you determine what gearing you have. 33" tires with 3.55 or numerically lower gears is very short gearing and kills top speed and mileage. Pull the diff cover and see what you have.

[Pete M]

if you haven't popped the cover in a long while, that would be my choice.  refrshing the gear oil and checking for anomolies is a good thing.

 

if you have checked it not too long ago,  then you can do the quick and dirty ratio check by chocking the front wheels, jacking up one rear tire, put the trans and t-case in neutral, then rotate the tire around exactly twice while counting the times the driveshaft spins.  if the driveshaft spins about 3 and a half times, that's a 3.55 ratio.  3 times is 3.07.  a tick over 4 is 4.10s.  etc.

[Kyleinreallife]

Your XJ Wagoneer would have had the "top of the line" interior trim.  Early XJs had much nicer interiors than later XJs (93-96).  It seems to me that Jeep tried to save money in those years by making the interiors very plain.  The changes are subtle.  For example, early years the higher trim levels had chrome trim for the hockey stick style inside door handles.  This was non existent in later years.
 
If by interior upgrade you mean more modern looking, than 97-2001 is an option.  My opinion, if that's what you are looking for, then buy one.  I'm not a big fan of the 97-01 interior swap, but to each his own.
 
You could swap an HO motor (and electronics) in to gain some HP.  1991 and up were HO.  96 and up were OBDII.  My opinion, swapping to HO is a lot of work for not a lot of HP.  I think you would be disappointed after spending the time and money.  A better option might be going to a stroker motor at the same time as going HO.  Swapping to HO will gain you some reliability (my opinion) and better availability of replacement parts.
 
Your perceived lack of performance might be your gearing.  You say it's stock, but not what it is.  If you don't know, you need to find out.  It's likely 3.55 which is the most common, and that's not ideal with 33s.  Money spent on proper gearing will make it feel like it has more power and probably improve mileage.  Going down to 31"s would have a similar effect.  It's a question of your priorities.  Is larger tires and off road performance important, or is better on road handling and mileage important?  Way back in the day  I had a Toyota with 35" (bias ply) tires on it.  I replaced them with 33" radials and it was like driving a completely different truck.  Power, mileage, braking, and handling improved.

Some PO had pulled all the plastic out at one point and lost most of th stock hardware, lots of sheet metal screws and supplementary holes into nothing...all previous work...looks like it was done by a tweaker. Just looking to replace with interior that’s not as severely damaged. Also, would like to remove power seats windows and locks

[Kyleinreallife]

The HO isn't gonna help. 
 
What gears are you running? What kind of shape is your Renix engine in? 

3.54 is stamped on the tag on the diff. Not sure if it’s been changed. Will check this week, planning on changing diff oil and will know for sure.

Annnnd not bad shape? 215k miles. Electrical needs cleaning up. I’ve replaced map, o2, tps, iac, oil pressure, water pump, belt, alternator, cap/dist, plugs/wires, vac lines, egr valve and solenoid, fuel&oil filters. Cleaned the throttle body, refreshed grounds, went through most of your tips.

Someone put the ford orange top injectors on and it runs a bit rich. Also, there was a gm map sensor and egr from a Le Mans before I replaced everything. Also, running open cat, only has pre cat o2 sensor.


Thanks for all the great info and advice...what do y’all suggest?

[Kyleinreallife]

Yep^^^^. Nothing else other than a ton of horsepower is gonna help you. 
The measly 6 or 8 horsepower difference in an HO versus Renix is like peeing in the ocean and expecting the level to rise. 

Trans doesn’t seem to be slipping, kinda clunks into gear from neutral, but nothing unusual. Actually at what rpm, should it be shifting into overdrive?

[Pete M]

I just thought of a straight forward test: swap on some normal size tires for a day.  that would show if the gears ratio is the problem.   

[Eagle]

FWIW, the Renix 4.0L engine generally produces better gas mileage than the HO. I own an '87 MJ 4.0L, an '88 XJ 4.0L and an '88 MJ 4.0L, a 2000 XJ 4.0L 5-speed and a 2000 XJ 4.0L auto. The '88s get better mileage. The 2000 XJ auto gets around 16 MPG in mixed driving. The '88 MJ was getting around 18 to 19 when I used it regularly, the '88 XJ gets 18 to 20 MPG and has delivered a best-ever of 28 MPG on a weekend trip from Connecticut to Vermont, loaded down with a lady friend, two kids, and gear for a long weekend.

 

Unless your injectors are massively oversized, it shouldn't be running rich. The O2 sensor controls the duty cycle of the injectors to keep the mixture in the optimum range. When did you last replace the O2 sensor? When it fails, the ECU goes into open loop mode and defaults to a rich mixture because it thinks the engine is still warming up. This could also happen if the ECU temp sensor (the one on the side of the block, not the one at the rear of the head) is bad.

[Eagle]

On 3/30/2018 at 6:31 PM, DirtyComanche said:

 

98ish? (somebody correct me if I'm wrong) they went to coil pack ignition, which is a worthwhile thing to have, but they changed to the 0331 head as part of this.

 

 

2000. I think the 1999 Grands got the coil-on-rail ignition, but the XJ didn't get it until 2000.

[schardein]

2 hours ago, Kyleinreallife said:

 

Some PO had pulled all the plastic out at one point and lost most of th stock hardware, lots of sheet metal screws and supplementary holes into nothing...all previous work...looks like it was done by a tweaker. Just looking to replace with interior that’s not as severely damaged. Also, would like to remove power seats windows and locks

 

OK.  That sucks.  But if you shop around you can probably replace all those pieces.  Either from people who pulled all of it to make a trail rig, or from a junkyard donor.  Early model XJs still turn up in the junkyard, but they are getting harder to find.

[Kyleinreallife]

FWIW, the Renix 4.0L engine generally produces better gas mileage than the HO. I own an '87 MJ 4.0L, an '88 XJ 4.0L and an '88 MJ 4.0L, a 2000 XJ 4.0L 5-speed and a 2000 XJ 4.0L auto. The '88s get better mileage. The 2000 XJ auto gets around 16 MPG in mixed driving. The '88 MJ was getting around 18 to 19 when I used it regularly, the '88 XJ gets 18 to 20 MPG and has delivered a best-ever of 28 MPG on a weekend trip from Connecticut to Vermont, loaded down with a lady friend, two kids, and gear for a long weekend.
 
Unless your injectors are massively oversized, it shouldn't be running rich. The O2 sensor controls the duty cycle of the injectors to keep the mixture in the optimum range. When did you last replace the O2 sensor? When it fails, the ECU goes into open loop mode and defaults to a rich mixture because it thinks the engine is still warming up. This could also happen if the ECU temp sensor (the one on the side of the block, not the one at the rear of the head) is bad.

Good call, will look up how to test that sensor.