1986 turbo diesel

[sunbelt]

does anyone know about them

[howeitsdone]

I would post in this section as this is just for VIN registry

https://comancheclub.com/forum/3-mj-tech-modification-and-repairs/

[Pete M]

they are pretty rare.   what specifically did you want to know?

[eaglescout526]

I can still get a valve cover for them from Chrysler. 

[cruiser54]

The engine is an underpowered piece of crap. 

[Jesse J]

4 hours ago, cruiser54 said:

The engine is an underpowered piece of crap. 

but they are cool

[cruiser54]

You are aware that I was Service Manager at a Jeep dealer when those boat anchors were introduced?

[Pete M]

after 3 decades, they have become cool.   mostly due to rarity and that diesel clatter, but cool none the less.   

 

I just wouldn't want one as a DD, or wheeler, or hauler, or pretty much anything but a car-show truck.   

[Jesse J]

On 10/22/2021 at 2:04 PM, Pete M said:

after 3 decades, they have become cool.   mostly due to rarity and that diesel clatter, but cool none the less.   

 

I just wouldn't want one as a DD, or wheeler, or hauler, or pretty much anything but a car-show truck.   

fair enough fair enough 

[Minuit]

My almost totally uninformed opinion as someone who has never owned, driven or even seen one in person is that they are at this point impractical due to a lack of power and especially parts. One would be a beyond horrible choice as a daily driver in 2021. However, they are very uncommon and weird. Just by virtue of being a member of this board, it should be evident that I like uncommon and weird. But I especially like the really uncommon and weird stuff. Besides maybe the System Sentry or other ultra-rare options like the '87 only black leather seats, I think the diesel engine is peak "uncommon and weird" for the XJ and MJ platform.

 

If the right diesel XJ or MJ showed up for cheap my red truck would be sent down the road packin' though. I'd be replacing a useless 4.0 vehicle with a useless 2.1 vehicle.

[Jesse J]

isnt the diesel just a 2.5 with a changed stroke and bore? and isnt the 2.5 just a 4.0 with 2 cylinders chopped off? by that logic you could build a diesel 4.0

[The86manche]

1 minute ago, Jesse J said:

isnt the diesel just a 2.5 with a changed stroke and bore? and isnt the 2.5 just a 4.0 with 2 cylinders chopped off? by that logic you could build a diesel 4.0

No the 2.1 and 2.5 were different animals completely.

You are right about the 2.5 and 4.0 though. 

[Jesse J]

9 minutes ago, The86manche said:

No the 2.1 and 2.5 were different animals completely.

You are right about the 2.5 and 4.0 though. 

oh ok cool. still would be cool to build a diesel 4 liter. I guess it would just be easier to 4bt swap

[eaglescout526]

34 minutes ago, Jesse J said:

isnt the diesel just a 2.5 with a changed stroke and bore? and isnt the 2.5 just a 4.0 with 2 cylinders chopped off? by that logic you could build a diesel 4.0

You’re thinking of the 2.5L diesel the XJs over in reichlandia got. That’s a completely different 2.5L. 

[Jesse J]

1 hour ago, eaglescout526 said:

You’re thinking of the 2.5L diesel the XJs over in reichlandia got. That’s a completely different 2.5L. 

OHHHH yes I was reading about those way back then and must of gotten it confused 

[omega_rugal]

if you come across one, get it, it´ll be a nice piece of museum

[gogmorgo]

Nah, the later VM Motori 2.5 diesels sold in Europe were also an entirely different beast from the AMC 2.5. It takes a little more than just a bore and stroke change to make a gas engine run on diesel.

 

I have a hard time imagining the 2.1 being truly useless. Slow, sure, but as best I can tell torque would be roughly comparable with the AMC 2.5. 86hp may not seem like a lot, but remember it’s a low-revving diesel engine, gas engines don’t make a ton of hp either of you don’t rev them last 2500rpm.