From owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net Wed Sep 18 13:09:46 2002 From: fsj-digest fsj-digest Wednesday, September 18 2002 Volume 01 : Number 1749 Forum for Discussion of Full Sized SJ Series Jeeps Brian Colucci Digest Coordinator Contents: fsj: 235s vs 31s vs 3.54s vs 4.10s fsj: 1990 GW stalling problem - looking for ideas fsj: 4.10s - more votes of confidence Re: fsj: 4.10's it is. Thanx! Re: fsj: 1990 GW stalling problem - looking for ideas fsj: New alternator not charging FSJ Digest Home Page: http://www.digest.net/jeeps/fsj/ Send submissions to fsj-digest-at-digest.net Send administrative requests to fsj-digest-request-at-digest.net To unsubscribe, include the word unsubscribe by itself in the body of the message, unless you are sending the request from a different address than the one that appears on the list. Include the word help in a message to fsj-digest-request to get a list of other majordomo commands. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 22:00:35 -0700 From: john Subject: fsj: 235s vs 31s vs 3.54s vs 4.10s question really is, 3.54's or 4.10s... leading polls indicate 4.10's. ;) - ----------- SuperDawg has 235's and 3.31's now. Replacing the stock 4.2L/T-5 with a '96 4.0L HO/Aisin Warner 4spd auto with 31's and 3.31's w/od at 60mph - RPM= 1,650 with 31's and 3.54's w/od at 60mph - RPM = 1,750 with 31's and 4.10's w/od at 60mph - RPM = 2,050 with 235's - 3.31's - 60mph - RPM = 1,750 with 235's - 3.54's - 60mph - RPM = 1,850 with 235's - 4.10's - 60mph - RPM = 2,150 (note, if he had a normal TF727 and no overdrive his current 235's and 3.31's would give 2,300RPM at 60mph) The goal is fuel economy, I'm trying to set this thing up as a daily driver. My drive is mixed, 2 miles of 55mph, then 2 miles 35mph, 3 miles of 40mph, 1 mile of 30mph, 2 miles 35mph, then 30 then 35... grand total about 14 miles... major changes in altitude... start out at 350FT above sea level, drop to sea level and then climb back up to 600 FT. Reverse to go home. I go through 10 stoplights and 2 stop signs... So, with that said should I go with 235's or 31s and then 3.54's or 4.10s. 4.10s are probably the best for that scenario, and with the 25% overdrive of the Aisin Warner tranny the 4.0L engine should be ok on the highway... Looking at the numbers I'm only looking at 100rpm difference in engine speed with the smaller tires... not a big delta... Here's the full charts: http://.wagoneers.com/SuperDawg/DawgYear2002/J10-axle-ratios-235s-tires.html http://wagoneers.com/SuperDawg/DawgYear2002/J10-axle-ratios-31in-tires.html thanx for the input, (in digest mode, ok to cc me) john meister - ------------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.WAGONEERS.com/ Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... jesus, don't leave life without him, please! - ------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 09:20:50 -0700 From: "Faith Jeff" Subject: fsj: 1990 GW stalling problem - looking for ideas hi folks my 1990 gw is tending to stall during braking to a full stop from speed....i been shifting into neutral to keep engine running, and that works 99% of the time. it does okay at very slow (parking) speeds. i changed the trans-filter & pan-gasket, and re-topped the fluid after assembly, and the problem persists... ideas? thanks, jeff so-cal 1990 gw 1963 willys wagoneer This electronic message transmission, including any attachments, contains information from Prescription Solutions which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by a "reply to sender only" message and destroy all electronic and hard copies of the communication, including attachments. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:42:45 -0700 From: john Subject: fsj: 4.10s - more votes of confidence Looks like 4.10s is the best way of going for SuperDawg! After looking at the difference between 235's and 31's, it's only 100 RPM difference... the real question is what is the ideal RPM for cruising? If I take SuperDawg to Portland, OR I'll be cruising at 70mph. Question is will 4.10's, 235's and a 25% overdrive offer me an acceptable RPM at 70 mph for decent fuel economy? At 60mph - 235's/4.10s nets me 2,150 RPM, (2,900 w/o the overdrive!) with 31's it drops to 2,050. The '99 WJ cruises at 75 MPH turning 2,500 RPM! 3.73 gears, not sure of tire size... So, maybe I should see if I can match the 4.0L to that range... hmmm... look at this: with 235's/od and 4.10s', it'll be turning 2,700. (200 rpm more then the WJ...) with 31's/od and 4.10's, it'll be 2,550. BINGO! Hey, I think we've got a winner... a little more Rippems out of the straight six won't hurt anything... and should help propel the 4,000 lbs or so (4,200 I think) around town a bit easier... Mileage in town will probably benefit from the 4.10s, and I guess that's where I should focus my economy efforts, for the long trips we'll probably take the wife's '99 WJ. So, 4.10's look like the way to go. Thanx all for your assistance... Looks like I need to get my '75 J10 rear axle down to Centralia. I'll be looking to buy a light weight trailer axle with electric brakes for the J10 box, won't put my Model 20 from my '83 J10 back under it. I'll give Curtis my 3.31 gear sets for "Rocky", he'd benefit from them over his existing 2.72s. And, we only need to setup the front D44 with the 4.10s from the '75 J10... Sure am glad I didn't sell off that front axle now. :) later, john meister At 08:15 AM 9/17/2002 +0000, 1FSJ-at-yahoogroups.com wrote: > From: Pat Hines >Subject: Re: 4.10's or 3.54's... getting closer... >John, > My '02 Blazer ZR2 has 31 inch tires and 3.73 ratio. It >desperately needs 4.10's, particularly since it has >overdrive in fourth gear, it would need them even in third >(direct drive). The 4.3L V6 is attempting to propel a 4300 >pound vehicle down the road, that takes torque. > On my '79 Cherokee, I installed the 4.10's while planning >to run 33 inch tires, I wish I'd gone with 4.56's instead >since that would allow me to run up to 34 inch tires with >some pulling power. That's with a 360 V8 that has some 350 >ftlbs. torque. > > Go with the 4.10's on your truck, you won't be sorry. > >Pat Hines > >john wrote: > > > > 4.10's seem to be the ratio of recommendation... I still need > > to compare the numbers between 3.54's and 4.10s though - ------------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.WAGONEERS.com/ Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... jesus, don't leave life without him, please! - ------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:55:01 -0700 From: john Subject: Re: fsj: 4.10's it is. Thanx! At 11:50 AM 9/17/2002 -0700, Jim B wrote: >I was just going to reply to your post about this. On your XJ you had 4.10 >with smaller tires and the same drivetrain set up with less power right? How right, the little wag was running 30x9.5s, 4.10s and the older renix 4.0l. (actually that combo netted 3% undergearing from the stock 215/3.55s it came with... made it faster off the line, but hurt the overall economy a bit) >was the fuel economy? Getting a heavier vehicle up to speed needs more low >end, and the HO motor's cam moved the power band up higher than the Renix >to get more HP and torque. sounds good, thanx for the confirmation... so, running 4.10s with my current (and very nice) 235/75 Michelin AT's sounds like a great plan, very, very cool. And if I'm finding I'm reving a bit too much, I can use my 31's... or move up to 33's, although bigger heavier tires won't necessarily help economy... except on long runs... getting the mass moving off the line will hurt a bit. thanx Jim, Pat and others for the feedback. of course, thanx to my favorite piece of software, Excel... it's the reason I moved to microsoft in '86 or '87... of course Star Office and KOffice offer suitable alternatives... ;) john meister - ------------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.WAGONEERS.com/ Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... jesus, don't leave life without him, please! - ------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:31:30 +0000 From: JeepNut Subject: Re: fsj: 1990 GW stalling problem - looking for ideas Jeff, check you throttle solenoid for proper ops. When you shut off the key, the solenoid drops the throttle to aid in shutdown and avoid run on. If it isn't working, then the exact scenario you describe is the result. Whenever you let the engine run down to idle, it'll die. JeepNut Faith Jeff wrote: > > hi folks > > my 1990 gw is tending to stall during braking to a full stop from speed....i > been shifting into neutral to keep engine running, and that works 99% of the > time. it does okay at very slow (parking) speeds. i changed the > trans-filter & pan-gasket, and > re-topped the fluid after assembly, and the problem persists... > > ideas? > > thanks, > jeff > so-cal > 1990 gw > 1963 willys wagoneer > > This electronic message transmission, including any attachments, contains information from Prescription Solutions which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. > > If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by a "reply to sender only" message and destroy all electronic and hard copies of the communication, including attachments. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 11:50:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Alexander Wall Subject: fsj: New alternator not charging I have my beast back on the road!! Not even drop of coolant leaking any more! I silicone-sealed the sh*t out of the water pump and its bolts. I have a new alternator in, but it's not charging. I tested the voltage to the plug in the side, and according to my Haynes manual, I should have battery voltage to pin 2, which I do, but I also have about 7.5 volts to pin 1, when the manual says it should be 2-4 volts only. It seems like this might be convincing the alternator not to excite the field, thus preventing charging. My question is: Should I just step the voltage down with a ballast resistor, or should I delve into the guts of my wiring harness to try and figure out WHY the voltage is too high through that resistor wire? TIA! Alex '84 Wagoneer "Lucky" Spokane, WA ===== Alexander Wall Spokane, WA ================================================================================= "Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you!" - E.L. Kersten, Ph.D. ================================================================================= Yahoo! News - Today's headlines http://news.yahoo.com ------------------------------ End of fsj-digest V1 #1749 **************************