From owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net Sun Sep 11 15:02:49 2005 From: fsj-digest fsj-digest Sunday, September 11 2005 Volume 01 : Number 2505 Forum for Discussion of Full Sized SJ Series Jeeps Brian Colucci Digest Coordinator Contents: fsj: Re: Ratios fsj: Re: Re: Ratios fsj: Re: Ratios Re: fsj: Re: Ratios fsj: freebie fsj: Re: Re: Ratios fsj: Re: Re: Re: Ratios fsj: Re: Ratios Re: fsj: Re: Ratios Re: fsj: Re: Ratios Re: fsj: Re: Ratios 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: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 15:36:17 EDT From: Brazzadog-at-aol.com Subject: fsj: Re: Ratios Not necessarily. I've seen several early '70s Wagoneers with 3.31s. Mine was one of them. Ben In a message dated 9/9/2005 11:24:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time, owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net writes: Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 23:17:37 -0700 From: "Jim Blair" A: It counts more of the year than anything else. Earlier rigs got lower gears than later ones. Mid '70s got 3.07 or 3.54 commonly. Before that, 4.10 was king with 3.73 for highway rigs. '80 up was 2.72 or 3.31 with 3.54 special order only. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 17:45:57 -0700 From: "Jim Blair" Subject: fsj: Re: Re: Ratios But yours is V8. Not necessarily. I've seen several early '70s Wagoneers with 3.31s. Mine was one of them. Ben In a message dated 9/9/2005 11:24:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time, owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net writes: Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 23:17:37 -0700 From: "Jim Blair" A: It counts more of the year than anything else. Earlier rigs got lower gears than later ones. Mid '70s got 3.07 or 3.54 commonly. Before that, 4.10 was king with 3.73 for highway rigs. '80 up was 2.72 or 3.31 with 3.54 special order only. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 00:07:55 EDT From: Brazzadog-at-aol.com Subject: fsj: Re: Ratios Excellent point. Every once in a while I forget the folly of questioning the depth of your knowledge. It's interesting that after all these years I still haven't the developed the instinct to ignore myself any time I think I know something you don't : ) Ben In a message dated 9/10/2005 5:46:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time, carnuck1-at-msn.com writes: But yours is V8. Not necessarily. I've seen several early '70s Wagoneers with 3.31s. Mine was one of them. Ben In a message dated 9/9/2005 11:24:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time, owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net writes: Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 23:17:37 -0700 From: "Jim Blair" A: It counts more of the year than anything else. Earlier rigs got lower gears than later ones. Mid '70s got 3.07 or 3.54 commonly. Before that, 4.10 was king with 3.73 for highway rigs. '80 up was 2.72 or 3.31 with 3.54 special order only. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 22:47:41 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Ratios just grabbed a factory shop manual... happens to be for 1976... 3.07, 3.54, 3.73, 4.09 and 4.88 Wag 258 had 3.54 S --> 360/401 - 3.07 '77 factory manual... no 3.31's my '67 wag, 327/3 on the tree, had 3.73 So, grabbed the old manual, j-164 did have 3.31 as std for the v8 350. the 232 was 4.09, The v8 327 was 3.73 with manual, AT's had 3.31. This manual appears to be up to the early '70's vintage... So, Ben's Wag matches what I have in the way of "official"... not sure when they dropped the 3.31's in the '70s... somewhere between '73 and '76... I'm not going to look at the '79, 80, 81, 82 and 85 manuals right now... good night. john On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 Brazzadog-at-aol.com wrote: >-->Excellent point. Every once in a while I forget the folly of questioning >-->the depth of your knowledge. It's interesting that after all these years I >-->still haven't the developed the instinct to ignore myself any time I think I >-->know something you don't : ) >--> >-->Ben >--> >-->In a message dated 9/10/2005 5:46:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >-->carnuck1-at-msn.com writes: >--> >-->But yours is V8. >--> >--> >--> >-->Not necessarily. I've seen several early '70s Wagoneers with 3.31s. Mine >-->was one of them. >--> >-->Ben >--> >--> >-->In a message dated 9/9/2005 11:24:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >-->owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net writes: >--> >-->Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 23:17:37 -0700 >-->From: "Jim Blair" >--> >-->A: It counts more of the year than anything else. Earlier rigs got lower >-->gears than later ones. Mid '70s got 3.07 or 3.54 commonly. Before that, >-->4.10 >-->was king with 3.73 for highway rigs. '80 up was 2.72 or 3.31 with 3.54 >-->special order only. >--> ---- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** http://JohnMeister.com **** http://wagoneers.com ** Snohomish, Washington USA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold ** http://freegift.net *** http://greatcom.org/laws/languages.html ** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 07:53:05 -0700 From: "Jim Blair" Subject: fsj: freebie Anyone close to Seattle need a tailgate glass? I have one from an '80 Cherokee, still in the tailgate. The motor went up and down fine too (faster than the one in my '83 Cherokee) but the gate is rotten. Can't ship as I don't have time and it's really heavy. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 08:13:07 -0700 From: "Jim Blair" Subject: fsj: Re: Re: Ratios Not folly. Every once in awhile I'm way off. (usually because I misread) I even double checked that he wanted 6 cyl ratios. Back then the 6 cyl didn't have enough power to push around these rigs with 3.31 gears. Excellent point. Every once in a while I forget the folly of questioning the depth of your knowledge. It's interesting that after all these years I still haven't the developed the instinct to ignore myself any time I think I know something you don't : ) Ben ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 08:15:12 -0700 From: "Jim Blair" Subject: fsj: Re: Re: Re: Ratios PS: It reinforced what I recalled about ratios and it was interesting to find out Buick powered rigs got that ratio. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 13:14:45 EDT From: Brazzadog-at-aol.com Subject: fsj: Re: Ratios IIRC, the standard ratio for early 70's 360 powered Wags was 3.31. I'm pretty sure it was a carry over from the Buick 350 ratio. It worked great on my Wag. In fact it worked so well that I collected that set of 3.07 gears that you got from Jerry Horn thinking I might get a little better mileage. I still have those gears. The AMC 360 may not have had the oompf of the Buick 350, but the 3.31s weren't too tall for it. Ben In a message dated 9/11/2005 8:16:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time, carnuck1-at-msn.com writes: PS: It reinforced what I recalled about ratios and it was interesting to find out Buick powered rigs got that ratio. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 10:36:07 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Ratios 3.31's would have been a VAST improvement over the 2.72s that came on old blue... superdawg had 3.31's, being replaced with 4.10's, was going with the 4.0l, but going with the 6.2L Diesel, 3.73s would be ideal, but 4.10s will really make the dawg scamper and the 700r4 should give me free way speeds, or I'll have to go with larger tires... john On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 Brazzadog-at-aol.com wrote: >-->IIRC, the standard ratio for early 70's 360 powered Wags was 3.31. I'm >-->pretty sure it was a carry over from the Buick 350 ratio. It worked great on my >-->Wag. In fact it worked so well that I collected that set of 3.07 gears that >-->you got from Jerry Horn thinking I might get a little better mileage. I >-->still have those gears. The AMC 360 may not have had the oompf of the Buick 350, >-->but the 3.31s weren't too tall for it. >--> >-->Ben >--> >-->In a message dated 9/11/2005 8:16:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time, >-->carnuck1-at-msn.com writes: >--> >-->PS: It reinforced what I recalled about ratios and it was interesting to >-->find out Buick powered rigs got that ratio. >--> ---- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** http://JohnMeister.com **** http://wagoneers.com ** Snohomish, Washington USA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold ** http://freegift.net *** http://greatcom.org/laws/languages.html ** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 13:39:32 EDT From: Brazzadog-at-aol.com Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Ratios Wouldn't I love to have that overdrive. I've been watching Gear Vendors on E-bay, but I drive so few miles a year that I'm still better off paying $3.00/gallon for gas. We just bought my wife a used sedan to drive to work and it gets twice the mileage that the previous rig did. It'll still take 4 or 5 years to break even on the expense of the vehicle purchase, assuming $3.00/gallon. Ben In a message dated 9/11/2005 10:32:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time, john-at-superdawg.wagoneers.com writes: 3.31's would have been a VAST improvement over the 2.72s that came on old blue... superdawg had 3.31's, being replaced with 4.10's, was going with the 4.0l, but going with the 6.2L Diesel, 3.73s would be ideal, but 4.10s will really make the dawg scamper and the 700r4 should give me free way speeds, or I'll have to go with larger tires... john ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 14:57:42 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Ratios just paid $50 to tank up my Benz... but I went almost 500 miles on that tank... just over a dime a mile... the 2.5L Turbo Diesel gets 30mpg. Superdawg will be running on veggie oil... so even at much less mpg it'll be cost effective... come on curtis we're so close to having superdawg on the road again! john On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 Brazzadog-at-aol.com wrote: >--> >-->Wouldn't I love to have that overdrive. I've been watching Gear Vendors on >-->E-bay, but I drive so few miles a year that I'm still better off paying >-->$3.00/gallon for gas. We just bought my wife a used sedan to drive to work and it >-->gets twice the mileage that the previous rig did. It'll still take 4 or 5 >-->years to break even on the expense of the vehicle purchase, assuming >-->$3.00/gallon. >--> >-->Ben >--> >--> >-->In a message dated 9/11/2005 10:32:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time, >-->john-at-superdawg.wagoneers.com writes: >--> >-->3.31's would have been a VAST improvement over the 2.72s that came >-->on old blue... superdawg had 3.31's, being replaced with 4.10's, >-->was going with the 4.0l, but going with the 6.2L Diesel, 3.73s would >-->be ideal, but 4.10s will really make the dawg scamper and the 700r4 should >-->give me free way speeds, or I'll have to go with larger tires... >--> >-->john >--> >--> >--> >--> ---- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** http://JohnMeister.com **** http://wagoneers.com ** Snohomish, Washington USA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold ** http://freegift.net *** http://greatcom.org/laws/languages.html ** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of fsj-digest V1 #2505 **************************