From owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net Sat Nov 20 18:30:44 1999
From: fsj-digest <owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net>
fsj-digest Saturday, November 20 1999 Volume 01 : Number 616
Forum for Discussion of Full Sized SJ Series Jeeps
Brian Colucci <versicom-at-juno.com>
Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Re: fsj: Re: xj: uh oh... I'm in more trouble now...
fsj: Re: 258 mods...
Re: fsj: Re: Diesels, stepsides, 5 speeds and 4.0Ls
Re: fsj: 80 J10 Honcho value???
fsj: Wagoneer
Re: fsj: Re: 258 mods...
fsj: Re: xj: PS
Re: fsj: Re: xj: PS
fsj: Re: J10's a plenty...
Re: fsj: SAVE THE WAGGY!!!
fsj: vehicle shuffling...
fsj: Re: xj: swapping XJ axles to get lower gears?
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, 20 Nov 1999 12:40:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Carnuck-at-webtv.net (James Blair)
Subject: Re: fsj: Re: xj: uh oh... I'm in more trouble now...
A: You could swap out the old 5 speed for a world class T5!
John wrote:
how hard would it be to put an NV4500 in the middle? Or would I want to
do the Atlas thing... :)
Wait a minute... I want an AT... :) So the 4.0L, AW4,
NP242 combo would make more sense. :)
You know, the AW4 would bolt up to the 258... hmmm... so the next time
the 5speed goes south I could swing it to an AT.
What will I use the extra pedal for? :) =A0 maybe do a set of rear
brakes only for J-turns in my J-truck? :)
john
At 09:24 PM 11/19/99 -0800, Paul W. wrote:
john <john-at-wagoneers.com> wrote:
Any comments on the Warner 5speed behind a 258?
In a CJ they were merely adequate. If you get too wild and crazy, they
won't last. I'd rate them as a light meduim duty trans. Wouldn't want
one behind a V8, for sure! OTOH, they are a far sight better than the
Peugeot BA10/5. :)
Too bad they never had anything like the NV4500...
Paul W
- --------------------------------------
Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee model 18 4.2L/999 AT, My Homepage:
http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html My Photo Album:
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=3D13998&Auth=3Dfalse
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 99 12:42:28 PST
From: Thomas Anhalt <tanhalt-at-netpipeline.net>
Subject: fsj: Re: 258 mods...
At 11:33 PM 11/19/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Tom,
>
>How much improvement did your 258 see with the MPI setup?
>
>what other options are available? I'm gonna look at this 84
>tomorrow, she said something about a special carb... and a
>mallory dual point setup??? Didn't think anyone was still
>doing points... I hope she's mistaken... :)
>
>The body is supposed to be straight, interior clean... we'll see...
>
>I posted my Benz and the Honcho on the newsgroup here in Seattle for sale...
>
Wow...you sure turn over the vehicles...sheesh ;-)
On the MPI setup, in my case I saw all of the torque and hp increases (~60
ft-lbs of torque and 50 hp) but didn't really see any change in the gas
mileage. Of course, I was already getting 17-18 mpg on the hwy, so I
couldn't really complain. I think the fact the gas mileage didn't go up has
a couple of causes:
1. Aerodynamics - the FSJs are already "aerodynamically challenged" and
I've gone ahead and lifted mine 3" and put 33"x12.5" tires on my Cherokee.
Does the phrase "pummeling the air into submission" mean anything? Anyway,
I think that at current freeway speeds (65-70 mph), the air drag portion of
the fuel economy equation is the main factor. This fact, coupled with the
second reason below account for the lack of change in my gas mileage.
2. Although the peak torque was greatly increased, the torque output at
cruising rpms was only slightly increased. Let me explain. When I did my
baseline hp and torque readings (using HomeDyno) I found that the torque
curve for the stock 258 had a curious shape...it had a "double hump". In
other words, the torque rapidly peaked at ~2000-2100 rpm and then dipped
significantly below this peak until it rose again to almost meet it at ~3500
rpm, whereby it then began falling off for good. In trying to imitate this
performance in a Desktop Dyno simulation, I found that the only way to
recreate this would be to greatly restrict the intake flow capacity. This
also made sense after looking at the stock air cleaner setup on the
258....very restrictive. I'm convinced that the majority of the torque and
hp gains from the MPI kit are directly the result of opening up the 258s
intake tract flow capacity and not the direct result of the MPI itself.
Anyway....to get back to the point....after the MPI was installed, I did
another HomeDyno run and found that the "double hump" was gone (it's a nice
smooth curve) and the peak torque was now at 3500 rpm. The main point is
that the torque in the 2000-2300 rpm range is not significantly different
enough to change the partial throttle cruise gas mileage. Also, this should
put to rest the myth that the 258 is just a low end torque engine. It's
peak torque was at a lowly 2000 rpm NOT because of the design of the
camshaft or the stroke or even the cast iron exhaust manifold. It was that
low only because the the intake was so restricted that the torque was
basically choked off above that rpm!
Of course, all this doesn't imply that the MPI kit wasn't worth it from a
performance and driveability standpoint....because it emphatically WAS worth
it, especially for someone like me who lives in the People's Republik of
Kalifornia. That CARB approved sticker is priceless.
Since your emissions laws are a little looser, you have some other options.
I have seen that a Howell type setup (GM style TBI) will get similar hp and
torque values as the MPI, especially if it is coupled with a 4.0L HO head swap.
See http://home.att.net/~jweir/
Since my future rebuild plan entails swapping the stock camshaft for a grind
with a shorter duration (but higher lift), I plan on having the torque curve
shift down in the rpm range some. This should help with the gas mileage,
since for maximum economy you want to try to match the max torque to your
cruising rpm. My current simulation shows a nice flat torque curve in the
2000-3000 rpm range with a max of over 300 ft-lbs!...and that's not with
anything more exotic than a cam change, the 4.0L HO head, and a header and
free-flowing exhaust.
Well....that's my take on things.
>At this point I'm ready to sell both anyways... :) I was thinking about
>calling around looking for any Diesel 4x4 rigs out there... :) Then
>I got the call on this 84 stepside, 6 cylinder... For some strange reason
>I'm really excited about the 5 speed tranny... sheesh... I'm really loosing
>it in my old age... :) (my bday was wednesday, guess I'm due for my midlife
>crisis or something... :)
>
Happy Birthday! When are you going to start looking at Corvettes?
That 5 speed should definitely help in the mpg department. Remember, Doc's
Timex used to consistently get >20 mpg in it's younger years.
Later,
Tom
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 12:46:57 -0800 (PST)
From: Carnuck-at-webtv.net (James Blair)
Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Diesels, stepsides, 5 speeds and 4.0Ls
A: Hey John! I think I figured out why you get such lousy mileage! You
must be stuck in low range! <G>>
At 09:04 PM 11/19/99 -0800, Paul W. wrote:
This 6.2 isn't too noisy, especially in the cab. Quieter than the
Cummins, that's for sure! I think it's even quieter than my friend's 6.9
Navistar.
agreed... the 6.5L Turbo Diesel is even quieter... =A0 I liked my 6.2L
in my
Jimmy...
The power differences between the leading Diesels isn't much to get
worked up about
unless you're towing a horse trailer or a really heavy load on a regular
basis...
=A0=A0Since I've heard many reports of 6.2's getting over 20mpg, I
thought I'd go ahead and give a diesel a chance and see what John gets
so excited about.
I was getting 18 to 20 mpg with mine, had 31x10.5's, lift and a BAD
advance piston...
Should have been getting closer to 22mpg on the highway with it... In a
2wd rig
you can expect 19 to 22 or better... You'll love the range you'll
have...
the low
maintenance... =A0 The SOUND... =A0 :) the smell of Diesel fuel in the
morning... :)
(diesel exhaust on the other hand is something the OTHER guy has to
smell... :)
The stepside is a cooler looking bed than the widebox, but you will give
up a little cargo capacity. You could swap the 258 for that 4.0L you
have - or did you sell it? That along with your AW4 and scrounge up a
NP242 and your dream FSJ (gas version) is complete, right? :D
I'm not worried about cargo space... that's what they make bungee cords
and
rope
for... :-) Besides, I've got a datsun longbed trailer that will double
my
capacity. :)
Yeah, I could use the 4.0L to pick up more economy, and the AW4 to make
my life
easier... haven't gotten an NP242 yet, still have the 231... =A0 What do
you
think
about that Warner 5 speed behind either the 258 or a 4.0L?
The 5 speed has a 4.03, 2.37, 1.5, 1, and either a .76 or a .86 od
ratio. Two axles were offered, 2.72, and 3.31... =A0 Is the 5speed ok?
SHe had it rebuilt
a few years ago... what can I do to make it last longer besides AMSOIL
synthetics
and avoiding burnouts. :)
A granny low would be really nice for this driveway... :) and an
Overdrive
would help
a lot on the freeway... I'm not fond of shifting, but to have an FSJ
that
I can afford
to drive will make me live with it... especially since I had my knee
fixed
in 92 and shifting
in an FSJ doesn't hurt my lower back like it did in my XJ's...
sleepless in snohomish... :)
john
- --------------------------------------
Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee model 18 4.2L/999 AT, My Homepage:
http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html My Photo Album:
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=3D13998&Auth=3Dfalse
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 12:52:29 -0800
From: john <john-at-wagoneers.com (WA state nospam)>
Subject: Re: fsj: 80 J10 Honcho value???
let him know mine's available... :)
At 12:36 PM 11/20/99 -0800, James Blair wrote:
>A: You know Scotty's Jeep is for sale, and he's looking for a CA
>compliant Jeep? <G>
>
>John wrote:
>Ok. I'm gonna sell the 80 J10 if the 84 is nice...
>You've seen the pictures... you know how long I looked for this one. I'm
>not sure if I'll leave the leather seats in the 80 or not... But I will
>put good seats in it either way...
>The 80 will have the auxillary fuel tank, 4.09 gears, NO RUST, some body
>dings, ac, cruise, tilt, radio-cassette, EXCELLENT brakes, a new
>alternator and battery.
>And a motor with about 14,000 miles on it... smoothest running 360 I've
>ever seen... it's really nice... no leaks... starts right up (once I got
>the timing figured out...) it doesn't stumble any more, but will include
>a couple extra carbs... (plans are to refine/rebuild the carbs I've got
>laying around and make it run more economically... if I keep it)
>It got me home, it's been getting me to work... :) It's got a few things
>I'd deal with if I keep it... nothing serious, or I wouldn't think about
>keeping it... :) (I'm gonna keep it if I don't buy the 84...)
>Well... I guess I'd better wait to see what the 84 is gonna be like
>before I get too excited. :)
>I'll probably swap a few parts between 'em... if they'll swap. :) The
>high flow cat/flowmaster are on my list of high priority swap items...
>along with the Jacobs... although the 84 is supposed to have a fancy
>carb and a Mallory setup already... hmmm...
>I only wish the 84 were a light color... it's brown... but one person's
>brown may be another person's tan... or red... or... oh shut up and go
>to bed john.... say goodnight john...
>goodnight
>john
>:)
>
>--------------------------------------
>Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee model 18 4.2L/999 AT, My Homepage:
>http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html My Photo Album:
>http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=13998&Auth=false
>
>
- -----------------------------------------------------
john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com
...don't leave life without Jesus, please!
Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold...
- -----------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:53:04 EST
From: Grtdaneguy-at-aol.com
Subject: fsj: Wagoneer
OK guys here it is for the last time. I'm selling my 83 Wagoneer limited. It
is tan with brown power seats that need to be recovered, it has a 360 V-8,
the trannie needs to be rebuilt and is already pulled out with the T/C. It
has a black back seat and body rust. This truck will run once the trannie is
put back in. I'm gonna send her to the junkyard as I am accumulating too many
vehicles. Someone make me an offer, I'd rather give her to someone on the
list than the Yard. I live in Delaware, please don't let her go to the junk
yard. Joe
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 12:57:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Carnuck-at-webtv.net (James Blair)
Subject: Re: fsj: Re: 258 mods...
A: Which cam did you profile? The 4.0L HO? Why won't CA let you put a
4.0L HO head on your 4.2L? Wouldn't the performance and drop in
emissions of the HO head be desirable? Since the HO head is built for
EFI, you could argue it's environmental benefits, and structural
integrity in the quest for lower outputs and lower fuel consumption.
At 11:33 PM 11/19/99 -0800, you wrote:
Tom,
How much improvement did your 258 see with the MPI setup?
what other options are available? =A0 I'm gonna look at this 84
tomorrow, she said something about a special carb... and a mallory dual
point setup??? Didn't think anyone was still doing points... I hope
she's mistaken... :)
The body is supposed to be straight, interior clean... we'll see...
I posted my Benz and the Honcho on the newsgroup here in Seattle for
sale...
Wow...you sure turn over the vehicles...sheesh ;-)
On the MPI setup, in my case I saw all of the torque and hp increases
(~60 ft-lbs of torque and 50 hp) but didn't really see any change in the
gas mileage. Of course, I was already getting 17-18 mpg on the hwy, so I
couldn't really complain. I think the fact the gas mileage didn't go up
has a couple of causes:
1. Aerodynamics - the FSJs are already "aerodynamically challenged" and
I've gone ahead and lifted mine 3" and put 33"x12.5" tires on my
Cherokee. Does the phrase "pummeling the air into submission" mean
anything? Anyway, I think that at current freeway speeds (65-70 mph),
the air drag portion of the fuel economy equation is the main factor.
This fact, coupled with the second reason below account for the lack of
change in my gas mileage.
2. Although the peak torque was greatly increased, the torque output at
cruising rpms was only slightly increased. Let me explain. When I did my
baseline hp and torque readings (using HomeDyno) I found that the torque
curve for the stock 258 had a curious shape...it had a "double hump". In
other words, the torque rapidly peaked at ~2000-2100 rpm and then dipped
significantly below this peak until it rose again to almost meet it at
~3500 rpm, whereby it then began falling off for good. In trying to
imitate this performance in a Desktop Dyno simulation, I found that the
only way to recreate this would be to greatly restrict the intake flow
capacity. This also made sense after looking at the stock air cleaner
setup on the 258....very restrictive. I'm convinced that the majority of
the torque and hp gains from the MPI kit are directly the result of
opening up the 258s intake tract flow capacity and not the direct result
of the MPI itself. Anyway....to get back to the point....after the MPI
was installed, I did another HomeDyno run and found that the "double
hump" was gone (it's a nice smooth curve) and the peak torque was now at
3500 rpm. The main point is that the torque in the 2000-2300 rpm range
is not significantly different enough to change the partial throttle
cruise gas mileage. Also, this should put to rest the myth that the 258
is just a low end torque engine. It's peak torque was at a lowly 2000
rpm NOT because of the design of the camshaft or the stroke or even the
cast iron exhaust manifold. It was that low only because the the intake
was so restricted that the torque was basically choked off above that
rpm!
Of course, all this doesn't imply that the MPI kit wasn't worth it from
a performance and driveability standpoint....because it emphatically WAS
worth it, especially for someone like me who lives in the People's
Republik of Kalifornia. That CARB approved sticker is priceless.
Since your emissions laws are a little looser, you have some other
options. I have seen that a Howell type setup (GM style TBI) will get
similar hp and torque values as the MPI, especially if it is coupled
with a 4.0L HO head swap.
See http://home.att.net/~jweir/
Since my future rebuild plan entails swapping the stock camshaft for a
grind with a shorter duration (but higher lift), I plan on having the
torque curve shift down in the rpm range some. This should help with the
gas mileage, since for maximum economy you want to try to match the max
torque to your cruising rpm. My current simulation shows a nice flat
torque curve in the 2000-3000 rpm range with a max of over 300
ft-lbs!...and that's not with anything more exotic than a cam change,
the 4.0L HO head, and a header and free-flowing exhaust.
Well....that's my take on things.
At this point I'm ready to sell both anyways... :) I was thinking about
calling around looking for any Diesel 4x4 rigs out there... :) Then I
got the call on this 84 stepside, 6 cylinder... For some strange reason
I'm really excited about the 5 speed tranny... sheesh... I'm really
loosing it in my old age... :) (my bday was wednesday, guess I'm due for
my midlife crisis or something... :)
Happy Birthday! When are you going to start looking at Corvettes?
That 5 speed should definitely help in the mpg department. Remember,
Doc's Timex used to consistently get >20 mpg in it's younger years.
Later,
Tom
- --------------------------------------
Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee model 18 4.2L/999 AT, My Homepage:
http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html My Photo Album:
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=3D13998&Auth=3Dfalse
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 14:37:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Carnuck-at-webtv.net (James Blair)
Subject: fsj: Re: xj: PS
A: I still have a FREE passenger side seat from Elmo, but that's an SJ
seat.
On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, William Van Tuyl wrote:
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Yes, this job is much easier with a MIG,
as I recall, the hardest part was trying not to burn holes in the seat
fabric.
Bill
I used rags and pieces of sheetmetal... =A0 with a regular buzz box it's
hard to get a good weld... the metal isn't very good... Next time I fire
up the buzz box I"ll have to yard the seat out and weld it up again...
john
- --------------------------------------
Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee model 18 4.2L/999 AT, My Homepage:
http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html My Photo Album:
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=3D13998&Auth=3Dfalse
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:15:18 -0800
From: john <john-at-wagoneers.com (WA state nospam)>
Subject: Re: fsj: Re: xj: PS
I'd like the pass side seat, it flips up right?
The power seats don't... Is there anyway of robbing the
mechanisms and putting them in a fixed back seat??
Just got back from looking at the 83 J10 Stepside... gonna
pay for it on Monday. :) It has a dual-point setup, and
needs a tuneup... anyone have the electronic pickup for 258?
john
At 02:37 PM 11/20/99 -0800, James Blair wrote:
>A: I still have a FREE passenger side seat from Elmo, but that's an SJ
>seat.
>
>On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, William Van Tuyl wrote:=20
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Yes, this job is much easier with a MIG,
>as I recall, the hardest part was trying not to burn holes in the seat
>fabric.=20
>Bill=20
>I used rags and pieces of sheetmetal... =A0 with a regular buzz box it's
>hard to get a good weld... the metal isn't very good... Next time I fire
>up the buzz box I"ll have to yard the seat out and weld it up again...=20
>john=20
>
>--------------------------------------
>Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee model 18 4.2L/999 AT, My Homepage:
>http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html My Photo Album:
>http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=3D13998&Auth=3Dfalse
>
>
- -----------------------------------------------------
john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com
...don't leave life without Jesus, please!
Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold...
- -----------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:33:24 -0800
From: john <john-at-wagoneers.com (WA state nospam)>
Subject: fsj: Re: J10's a plenty...
I just got back from looking at the Stepside... it's an 83,
made in Mar 83, not an 84... not a big deal, the lady explained
that her ford 1T is an 84... oops. :)
Anyway, it has a Holley carb and indeed has the mallory dual point
setup... and it needs help bad... it's running pretty poorly, missing
and such...
How hard will it be to put the electronic system back in place?
Is the Holley a good carb?
I'll be switching the leather seats into the 83, and a few odds and
ends... The 80 Honcho has lots of power and is running superbly after
tweaking the timing... It should sell quickly.
Got to run, need to run Mark's motorcycle into town so he has money
to get his J3000 home tomorrow. :)
Monday afternoon there will be two J10s and a J3ooo in the driveway...
my wife is gonna flip... I better be good this weekend... :)
ttyl,
john
- -----------------------------------------------------
john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com
...don't leave life without Jesus, please!
Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold...
- -----------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:34:51 -0800
From: john <john-at-wagoneers.com (WA state nospam)>
Subject: Re: fsj: SAVE THE WAGGY!!!
come on East Coasters... SAVE THIS WAGGY!!!!
john
At 03:53 PM 11/20/99 EST, Grtdaneguy-at-aol.com wrote:
> OK guys here it is for the last time. I'm selling my 83 Wagoneer limited.
It
>is tan with brown power seats that need to be recovered, it has a 360 V-8,
>the trannie needs to be rebuilt and is already pulled out with the T/C. It
>has a black back seat and body rust. This truck will run once the trannie is
>put back in. I'm gonna send her to the junkyard as I am accumulating too
many
>vehicles. Someone make me an offer, I'd rather give her to someone on the
>list than the Yard. I live in Delaware, please don't let her go to the junk
>yard. Joe
>
- -----------------------------------------------------
john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com
...don't leave life without Jesus, please!
Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold...
- -----------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:37:09 -0800
From: john <john-at-wagoneers.com (WA state nospam)>
Subject: fsj: vehicle shuffling...
I'm definetly getting the 83 J10 Stepside with the 6 cylinder and
5 speed... Which means I need to sell my 80 J10 Honcho and 81 300d
ASAP. I'm asking $3500 for each, they have lots of extras and are
both in great shape... I'm open to offers...
john
- -----------------------------------------------------
john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com
...don't leave life without Jesus, please!
Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold...
- -----------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:18:30 -0800
From: john <john-at-wagoneers.com (WA state nospam)>
Subject: fsj: Re: xj: swapping XJ axles to get lower gears?
yeah, but I'm buying an 83 J10... with 3.31's... I forgot to
look at the axle... but it already has a trash lock in it... :)
At 02:14 PM 11/20/99 -0800, James Blair wrote:
>A: One of the AMC-list Jeepers has a good used track lock for a model 20
>for sale. Too bad you're selling the '80 already! <G>
>
> john wrote:
>(snip)
>Any word on True-Tracs for a Dana 35? how about a Model 20? My J10
>really, really needs some sort of TAD... :)
>john
>
>--------------------------------------
>Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee model 18 4.2L/999 AT, My Homepage:
>http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html My Photo Album:
>http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=13998&Auth=false
>
>
- -----------------------------------------------------
john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com
...don't leave life without Jesus, please!
Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold...
- -----------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
End of fsj-digest V1 #616
*************************