From owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net Wed Jul 11 08:55:37 2001 From: fsj-digest fsj-digest Wednesday, July 11 2001 Volume 01 : Number 1375 Forum for Discussion of Full Sized SJ Series Jeeps Brian Colucci Digest Coordinator Contents: fsj: Re: QT fsj: Quadratracs and other xfr cases fsj: RE: Stalled again fsj: NP228 Leak localized fsj: Re: MTBE and Arco fsj: oxygenates in gasoline Re: [Re: fsj: attachments on the lists...] fsj: Rambler for sale Re: [Re: fsj: attachments on the lists...] Re: fsj: Physics of Ping Re: fsj: Physics of Ping Re: [fsj: Re: QT] Re: [Re: fsj: Re: QT ] fsj: what tranny? 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, 09 Jul 2001 21:39:28 -0700 From: john Subject: fsj: Re: QT At 07:32 PM 7/9/01 -0700, Sean Daw wrote: >Thanks for the reply. I'm interested in the 70's model >Cherokee's with the real quadra-trac. I believe they >came with dana 60's up front. But my father owned one >when I was real little now I'm wanting to get one for >my self. I figured that I waould try to find out as >much as possable before I went looking for one to buy. >I also think I'm going to have to do some serious >searching to find one between those years, so if you >could help me on that I would appreciate it. Thanks >again for your help on the quadra-trac! >Sean I don't think the Cherokees came with Dana 60s up front... I'm not even sure if the J20's came with Dana 60's up front... Dana 44's are what the Chero's had. and the J10's... I don't know what, if any FSJ's used a Dana 60 in the front... posting to the fsj lists for input. The Quadratrac you refer to is the Borg Warner 1339, the "original" Quadtratrac. I personally prefer the newer version of it produced in the New Process NP219, which is what I'm trying to put in my '83 J10 Stepside behind an '96 XJ 4.0L engine/trans. :) good luck. john ====================================================================================== For Full Size Jeep help see: http://wagoneers.com/FSJ http://wagoneers.com/FSJ/tech - technical information http://wagoneers.com/FSJ/rigs - pictures of FSJ's http://wagoneers.com/FSJ/digests - list digests more info at: http://www.wagoneers.com/FSJ/FSJ-info.html ====================================================================================== john-at-wagoneers.com remember, leaving life with out Jesus isn't recommended... ===================================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 23:05:20 -0700 From: john Subject: fsj: Quadratracs and other xfr cases >From: Carnuck2-at-webtv.net (jim blair) >Subject: Re: fsj: Re: QT >A: The NP219 was '80/'81 only. The Selectrac NP229 was late '81/ early >'82 to '91 (last FSJ) with -at-86 with the NP228. '82 to '85 NP229 >had the infamous vacuum front axle, (which could be bypassed and made >into shift on the fly easily) > The NP208 Comandtrac was also available from '80 to '88. Jim, I'm sitting here with a 1982 Shop Manual opened up, it lists a Model 208 and a Quadratrac (obviously the NP219), but NO Selectrac. (In the CJ/Scrambler only the 300 is listed) When I flip open my 1983 Manual it lists the 208 and the Selectrac. Hmmm. Looks like Selectrac debuted in the 1983 Model year, eh? Not late '81, unless you consider 1983 late '81, and if you do, so will I. ;) That means the NP219 Quadratrac was available from 1980 through 1982. Selectrac from 1983 through the end of the SJ model, 1991 (or '92 if you count the last 4... ;) For grins my '84 Manual shows 208 and 229. Further grins, my '85 Manual (MR244 for the XJ) shows 207 and 228. (which is interesting since my '86 XJ had an NP229... go figure... ;) I don't have time to dig up when the NP208 wasn't offered in the SJ, but it seems to me that ended in the GW in '86 and only the Selectrac was offered... but it could have been '87... or even '88... without digging through brochures I won't know for sure. I do recall seeing an '87 without wallpaper and an NP208, so it may have been a fleet/gov't or delete option. You know how Jeep is. ;) so, basically under Jeep's nicknames we have: QUADRATRAC: Borg Warner BW1339 (there was one other # ?) 1973 - 1979 New Process NP219 - 1980 - 1982 (and in one '83 J10... ;) Selectrac: New Process NP229 - 1983 - 85 or 86 (have had three '86 XJ's with this one) New Process NP228 - 1985??86 - 1991 New Process NP242 - 1987 - present day (XJ) COMMAND TRAC: Dana 20 - from the beginning... ;) (at least '65 for sure... ;) NP208 - 1980 - 198??6?7?8? NP207 - 1984 - ??? (XJ) NP231 - 1987?? - ??? (XJ) Remember too that the Cherokees/J10/20s had different options than the Wagoneers and the other Jeeps (CJ's, Scramblers, etc.) john - ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.WAGONEERS.com/ Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... jesus, don't leave life without him, please! - ------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 23:55:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Carnuck2-at-webtv.net (jim blair) Subject: fsj: RE: Stalled again A: MTBE is one of the garbage chemicals added (to lower our fuel economy and the shorten life of our older cars I think!) Methyltertialbutylethelene, which is a blend of alcohols (methyl and ethylene) and tar-like waste residue byproduct (butyl) from the refining of oil and gas IIRC, it was developed by Shell Oil in the late '70s, early '80s as a way to get rid of the waste byproducts of gas refining. Cursory emission tests showed it lowered the CO and HC levels when mixed wih gasoline. I often wonder if it was the same testing company that CA fired for their non-scientific, bordering on fraudulent money grabbing, emission testing? {and we KNOW the government hates those that steal, because they always hate competition! } CARB jumped on it as the "savior of the internal combustion engine", and forced the other states to have it in their fuel as well (I think that if the truth were known, MTBE in the fuel probably is responsible for the rash of recent year's pipeline and refining plant explosions! Gas treated with MTBE vapor locks easier, because the boiling point is lowered, and so is the flash point because of the alcohol!) At any rate, the water will sit in the bottom of the tank till you drive a bit, then going over bumps causes sloshing, and some gets sucked up to the carb. It puddles in the bottom till it's sucked into the idle jets and power valve or clogs the fuel pump/filter, then POOF! engine is shut off temporarily, because it can't run on water (or any other non-flammable glop in the tank) I wrote: Did you use Arco water, errr gas? My Cherokee did that when I had crud in the tank. It would jam the inlet valve of the fueel pump, which would drop pressure (I added a see through filter before the pump after that! I was amazed how much water came out each time after fueling at Arco! {Waterco?})         The built in resistor for the points is taken into account for with the Perts. Either they go or no go. AKA transistorized ignition, they use a trans sistor with the pulse from the dist to open and close the ground circuit at the coil (just like points) I've heard Arco uses gas with something else added, not good for fuel injectors and such... but why would water in the fuel act up only when warm? Walt, next time it does it see if you have spark... have Jim come up and grab hold of the coil wire while you crank... ;) (just kidding). I think the next step is to determine if it's fuel or spark related... I've got a remote starter switch you can borrow. That way you can crank it with the key on and hold a wire (with insulated pliers) to see if a spark is happening... :) john ************************************* JimBlair, Seattle,WA '84 J10, '86 Comanche http://www.geocities.com/eaglemania2002/ http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=13998 ************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:51:38 -0500 From: Brian Wall Subject: fsj: NP228 Leak localized Jim (and everyone else) - Thanks for all the continued help. Realizing this was just too big of a job for me to handle, I took the GW to a local shop that always has a couple of Jeeps outside. I figured some of the mechanics drove them, and I was right. So, as much as I hate to pay someone to do work I could do, Iım going to let them look at it. Theyıre also going to give me an estimate to take out some pinion slop in the rear end and replace the timing chain cover seal. About the latter of those two: after replacing the water pump yesterday, I found it still leaked. Arggh! What a pain in the rear to put that all back together and find out itıs the dog-gone tb cover. Anyway, Iıll let you know what they give for estimate. Someone give me a shoulder to cry on! Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 00:31:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Carnuck2-at-webtv.net (jim blair) Subject: Re: fsj: NP228 Problem Localized - A: Which one is going down? Did you check the bolts for tightness? (I nearly lost my NP208 after hauling my 5 ton trailer the last time!) I cleaned mine off, and siliconed it shut. No more leak! From: "Brian Wall" What's the problem? I think I've localized the problem to the weap hole in the bottom of the transfer case near the point where it hooks up to the tranny. What seal failure would cause this leak? Transfer case or tranny? Thanks, Brian Wall 86 GW OKC ************************************* JimBlair, Seattle,WA '84 J10, '86 Comanche http://www.geocities.com/eaglemania2002/ http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=13998 ************************************** - ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:17:02 -0700 From: john Subject: fsj: Re: MTBE and Arco At 07:11 AM 7/10/01 -0700, Walt Greenwood wrote: >I've observed that the Arco pumps where I fill up say the fuel contains 10 >percent alcohol. Wouldn't that absorb water? (Isn't Drygas essentially >just alcohol?) > >Walt that's quite true. The problem with Alcohol in gas is that it tends to attack seals in the fuel system and injectors. A buddy of mine running a parts dept in a dealership said he loved the stuff, he'd sell injectors like crazy... ;) I'm not sure about all the stuff Jim was saying... john - ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.WAGONEERS.com/ Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... jesus, don't leave life without him, please! - ------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:49:33 -0400 From: RFISCHEL-at-osc.state.ny.us Subject: fsj: oxygenates in gasoline For all of you concerned with performance and economy as a result of the addition of oxygenates to gasoline, read the following: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/ostp-3.pdf Of course as it is put out by the EPA, some may find it to be less than credible. Older cars with butyl rubber parts could suffer degradation with bothalcohol and MTBE enriched gasoline. Starting in the late 80's this became less of a problem after the manufactures switched compounds. The fight between Alcohol v. MTBE as an additive was purely political between the supporters of the petrochemical industry and corn growers/ADM (you know, supermarket to the world). The petrochemical industry didn't want to be reliant on an additive they didn't control so they proposed a relatively cheap additive that could be formulated as a by-product of the refining process. The agribusiness was looking for a way to utilize over-produced corn and ADM was looking for a way to squeeze the petrochemical industry. Unfortunately for the Petro industry, MTBE has some properties that when added to gasoline make the effect and cost to clean-up of spills into the groundwater much more expensive than gasoline spills alone. The environmental problems with MTBE have been known since the mid-80's, but it has only been in the last two years that the regulatory agencies have seen the light, and MTBE is now no longer present in most gasoline. The gas shortage in the mid-west last summer was blamed on the need to reformulate after MTBE was removed from the gasoline. Alcohol has its own list of problems, including effectiveness in winter, but the agri-lobby is sufficiently strong that it should be with us as an additive for many years to come. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jul 2001 18:40:26 MDT From: Michael Shimniok Subject: Re: [Re: fsj: attachments on the lists...] I agree the majority of the people on the list probably don't have $40 a month for high speed access if it is even available to them in the first place, tho they probably have 33-56k modems -- assuming they can even achieve full 33+ speed on their phone line. But even at 56k, email downloads are doubled or tripled by just a few image attachments. So what I'm hearing from those in favor of email attachments is that if I want people to see my picture, I should be allowed to force everyone on the entire list to download my picture whether they want to or not, wasting their valuable time but saving a few minutes of my own time. Why is it so distasteful to spend your own time uploading your image to your website and then emailing the URL to everyone?? This is all just a courtesy issue from my perspective. (Not counting the issue with preventing the spread of viruses, reducing bandwidth on the email server, etc). Michael - --- Michael E. Shimniok - KC0EKI - Michael.Shimniok-at-usa.net "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." - H. L. Menken ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 23:22:55 -0500 From: JeepNut Subject: fsj: Rambler for sale Sorry about the off topic post, but I consider Rambler a cousin of Jeep in the independent car companies of yesterday and I just would hate to see some goon get this who would not take care of it.... I went to pickup the Jeep today from the AC recharge shop and they have the most beautiful 63 Rambler American 2dr coupe there -- $2500.00!! This thing has only 50K on the clock and it is in the most amazing shape. No rust, dents, or anything. Interior is pristine! Has the flat head 4 cylinder motor. I call it Sea Foam Green if you know what that color is. Guy told me that the owner got it for next to nothing and is just passing it through more or less.... Someone Buy This Car! I don't know if it is really worth $2500, but it seems a good deal to me. Heck ANYthing with 50K miles and looks/runs good is worth that. I would buy it myself, but am already looking for a second job, just to make ends meet. It is killing me not to run down there and grab the keys... **I have a serious weakness for homeless classics and dogs...I've got four of those "rescued" too...** Maybe Jim Blair can cross post this to the AMC list? JeepNut - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------- '87 Street Comanche #24/100 '88 Grand Wagoneer ...and they say there's only one... '92 Cherokee - ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 23:09:10 -0500 From: JeepNut Subject: Re: [Re: fsj: attachments on the lists...] Hi Michael, Maybe I'm missing posts, but I only really recall that Pat Hines was fairly interested in the attachments, but he is on other lists that allow it. Which was my point in my last post. There's room for all in cyberspace. I hope. I'd hate to be excluded from sharing and gaining knowledge because I cannot live on the bleeding edge. If all the lists were the same, why have different lists? IMHO what happens to folks is that they naturally, innocently, relate to their own day-to-day realities. If you've always lived in a major metropolis or elsewhere where DSL is a functional reality, your cable service is highly reliable, a cell phone actually works, or there's efficient public transportation, you tend to believe/agree with all the marketing regarding the ubquitous nature of such services and simply can't relate to how it is to live where that just ain't so. BUT I'm afraid marketing seems to overshadow reality. To paraphrase the ol' Parrothead... Don't try to describe the ocean or a KISS concert, if you've never seen one, you just might wind up being wrong. ;-) JeepNut Michael Shimniok wrote: > > I agree the majority of the people on the list probably don't have $40 a > month > for high speed access if it is even available to them in the first place, tho > they probably have 33-56k modems -- assuming they can even achieve full 33+ > speed on their phone line. But even at 56k, email downloads are doubled or > tripled by just a few image attachments. > > So what I'm hearing from those in favor of email attachments is that if I > want > people to see my picture, I should be allowed to force everyone on the entire > list to download my picture whether they want to or not, wasting their > valuable time but saving a few minutes of my own time. > > Why is it so distasteful to spend your own time uploading your image to your > website and then emailing the URL to everyone?? This is all just a courtesy > issue from my perspective. (Not counting the issue with preventing the > spread > of viruses, reducing bandwidth on the email server, etc). > > Michael > > --- > Michael E. Shimniok - KC0EKI - Michael.Shimniok-at-usa.net > "For every complex problem, there is a solution that > is simple, neat, and wrong." - H. L. Menken - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------- '87 Street Comanche #24/100 '88 Grand Wagoneer ...and they say there's only one... '92 Cherokee - ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 23:32:33 -0500 From: JeepNut Subject: Re: fsj: Physics of Ping ..and now, back to our show.... OK, Jim and Landon weighed in with some physics of ping. And there is validity there since it IS heat related. When the temp gauge is in the blue, no pinging happens. Once it crosses the first line above the blue it is weak and infrequent, but as the temp climbs up to about 1/2 way between the upper blue line and the next line up, it will start pinging at every throttle push and gets worse the warmer she runs. (no it's not overheating, doesn't get that hot.) I'm going to play with remvoving the thermostat, though I don't expect much change. Ambient temps have been near 100 all week.... NOW, what about Octane. Why does higher octane keep the ping at bay, at least mostly? What does octane do to reduce pre ignition? JeepNut Landon Tesar wrote: > > > But in my mind an unusually rich or slightly rich mixture would be more > > susceptible to an early fire than a mixture short of fuel. > > Thanks to all. :-) > > JeepNut > > > Why does lean cause ping ? Hmm. > One thing is that a richer mixture is a cooler mixture, so pressure + > temperature leads to combustion. > > - Landon - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------- '87 Street Comanche #24/100 '88 Grand Wagoneer ...and they say there's only one... '92 Cherokee - ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 23:36:27 -0500 From: JeepNut Subject: Re: fsj: Physics of Ping ..and now, back to our show.... OK, Jim and Landon weighed in with some physics of ping. And there is validity there since it IS heat related. When the temp gauge is in the blue, no pinging happens. Once it crosses the first line above the blue it is weak and infrequent, but as the temp starts to climb up to about 1/2 way between the upper "cold" line and the next line up, it will start pinging at every throttle push and gets worse the warmer she runs. (no it's not overheating, doesn't get to 210 degree line or is it 220?) I'm going to play with remvoving the thermostat, though I don't expect much change. Ambient temps have been near 100 all week anyway. NOW, what about Octane. Why does higher octane keep the ping at bay, at least mostly? What does octane do to reduce pre ignition? JeepNut Landon Tesar wrote: > > > But in my mind an unusually rich or slightly rich mixture would be more > > susceptible to an early fire than a mixture short of fuel. > > Thanks to all. :-) > > JeepNut > > > Why does lean cause ping ? Hmm. > One thing is that a richer mixture is a cooler mixture, so pressure + > temperature leads to combustion. > > - Landon - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------- '87 Street Comanche #24/100 '88 Grand Wagoneer ...and they say there's only one... '92 Cherokee - ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jul 2001 22:40:35 MDT From: Michael Shimniok Subject: Re: [fsj: Re: QT] john wrote: > I know the BW QT went from '73 until '79. > the NP QT from 80 until ??? 84 or 85???? I'd have to research that > one... it would be the last time they used an NP219. busy putting > stuff up on ebay right now... :) This was a fuzzy spot in my FSJ knowledge. :) I knew of a 1983 Wag Ltd with SelecTrac NP229, but didn't know of any 1981-82 Wags. According to _The Standard Catalog of 4x4's_, 1983 saw the introduction of SelecTrac which replaced QuadraTrac. So NP219 was available 1980-1982. The NP229 ran from 1983-1985 and again from 1987-?? In 1986 the NP228 was available instead of the 229. I am fuzzy after 1987... not sure if the last year or two of GW offered something other than NP229? Mic - --- Michael E. Shimniok - KC0EKI - Michael.Shimniok-at-usa.net "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." - H. L. Menken ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jul 2001 22:46:23 MDT From: Michael Shimniok Subject: Re: [Re: fsj: Re: QT ] Carnuck2-at-webtv.net (jim blair) wrote: > A: The NP219 was '80/'81 only. The Selectrac NP229 was late '81/ early > '82 to '91 (last FSJ) with -at-86 with the NP228. '82 to '85 NP229 > had the infamous vacuum front axle, (which could be bypassed and made > into shift on the fly easily) > The NP208 Comandtrac was also available from '80 to '88. 85 was apparently a crossover year, cuz my 85 has no vacuum shift front axle... but I know there was recent talk of an 85 with it... It might be interesting, someday, to survey ... maybe we'll have to do a questionaire / survey / inspection in Ouray. There probably won't be many more opportunities to get that many different vehicles together in the same place at the same time. :) Mich - --- Michael E. Shimniok - KC0EKI - Michael.Shimniok-at-usa.net "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." - H. L. Menken ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 23:47:57 -0500 From: JeepNut Subject: fsj: what tranny? Hey all, In case someone can use them... The guy that has the Rambler also has an older XJ with a 350 stroker 383! WOAH mighty mechanical monster! What came out of it was the GMC 2.8 V6 with some kind of small one piece 3 speed tranny. He is selling the tranny cheap ($100) and it is supposed to be in good shape, no leaks, but he really doesn't know WHAT tranny it is. I told him I would ask. The V6 is in questionable condition but can be had for $50 or less probably. Memphis I promise the XJ questions will not be a habit, I just ran into all this stuff today with the XJ. Maybe you guys run into stuff like this all the time? I don't "get out" much so it's unusual for me to run into odd Jeep goodies for sale. JeepNut - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------- '87 Street Comanche #24/100 '88 Grand Wagoneer ...and they say there's only one... '92 Cherokee - ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of fsj-digest V1 #1375 **************************