From owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net Tue Jun 9 21:18:05 2009 From: fsj-digest fsj-digest Wednesday, June 10 2009 Volume 01 : Number 3350 Forum for Discussion of Full Sized SJ Series Jeeps Brian Colucci Digest Coordinator Contents: fsj: tech question RE: fsj: tech question RE: fsj: tech question fsj: will it fit? fsj: comparing cj-10a to J10 and XJ, seating and swaps... fsj: IFS vs. Solid Axle, wasRe: [db] mahindra diesels RE: fsj: IFS vs. Solid Axle, wasRe: [db] mahindra diesels fsj: RE: comparing cj-10a to J10 and XJ, seating and swaps... Re: fsj: RE: comparing cj-10a to J10 and XJ, seating and swaps... Re: fsj: IFS vs. Solid Axle, wasRe: [db] mahindra diesels 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: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 09:20:09 -0700 (PDT) From: diesel john Subject: fsj: tech question would there be much difference in sizes between: 4.0L / AW4 / NP242 SD33 / TF727 / NP208 The 4.0 only weighs around 400lbs, while the SD33 is closer to 700 (672)lbs. Looking at the engine it looks about the same length as a 4.0, will measure first chance I get, guess the question is, how much difference between the AW4 and the TF727? the snohomish monster carport is being tempted by the ready availability of a suspected good SD33T and TF727 and both another '83 J10 stepside and a couple of XJs, one in particular, a very nice clean '90 XJ limited... the tug is doing quite well, but I guess I'm looking for a bit more refinement. as far as my WVO hauling, already working on some ideas where I don't have to move barrels, but rather buckets and cubies... and of course I have my J10 trailer so I don't absolutely need a pickup... of course SuperDawg will be retained whether operated or not... :) going to look at a basket case '83 Stepside at lunch... Jim Blair, heads up... ;) john ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 09:24:51 -0700 From: Jim Blair Subject: RE: fsj: tech question AW4 is slightly lighter than the 727 (I have carried both recently. I carried a 727 about 100 feet and only about 50 feet for the AW4, but they are both 2wd versions and I don't know how much oil was in the 727 trans. AW4 is empty.) Jim Blair, Lynnwood, WA '87 Comanche, '83 Jeep J10, '84 Jeep J10 - ---------------------------------------- > Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 09:20:09 -0700 > From: dieseljohn-at-comcast.net > To: xj-at-digest.net; fsj-at-digest.net; DZAshby-at-comcast.net; CJ-10List-at-yahoogroups.com > Subject: fsj: tech question > > would there be much difference in sizes between: > > 4.0L / AW4 / NP242 > > SD33 / TF727 / NP208 > > The 4.0 only weighs around 400lbs, while the SD33 is closer to 700 (672)lbs. > > Looking at the engine it looks about the same length as a 4.0, will measure > first chance I get, guess the question is, how much difference between the > AW4 and the TF727? > > the snohomish monster carport is being tempted by the ready availability > of a suspected good SD33T and TF727 and both another '83 J10 stepside > and a couple of XJs, one in particular, a very nice clean '90 XJ limited... > > the tug is doing quite well, but I guess I'm looking for a bit more refinement. > as far as my WVO hauling, already working on some ideas where I don't have > to move barrels, but rather buckets and cubies... and of course I have > my J10 trailer so I don't absolutely need a pickup... of course SuperDawg > will be retained whether operated or not... :) > > going to look at a basket case '83 Stepside at lunch... Jim Blair, heads up... ;) > > john > > > > ----- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold > http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org > http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live^Y SkyDrive^Y: Get 25 GB of free online storage. http://windowslive.com/online/skydrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_SD_25GB_062009 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 09:43:53 -0700 (PDT) From: diesel john Subject: RE: fsj: tech question is there a difference in length? don't care as much about weight extra springs can fix that... :) john ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Jim Blair wrote: # # AW4 is slightly lighter than the 727 (I have carried both recently. I carried a 727 about 100 feet and only about 50 feet for the AW4, but they are both 2wd versions and I don't know how much oil was in the 727 trans. AW4 is empty.) # Jim Blair, Lynnwood, WA '87 Comanche, '83 Jeep J10, '84 Jeep J10 # > Subject: fsj: tech question # > would there be much difference in sizes between: # > 4.0L / AW4 / NP242 # > SD33 / TF727 / NP208 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 11:21:22 -0700 (PDT) From: diesel john Subject: fsj: will it fit? so, just thinking... will the SD33 fit in a '90 XJ? Someone have a 4.0L they can measure from fan to the back of the block? :) main issue will be length... possibly height... weight of the sd33 is 672lbs... the 4.0L/4.2's are around 390lbs john ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 15:29:35 -0700 (PDT) From: diesel john Subject: fsj: comparing cj-10a to J10 and XJ, seating and swaps... ...at lunch time I looked at a 1999 Cherokee Limited... has a few issues but is priced right... runs nicely... needs 02 sensor, tires, paint on front fender/grille... leather and interior are fine... http://wagoneers.com/XJ/rigs/99-XJ-limited-107k/ALL.html downside, it's not a Diesel... questioning how important that really is to me... - --------------- also looked at an '83 J10 stepside for parts, 360/4spd blown rear axle... body rough, some good parts, but I like being married and plan on being so for more than the existing 34 years, so this won't be following me home, sorry dennis... ;) Jim, here ya go! http://wagoneers.com/FSJ/rigs/dennis-1983-j10-stepside-rough/ALL.html while both vehicles aren't likely to follow me home today, I had an ulterior motive for looking at both with tape measure and camera in hand... - ------------------- measured the cab difference between my cj-10a and the J10... http://wagoneers.com/JEEPS/COMPARE-cj10a-XJ-J10/compare-J10-CJ10-cab/ALL.html basically 55" versus about 61", 6 more inches in width... doesn't seem like a lot, until you're trying to place your left elbow somewhere... :) - -------------------- also looked at the 4.0L vs. the 3.2L Diesel... http://wagoneers.com/JEEPS/COMPARE-cj10a-XJ-J10/compare-XJ-CJ10-engines/ALL.html the xj 4.0 seems a bit smaller, didn't get really accurate readings, looks like about 33" to the radiator from the firewall for the xj and about 36" for the SD33. engine height does look to be different, the 4.0 cowered around 24 while the sd33 towered around 31... again, not really accurate... suspect both dimensions would work with some adjustments... and a large hammer... what does red green say? any tool can be the right tool... ;) might work out... if I really want to do all that work... of course since the xj only weighs in around 3,000lbs a Mercedes Turbo Diesel would be a much better option... :) also going to look at a '90 XJ limited also with the preferred tan leather interior and a factory sunroof... I'm learning that just about any 4x4 Diesel or gas is going to get in the 15 to 20 mpg range... and the prices are close... of course I do have WVO and BioDiesel so that makes Diesel the preferred motivation... one other thing I noticed, the xj had a much harsher ride than the cj-10a!!! tires most likely, but when I hit the little lane bumps you could really feel 'em in the xj, not so much in the cj-10a... of course bumps in the road were treated more respectfully by the XJ... didn't get a chance to road test the J10, wasn't going to sit in that seat. ;) john ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 15:39:58 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: fsj: IFS vs. Solid Axle, wasRe: [db] mahindra diesels I disagree that IFS has better ground clearance than solid axles... and here's why: they measure the ground clearance at the LOWEST point.. which is that large bulge you referred to... which happens to be made out of cast iron usually and will do a fine job of moving gravel, mud and other organic material out of it's way... allowing the axle tubes which sit MUCH higher up the opportunity to pass without interference. especially near the edges where the ruts usually live... example: http://wagoneers.com/JEEPS/trail-reports/laborday98/alan2.jpg in an earlier part of this trail the xj's cleared the center mound, but some IFS equipped toyotas got hung up and had to put logs in one part of the trail to make it through... I was giving my buddy from hawaii a tug here, he was running STOCK 205's on this trail with no lift... I was running 30x9.5's with only two inches of lift... the aforementioned 4runners had 31's and 4" of lift... solid axles rule, IFS drools in the mud... impressive specs don't mean much on the trail. ;) ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: # On Tuesday 09 June 2009, my mailbox was graced by a missive # from john who wrote: # # > so are you saying it's NOT superior for road-holding, comfort or reduced # > unsprung weight? I would think that IFS is better for those things, but not # > better for off-road clearance and durability... # # with due respect, M'lud, IFS is _muuuuch_ better for road clearance than # rigid axle can be. # # One example I know very well, the VW Kuebelwagen, with 16" wheels and 5.26x16 # tyres, has a road clearance of 27 cm (about 11" for the heathens) while the # Jeep, with 6.00 x 16 tyres, had a road clearance of only 16 cm (13.5"); the # rigid axle, going straight from wheel centre to wheel centre, and often with # a big differential housing bulge in the middle on a 4WD, does not promote # road clearance while IFS leaves all that space mostly clear. # # The only advantage of straight axles are that they are simple and cheap to # make, but to the detriment of road holding and comfort. # # In Europe, even the cheap cars designed seventy years ago had IFS. # # Cheers, # # Ron. # ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 20:47:59 -0700 From: Jim Blair Subject: RE: fsj: IFS vs. Solid Axle, wasRe: [db] mahindra diesels The BEST suspension is Portal axles! Jim Blair, Lynnwood, WA '87 Comanche, '83 Jeep J10, '84 Jeep J10 - ---------------------------------------- > Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 15:39:58 -0700 > From: john-at-wagoneers.com > To: renaud-at-olgiati-in-paraguay.org > CC: xj-at-digest.net; fsj-at-digest.net; diesel-benz-at-digest.net > Subject: fsj: IFS vs. Solid Axle, wasRe: [db] mahindra diesels > > I disagree that IFS has better ground clearance than solid axles... > > and here's why: they measure the ground clearance at the LOWEST point.. > which is that large bulge you referred to... which happens to be made > out of cast iron usually and will do a fine job of moving gravel, mud > and other organic material out of it's way... allowing the axle > tubes which sit MUCH higher up the opportunity to pass without interference. > especially near the edges where the ruts usually live... > > example: http://wagoneers.com/JEEPS/trail-reports/laborday98/alan2.jpg > > in an earlier part of this trail the xj's cleared the center mound, > but some IFS equipped toyotas got hung up and had to put logs in one > part of the trail to make it through... > > I was giving my buddy from hawaii a tug here, he was running STOCK > 205's on this trail with no lift... I was running 30x9.5's with only > two inches of lift... the aforementioned 4runners had 31's and 4" of lift... > > solid axles rule, IFS drools in the mud... > > impressive specs don't mean much on the trail. ;) > > ----- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold > http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org > http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: > > # On Tuesday 09 June 2009, my mailbox was graced by a missive > # from john who wrote: > # > #> so are you saying it's NOT superior for road-holding, comfort or reduced > #> unsprung weight? I would think that IFS is better for those things, but not > #> better for off-road clearance and durability... > # > # with due respect, M'lud, IFS is _muuuuch_ better for road clearance than > # rigid axle can be. > # > # One example I know very well, the VW Kuebelwagen, with 16" wheels and 5.26x16 > # tyres, has a road clearance of 27 cm (about 11" for the heathens) while the > # Jeep, with 6.00 x 16 tyres, had a road clearance of only 16 cm (13.5"); the > # rigid axle, going straight from wheel centre to wheel centre, and often with > # a big differential housing bulge in the middle on a 4WD, does not promote > # road clearance while IFS leaves all that space mostly clear. > # > # The only advantage of straight axles are that they are simple and cheap to > # make, but to the detriment of road holding and comfort. > # > # In Europe, even the cheap cars designed seventy years ago had IFS. > # > # Cheers, > # > # Ron. > # _________________________________________________________________ Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail.. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutoria l_QuickAdd_062009 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 20:56:25 -0700 From: "Joe" Subject: fsj: RE: comparing cj-10a to J10 and XJ, seating and swaps... I hear about 4bt's getting 20-30MPG in full size trucks all the time. Of course they are highly sought after so your going to pay 3K-5K for a decent 4bt. Of course, at that premium price you could buy a lot of diesel or gas. ;-) I just got 15.2 in my first tank in the Dodge (w/6bt). 120 miles of that last tank was towing a 6K pound trailer. That's with 4.10 gears and 35x12.5 tires. I think you should be able to 20-25 in a jeep with most 4 (or 5) cylinder turbo diesels. Joe Hughes Everett, WA 22 Willys-Overland Touring 49 Willys pickup, Cummins 3.9L 4bt on a 74 Cherokee chassis 50 Willys Wagon, Buick 231 V6 (Wife's) 64 Mercedes S220 Sedan (For Sale) 88 Honda CBR-600 94 BMW 540i e34 6-spd 4.0L 95 Dodge 2500 6bt, 47RH 00 JGC Ltd. 4.7L - -----Original Message----- From: owner-fsj-at-digest.net [mailto:owner-fsj-at-digest.net] On Behalf Of diesel john Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 3:30 PM To: undisclosed-recipients: Subject: fsj: comparing cj-10a to J10 and XJ, seating and swaps... ...at lunch time I looked at a 1999 Cherokee Limited... has a few issues but is priced right... runs nicely... needs 02 sensor, tires, paint on front fender/grille... leather and interior are fine... http://wagoneers.com/XJ/rigs/99-XJ-limited-107k/ALL.html downside, it's not a Diesel... questioning how important that really is to me... - --------------- also looked at an '83 J10 stepside for parts, 360/4spd blown rear axle... body rough, some good parts, but I like being married and plan on being so for more than the existing 34 years, so this won't be following me home, sorry dennis... ;) Jim, here ya go! http://wagoneers.com/FSJ/rigs/dennis-1983-j10-stepside-rough/ALL.html while both vehicles aren't likely to follow me home today, I had an ulterior motive for looking at both with tape measure and camera in hand... - ------------------- measured the cab difference between my cj-10a and the J10... http://wagoneers.com/JEEPS/COMPARE-cj10a-XJ-J10/compare-J10-CJ10-cab/ALL.htm l basically 55" versus about 61", 6 more inches in width... doesn't seem like a lot, until you're trying to place your left elbow somewhere... :) - -------------------- also looked at the 4.0L vs. the 3.2L Diesel... http://wagoneers.com/JEEPS/COMPARE-cj10a-XJ-J10/compare-XJ-CJ10-engines/ALL. html the xj 4.0 seems a bit smaller, didn't get really accurate readings, looks like about 33" to the radiator from the firewall for the xj and about 36" for the SD33. engine height does look to be different, the 4.0 cowered around 24 while the sd33 towered around 31... again, not really accurate... suspect both dimensions would work with some adjustments... and a large hammer... what does red green say? any tool can be the right tool... ;) might work out... if I really want to do all that work... of course since the xj only weighs in around 3,000lbs a Mercedes Turbo Diesel would be a much better option... :) also going to look at a '90 XJ limited also with the preferred tan leather interior and a factory sunroof... I'm learning that just about any 4x4 Diesel or gas is going to get in the 15 to 20 mpg range... and the prices are close... of course I do have WVO and BioDiesel so that makes Diesel the preferred motivation... one other thing I noticed, the xj had a much harsher ride than the cj-10a!!! tires most likely, but when I hit the little lane bumps you could really feel 'em in the xj, not so much in the cj-10a... of course bumps in the road were treated more respectfully by the XJ... didn't get a chance to road test the J10, wasn't going to sit in that seat. ;) john ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 21:14:30 -0700 From: Kevin Subject: Re: fsj: RE: comparing cj-10a to J10 and XJ, seating and swaps... I guess the question is why. The 89 XJ with six banger gasser effortlessly got 25 MPG. The 74 cherokee with 258 with POINTS and a CARB got 20. The 83 with a wiped out 258 and five speed got 21 on its last drive before it got parked. Lots of effort for seemingly little gain, IMO. And I'm someone with half a yard full of diesels. If I'm going through the hassle of a diesel swap in an XJ, it better be getting 30, if not clearing it. Got the cummins powered tow rig back from the shop, will be interesting to see what sort of mileage it gets with a not-horked turbo. I know this tank's mileage isn't going to be good :) On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 08:56:25PM -0700, Joe wrote: > I hear about 4bt's getting 20-30MPG in full size trucks all the time. Of > course they are highly sought after so your going to pay 3K-5K for a decent > 4bt. Of course, at that premium price you could buy a lot of diesel or gas. > ;-) > > I just got 15.2 in my first tank in the Dodge (w/6bt). 120 miles of that > last tank was towing a 6K pound trailer. That's with 4.10 gears and 35x12.5 > tires. > > I think you should be able to 20-25 in a jeep with most 4 (or 5) cylinder > turbo diesels. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 00:24:34 -0400 From: "Neal Hoover" Subject: Re: fsj: IFS vs. Solid Axle, wasRe: [db] mahindra diesels didn't know a Portal axle was a *suspension* type, there, Jim. ;) Neal A. Hoover Project '76 J-10 Project '96 XJ http://community.webshots.com/user/proj96xj - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Blair" To: "john Meister" ; Cc: "xj" ; "local Jeep list" Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 11:47 PM Subject: RE: fsj: IFS vs. Solid Axle, wasRe: [db] mahindra diesels > The BEST suspension is Portal axles! > > > Jim Blair, Lynnwood, WA '87 Comanche, '83 Jeep J10, '84 Jeep J10 > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------- > > Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 15:39:58 -0700 > > From: john-at-wagoneers.com > > To: renaud-at-olgiati-in-paraguay.org > > CC: xj-at-digest.net; fsj-at-digest.net; diesel-benz-at-digest.net > > Subject: fsj: IFS vs. Solid Axle, wasRe: [db] mahindra diesels > > > > I disagree that IFS has better ground clearance than solid axles... > > > > and here's why: they measure the ground clearance at the LOWEST point.. > > which is that large bulge you referred to... which happens to be made > > out of cast iron usually and will do a fine job of moving gravel, mud > > and other organic material out of it's way... allowing the axle > > tubes which sit MUCH higher up the opportunity to pass without > interference. > > especially near the edges where the ruts usually live... > > > > example: http://wagoneers.com/JEEPS/trail-reports/laborday98/alan2.jpg > > > > in an earlier part of this trail the xj's cleared the center mound, > > but some IFS equipped toyotas got hung up and had to put logs in one > > part of the trail to make it through... > > > > I was giving my buddy from hawaii a tug here, he was running STOCK > > 205's on this trail with no lift... I was running 30x9.5's with only > > two inches of lift... the aforementioned 4runners had 31's and 4" of > lift... > > > > solid axles rule, IFS drools in the mud... > > > > impressive specs don't mean much on the trail. ;) > > > > ----- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold > > http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org > > http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: > > > > # On Tuesday 09 June 2009, my mailbox was graced by a missive > > # from john who wrote: > > # > > #> so are you saying it's NOT superior for road-holding, comfort or reduced > > #> unsprung weight? I would think that IFS is better for those things, but > not > > #> better for off-road clearance and durability... > > # > > # with due respect, M'lud, IFS is _muuuuch_ better for road clearance than > > # rigid axle can be. > > # > > # One example I know very well, the VW Kuebelwagen, with 16" wheels and > 5.26x16 > > # tyres, has a road clearance of 27 cm (about 11" for the heathens) while > the > > # Jeep, with 6.00 x 16 tyres, had a road clearance of only 16 cm (13.5"); > the > > # rigid axle, going straight from wheel centre to wheel centre, and often > with > > # a big differential housing bulge in the middle on a 4WD, does not promote > > # road clearance while IFS leaves all that space mostly clear. > > # > > # The only advantage of straight axles are that they are simple and cheap > to > > # make, but to the detriment of road holding and comfort. > > # > > # In Europe, even the cheap cars designed seventy years ago had IFS. > > # > > # Cheers, > > # > > # Ron. > > # > > _________________________________________________________________ > Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail.. > http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutoria > l_QuickAdd_062009 ------------------------------ End of fsj-digest V1 #3350 **************************