Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[topcat]

Please find below an e,mail I have recently sent John Carroll editor of 4x4 magazine:

I loved your  allegory in last month's magazine concerning those who dare to wear Tesco own brand jeans very perceptive! I am sure that there will be those who disagree- but you are the Editor and you should be able to air your feelings even if they might be prejudicial to Renault dealers!

As you may know I have a number of 4X4s, and I am currently having my V8 CJ7 restored, (and painted in the correct colour this time). I am very used to old American machinery having had two 40 year old Chevrolet Camaros for 20 years each. But what confuses me over Jeep ownership- which inevitably involve Jeep improvements- is the plethora of differing parts and suppliers that do not seem to match over the years. There are Dana 44 axles, type 20 axles, 300 transfer boxes and the like much of which does not seem to be interchangeable between the original CJ and the more modern TJ and YJ variants. For example if you were looking for a 5 speed manual would a modern TJ box fit a CJ? Which is the preferred option?  I mention these things because in the world of Chevrolet everything is relatively straightforward- sure there are Muncies and Richmond gearboxes but effectively only two axles 10 bolt and 12 bolt with or without LSD (Positraction), laterly 5 speed transmissions, but all gearboxes come in either 26 or 10 splines and all are interchangeable. For example I could fit the latest 6 speed transmission from a Z06 Corvette to my 1968 racing Camaro if the Historic regulations allowed me to do so!. Is the modern 4.0 straight six a development of the venerable 4.2 AMC straight six? Was the Dauntless V6 engine in early CJs related to the Buick V8 all aluminium engine that later provided such good service to Land Rover (and others)?

I appreciate that this is a huge subject, but I feel sure that you do have the knowledge- perhaps a good idea for a book?

Guidance and help would be appreciated!
Finally I would love to know the reasoning behind the Wrangler Jeep nomenclature, CJ stood for "Civilian Jeep", but YJ and TJ? I think the  YJ Jeep is the unfortunate Jeep whose reputation never really recovered from starring in the TV programme "Queer as Folk", can the YJ Jeep owner buy a round headlight kit to make it look more like a CJ?


No doubt Members will have views on these matters

regards
TopCat

[Roland]

:wink:

http://http://www.jeepwranglerclub.com/

[longman]

NOOOOOOOOO,
 

Finally I would love to know the reasoning behind the Wrangler Jeep nomenclature, CJ stood for "Civilian Jeep", but YJ and TJ? I think the YJ Jeep is the unfortunate Jeep whose reputation never really recovered from starring in the TV programme "Queer as Folk", can the YJ Jeep owner buy a round headlight kit to make it look more like a CJ?

Whats all this about " Folk,queer, Jeeps and square lamps !  

P.S I allready have a thing for round lamps on my YJ .

[Panic mechanic!]

wasn't there a record in the 80's that had the lyrics... its hip to be square?
think that kinda says it all.....

[longman]

You are right BUT,
Isn't there a saying "You can't fit a square peg in a round hole"
Eye !!!!

[Bubba]

the very short answer to the lack of interchangeabilty is simple jeep has been owned as a brand by that many companys and they have all meddeled ant atempted to use there own parts to help ease the suply in there line up of products
general moters has been fortunate in that it has remained its own boss
i am fairly sure this probably the reply you will get from john carol if he replys you cant be an editor without having strong veiws if only to provoke
a response
you will find all the help on birtys we are the secret haven for cjs you wont find us in print much but we are still the best place in the uk to
find most things out

[alcoholicmaggot]

Having met John Carroll on a few occaisions and sold him a coulpe of jeeps your probably find its more likely to be a printed response if the 4x4 mag by one of the other so called experts, if its answered at all that is

[Bubba]

un fortunatly you may be correct about so called experts


x=an unkown quantity
spurt= a drip under presure


i am sure if john replys you should get a reasonable reply

[Mike Pavelin]

Bubba's right. Jeep has changed hands many times and for much of the time, especially with AMC especially components came from many sources from GM to Renault. Things calmed down a bit once Jeep was taken under the Chrysler's wing in the '80s, only to go a bit pear shaped again with the so-called merger with Daimler Benz.

[Bubba]

to my best recolection the only gearbox that cossed the cj yj tj line up is the torquflight 999 its a good box well up to a v8 it has only one isue in that it has a vent in the bellhousing that does not like deep water but the vent can be modded
other than that why get uptight over five speeds auto is far more flexable offroad

[Mike Pavelin]

The AX 15 5 speed was fitted to YJs around 1991 and continued in the TJ until 2000.

[Bubba]

changing gears by hand is very over rated

[MOCAJ]

its what your left hand and foots for  

[Warthog]

You are right BUT,
Isn't there a saying "You can't fit a square peg in a round hole"
Eye !!!!

You can make anything fit if you want it to :wink:

[Bubba]

the torqu flight was a lot stronger than the zf that replaced it

[JamesH]

The Dana 44 axle and to some extent the Dana 30 axle have been used in a lot of models over a long period of time. There are variants, D30 disconnect, LP/HP etc but as Warthog said, it's a case of chanign times and demands, hence why no 4.0 in production now. 231 & 242 transfercases are pretty widespread too, albeit in newer 1984- models.

[Warthog]

the torqu flight was a lot stronger than the zf that replaced it

Yup, no question aboot that.

But the ZF box helped with overall/all round drivabilty of said vehicles, so im led to believe. Better Mpg, towing............Pretty sure ZF auto boxes are in several Marques of today (German engineering, good but boring)

The point i was trying to make is that changes happen to hopefully make a more efficient product etc But the problem is, for the likes of us. The concurrent amount of changes in product parts is hard to keep up with, but a neccesary evil to improvement.

But hey, like you said Bubba. Theres a wealth of knowledge to be found on here for all your Jeeper part enquiries :roll:

[topcat]

Hi
Many thanks for all your valuable input-- and I didn't get a response from JC-- but there again he has moved on to pastures new from the 4x4 mag.

Now looking at a restoration projcet CJ7 with a 5 litre V8 (of course) but with a 3 speed manual gearbox-- is there a 5 speeder that will fit  - perhaps from a later TJ?

All guidance gratefully acknoweledged!

regards
Topcat

[Nosebolt]

the Borg-Warner 13-52 (T5) 5-Speed Manual will fit between a AMC 360 V8 (5.9L) and a Dana 300 Transfer box

[isle of man]

Try this....... http://www.novak-adapt.com/knowledge/sm465.htm

[doublej]

first off - im not a fan of jeep, im an import guy by heart. and if you didnt know im American too.
when was a cj made? say 20 years oldish..... so for 20 years you dont think a car builder should not improve its design?
ohhh and chevy is crap by the way.

[Nosebolt]

keep reading the title of this post not sure why it didn't feel right,

just realised, why would CJ parts fit a TJ? its like asking why 1980 Ford Sieria parts dont fit the new 2009 Mondao, just because a manufacturer has maintained a model within the same class for many years dont mean it will use the same parts, how could it, if a TJ used CJ parts it would be CJ and not the product of a futher 30 years development.

[doublej]

see.... and i thought i was just going to be pissing people off.