Jump to content

Moses Ludel

Administrators
  • Posts

    4,100
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Moses Ludel

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.4WDmechanix.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Reno Area...Nevada
  • Interests
    Family, destination four-wheeling and dual-sport motorcycling, photography, videography, fly-fishing, anthropology, automotive mechanics and welding/metallurgy.

Recent Profile Visitors

33,482 profile views
  1. The box cover makes sense, that's a straight bed for its age. If the sheet metal is sound, you can easily restore and paint this bed...
  2. CJChris...So, you're installing a 4.0L in a CJ7? You want to know whether the OEM CJ 5/16" fuel pipe is adequate fuel flow to the fuel rail? 5/16" fuel flow should be adequate for a stock 4.0L engine. The pressure is fuel pump and rail regulator controlled, which compensates for the fuel line size. Your concern would be 5/16" fuel line gph fuel volume flow, and the stock 4.0L will not "starve" with a 5/16" fuel line. The Mopar EFI Conversion Kit for the 4.2L relies on OEM 1980-86 CJ and early (1987-90) YJ 4.2L chassis fuel lines. The 1994 4.0L MPI/EFI system is two-rail with a pressure regulator at the rail. You need a return line, and I am guessing you'll use the OEM Jeep fuel return line to the tank? You do need a return line with two-rail EFI. The CJs with a BBD carburetor and three pipe fuel filter have that return line to the tank. An external pump is not an issue as long as it's close to the 4.0L OEM fuel pump pressure. These are high pressure pumps. Pump pressure specs are in a 1994 YJ Wrangler or XJ Cherokee FSM. Replacement pump catalogs offer these specs as well...Make sure your fuel supply line connections and any hoses can handle EFI/high pressure. (The carbureted CJ was a light pressure mechanical fuel pump.) Any line, hose or fittings between the high pressure fuel pump and rail must handle the pressure. Moses
  3. RareCJ8...So the wild card might be the new, longer truck springs? A few cell phone pics of the springs, their frame mounts and hangers, and the angle of the stacks would be helpful. I'd like to see how the springs align with the frame at curb/static height and the arch of the installed springs. Leaf springs, as you know, double as a "torsion" member to keep a hypoid/beam axle from rotating. Let's see if the spring installation or alignment is failing to do so and why. You never had this problem before the spring install. A CV driveline is an improvement, not a detriment. The rear U-joint and pinion yoke/driveline angle is off, but it sounds like there's more going on here. Moses
  4. I'm surprised at how straight the bed floor looks. Wheel wells, too. You can take your time assessing the truck's condition now. Out of the weather...Yea!
  5. So back to my points, RareCJ8. The rear CV driveline has the CV at the transfer case end. Those double-Cardan joints self-cancel each other’s angles. Regardless of driveshaft slope angle, you need 1.5-2.0 degrees of pinion shaft-to-driveshaft angle. When you rotate the axle upward to set the pinion joint angle, you also shorten the space between the transfer case and rear axle pinion yoke. The driveshaft is then too long for the space between the transfer case output yoke and the rear pinion yoke. This creates bind. If you have a slip coupler in the rear driveshaft, the shaft could be bottoming in the slip joint. Either way, if the shaft is too long, you will have severe binding as the shaft rotates. Given the amount of angle change you applied, the shaft shortened considerably. If the rear driveshaft needs to be shortened be sure to have a slip joint built into the assembly. End goal is a rear pinion angle of 1.5-2.0 degrees. When you measure for shaft length and the pinion angle, the rear pinion angle should be 1.5-2.0 degrees with the Jeep setting on level ground and full weight on the springs and axles. This is “curb height”, which is the baseline for driveshaft fitting. Do not measure with the vehicle lifted by the frame. If springs and axles are hanging, the measurement will be too long. From what you describe, it sounds like the rear driveshaft is too long for the pinion angle you are trying to achieve. As for how to rotate the axle for the 1.5-2.0 degree pinion angle, you can use steel shims or relocate the spring perches. If the steel shims will not rotate the axle far enough, you would need to relocate the spring perches. Regarding spacer blocks with a slope to replace the shims, that’s an option. My Ram 3500 has angled spacer blocks as part of the 4” lift kit. Longer U-bolts, accordingly. I never get spring wrap or any other issues. When the driveline is the correct length for curb height, and pinion joint angle is correct, there should be no wrap-up with stiff springs. If your springs are not up to stiffness, you can have spring stacks built to reduce risk of wrap-up. I’m not clear what springs you run, they should be ¾-ton truck capacity at least. Modifying the rear springs with a stiffer main leaf and lighter secondary leafs could resist spring wrap and still provide reasonable ride quality. Here, a spring shop takes rear vehicle weight (loaded and unloaded) into consideration. The spring sag with the load could indicate too light a spring rate, although I know you carry a substantial trail gear load. Stiffer rear springs or main leafs would level the Jeep and also provide some anti-wrap capability. (Spring arch can be configured for your front/rear ride height correction in the process.) The stiff main leaf at each side would act like a rear traction bar. If the driveline/rear pinion is at the correct angle, driveshaft sized to proper length, a slip coupler on the rear driveline, etc., and the rear spring wrap persists, you could consider anti-wrap bars or the fulcrum solutions. In looking over the offerings at Summit Racing, there are many traction solutions to counter spring wrap. As you suggest, this is a last resort. Correct all other issues before considering traction bars, fulcrums, etc. Moses
  6. Rare CJ8...I know your chassis is modified with 3/4-ton truck axles (Sterling at the rear.) If you mean that the rear U-joint angle measures 6-degrees, that could be the problem. When you run a CV at the transfer case end, each of the double Cardan joints cancel each other, i.e. the “angle” of that joint becomes irrelevant. When you do a CV at the transfer case end, the rear axle pinion shaft-to-driveline angle should be 1.5 to 2.0 degrees with the vehicle resting on the ground, axles fully weighted. This is the upward canted pinion so common with CV drivelines. Essentially, you could run 0-degrees at the pinion shaft/yoke end, but this would not enable the rear U-joint’s needles to rotate, resulting in rapid wear of the single-Cardan rear U-joint. The 1.5-2.0 degree angle is simply to keep the U-joint’s bearing cap needles rotating. Again, the CV is always self-cancelling angles; the rear axle shaft pinion is then set close to a straight line with the sloping driveshaft (1.5 to 2.0 degrees rear U-joint angle maximum). This could account for both the axle wrap and the tearing up of the rear driveline. Also, if you're running Jeep springs at the back, the main leafs could be too weak to resist spring wrap, a contributing factor. Modifying the rear springs with a stiff main leaf and lighter secondary leafs could resist spring wrap. The stiff main leaf would act like a traction bar. If the rear driveline joints are at correct angles, if the driveshaft is the proper length with the axle pinion angle set, and if you have a properly centered slip coupler on this rear CV driveline, the spring wrap and shaft binding should go away. If the spring wrap persists, Summit Racing and others have a variety of traction bar solutions. Link and coil suspension is an option, but as you share, expensive. I would start by correcting the rear pinion joint angle and the driveshaft length. Moses
  7. The truck's safe and ready when you are...School, kids, I-H project—sounds like a full plate!
  8. -50 ought to do it! 1961 or '62 would be a Ross or Gemmer steering gear. Code or housing casting number will confirm actual type/application. Found a good parts reference at eBay. Check this out and copy: https://www.ebay.com/itm/184588765889 Looks like the inline six would have been a 240 or 241 (BD design). I worked on these engines, they were rugged four-main bearing OHV design but certainly not world beaters for horsepower. I can understand why your truck got a V-8 transplant, a big one at that! Moses
  9. Drain the block was a reminder if you filled the Mopar V-8's cooling system with straight water...Prior to use of Saginaw recirculating ball steering gears, the steering gears on the I-H pickups were either Ross or Gemmer. The ratios were slow (lots of turns lock-to-lock), so it's likely the truck steers well with manual steering. What year is the chassis? I'll research the steering gear. Have you found the I.D. plate?
  10. Oh, boy! It's alive and running under its own steam. Out of the raspberries, the I-H 4x4 looks much better. Potential here, your instincts were good. This move is just in time for the freezing weather. You can now see what you have here and make plans. How does the beast steer with manual steering? It's a slow ratio steering gear with lots of turns lock-to-lock. Those closed knuckles at the front axle offer plenty of feedback...Drain the block.
  11. Kevin...3.54 gears would "get by" if you were primarily highway driving. The T176 gearing is respectable despite no compound 1st or overdrive. If that transmission is your future, 3.54 gears with 31" tires would be approximately what the Jeep feels like with stone stock tires (225/75SB15 or 28.3" diameter) and 3.08s. Here are the 65 mph engine speeds in 4th/direct gear for each axle ratio, including your current 3.08s and 31" tires: 1) 2,320 rpm with near stock tires (29")and 3.08s 2) 2,170 rpm with 31" tires and your current 3.08s 3) 2,494 rpm with 31" tires and 3.54s 4) 2,628 rpm with 31" tires and 3.73s If seen this way, and if near stock tires (28.3"-29") and 3.08s were livable, your idea of 3.54s on a budget build is not bad. The 4.6L stroker motor would be a happy camper below 2,500 rpm and not eat as much fuel. Highway driving looks a lot better with the 3.54s if your new camshaft is a torque grind for bottom end and mid-range performance (idle to 4,000 rpm). 31" tires and 3.54s would be a sweet spot for the engine, at peak torque on the highway in 4th gear. (3.08s would feel like a modern "overdrive" in 4th/direct gear.) Here are the transmission ratios for the T176, courtesy of our friends at Advance Adapters: 1st gear 3.52:1 2nd gear 2.29:1 3rd Gear 1.46:1 4th Gear 1.00:1 Reverse 3.52:1 You have a reasonably low first gear (not compound, though) with 4th direct. Without overdrive, this is a juggling act, balancing between performance, fuel efficiency and engine rpm. You might leave the axle gearing alone until after you get the engine together and have a chance to drive the vehicle with the lift, 31" tires and stock gearing. The axle ratio choice would then be based on a real world "feel" for how the Jeep performs. With a strong clutch, you could drive the Jeep and evaluate its performance and loads in each gear before making an informed choice about the optimal axle gearing. As for books, the one that would serve you well at this moment is the Jeep® CJ Rebuilder's Manual: 1972-86 edition (Bentley Publishers), available from a variety of sources, including Amazon and Bentley. It's hands on and in-depth on axles, the transfer case and other mechanical service work. Moses
  12. Hi, Kevin...A 2-2.5" chassis lift (only) has historically been a 31"x10.5"x15" or equivalent metric tire size on 8-inch negative offset rims. With the non-overdrive T176, highway driving would benefit from 3.73s. The 4.6L stroker motor will easily pull this gearing with a good clutch (Centerforce or similar) behind the engine. You have a Dana 300 low range ratio for decent off-pavement trail running. If the vehicle were driven primarily off-pavement, 4.11s would be a consideration with this tire size. 33" tires would dictate 4.11 gears plus a chassis lift (only) of 4" for that tire diameter. I'm not a fan of body lifts, they create body, radiator, steering shaft and other alignment issues, so I think in terms of a chassis lift. If not worn (41 years old?), you could use the internals with new ring-and-pinion gear sets. I like a manual locker at least at the rear, historically running an ARB Air Locker. Front and rear lockers are generally for hardcore wheeling. A rear only locker will make a world of difference under most driving conditions. I prefer a manual locker for more control and safety on off-camber trails where a locked axle can cause both wheels at an axle to spin, and the vehicle slides sideways to the low side of the trail. Here, I run open differentials front and rear for better directional stability. I address this in my Jeep® books. Moses
  13. Looks like the home stretch for getting the 4x4 to your place...Yep, snow needs to stay away. Can see that the cold weather has shown up, but the engine is starting right up.
  14. Well, our rain turned to snow this morning, a first for the fall, warming toward the end of the week, so I know your pain. Your crew cab 4x4 sounds close to live action!
×
×
  • Create New...