Moses Ludel

Jeepstroker...The 3-speed manual transmissions offered for light duty trucks through the 1970s were replaced in the 1980s with the four- and five-speed light duty overdrive transmissions (T5 Warner, Aisin AX4, AX5 and AX15 and others). These became the base transmission offerings to meet emissions requirements and fuel efficiency. In the 3-speed era, the most rugged transmissions were the T85 and T89 Borg Warner units and the Chrysler/New Process 3-speeds used in big engine muscle cars. None of these transmissions were designed to handle 800 horsepower. I will note that the T85 and T89, or the Chrysler muscle car units could handle an honest 400-425 horsepower. From 1957 onward through the muscle car era, the "high performance" transmissions were always four-speed units like the Borg-Warner T10, the "Rock Crusher", the Saginaw GM and Muncie units and the Chrysler New Process transmissions. These were all-synchromesh on forward gears and designed for drag racing and even track use in the Corvette or Trans Am cars. The T10, in particular, was a popular swap into Jeep CJ 4x4s used for sand drags or hill climb competition with engines to 300 horsepower or so. I believe that for 800 horsepower and a manual transmission, you need a heavy-duty truck transmission, one designed for the bigger Ram 2500/3500 with a Cummins diesel engine or even a medium-duty truck. Shafts, bearings, gear size and tooth contact area, the overall stamina for the kind of torque you describe requires the use of an NV4500 or NV5600 transmission. In fact, there are many XJ Cherokee models with the NV4500 behind a modified 4.0L engines. Advance Adapters can furnish adapters for this transmission to the stroker 4.0L engines you build. In my Jeep CJ Rebuilder's Manual (Bentley Publishers), I feature an NV4500 in a CJ-7 Jeep with a Dana 300 transfer case. I also used this transmission in a Toyota Land Cruiser FJ40 with a 350-plus horsepower 383 Chevrolet stroker V-8, the 4x4 is featured in my Toyota Truck & Land Cruiser Owner's Bible. I used a fresh Toyota transfer case behind it. For 800 horsepower, I would use an Advance Adapters' Atlas II transfer case. In my view, there was never a 3-speed manual transmission built to handle torque and horsepower in the 800 HP range. Even WWII GMC "deuce-and-a-half" 4x4 trucks built from 1942 forward used the GM SM420 four-speed with compound low gear. This SM420, by the way, has been a very popular Jeep 4x4 retrofit transmission since the 1950s, usually attached to a Chevy V-8 engine conversion or at least a V-6 transplant. Jeep used the BW T98A truck four-speed in many '50s to 1971 models, replaced by the T18 four-speed option in the '70s. Four-speed truck transmissions were always more rugged than the base 3-speed offerings, including the Jeep CJ's BW T90, T86, T14 or T15. And none of these truck four-speeds are as strong as an NV4500 or NV5600. Is there a reason why you would not consider the NV4500 5-speed transmission, a conversion that many have done with the XJ Cherokee, Jeep CJ and the Wranglers? Why the need for a three-speed manual transmission? Again, a more rugged three speed automatic transmission (GM Turbo 400, Chrysler 727A Torqueflite or a Ford C-6) could be built to barely withstand this kind of horsepower. Moses

Connercop...I purposely geared the Ram 3500 to reach 2000-2100 rpm at 65-69 mph highway speeds. The "new" torque peak rpm (2100) with the Max Energy program is in step with maximizing fuel efficiency at the torque peak. In my case, 65 mph is 1980 rpm, 2100 is close to 69. This is with 34.6" diameter tires and 4.56:1 gearing. In addition to mileage, my aim is to see 500K or more trouble free miles out of this Cummins 5.9L and squeeze as many miles out of the 48RE as possible before I personally pull it and do the rebuild. (When the transmission needs rebuilding, I have a list of Sonnax upgrade parts planned to extend its life for the next go-around.) The way I drive and tow, the 48RE is still quite viable at over 140K miles. I did tow your gross vehicle combination weight for about 600 miles total, several round trips during a shop equipment move. The route included an 8 percent grade with a standing start at its base, which we did five times...and the 48RE has survived to this point. What I have learned is our trucks' sensitivity to weight, gearing and engine speed. I just returned from the Las Vegas SEMA Show. For those familiar with US. Highway 95 from Fallon, Nevada to Las Vegas, this is a peculiar road, and I'm sure you have them in your area as well. There is gradual climbing to Tonopah/Goldfield (the first 200 miles from Fernley). Goldfield is 6,100 feet, and Las Vegas is 2,184 feet, with 184.2 miles between these points. I ran the Ram with only auxiliary fuel, my unladen weight approaching 9,000 pounds with full fuel. Downhill for much of the 410 miles from Fernley to Las Vegas got me a whopping 24 miles per gallon! I only used 17 gallons over this section. On the return trip, same route, I used the 17 gallons to reach Beatty, only 120 miles from Las Vegas. The whole trip averaged 20.4 miles per gallon. The moral of this story is that load and weight make a dramatic difference in mileage. In my experiences, loads decrease mileage far more than downgrades tend to increase mileage. I knew that when I added accessories, a lift and oversized tires, plus auxiliary fuel capacity, that the mileage would suffer. And it has. The direct gearing correction for the oversized tires would have been 4.10:1 when compared to the original 3.73 gearing. I will say with certainty that 4.10s would not have restored fuel efficiency and more than likely would have the 48RE on my workbench by now. Today, AAM offers 4.30:1 gearing (not available when I changed gears), and this might be worth a try. Or like your plan, I could try to squeeze larger tires under the fenders, perhaps a true 36" diameter. In the long run, that might be a better gamble, as we can restore tire size more readily than changing ring-and-pinion gear sets. In earlier discussions, I mentioned the Gear Vendors overdrive as another option. You have a very busy setup with the six-speed manual transmission already, and perhaps the Gear Vendors overdrive would complicate this further. The entire premise is maximizing engine torque through split shifting, finding just the right gear for each occasion and load. To understand this premise more thoroughly, I suggest looking at the Gear Vendors approach: https://www.gearvendors.com/4x4dmanual.html. The charts confirm the sensitivity of gearing and its relationship to torque and horsepower. You can see how dramatically a subtle change will impact the balance. When I installed the Hypertech Max Energy program with the highest output setting, the manufacturer was certain that there would be a substantial mileage gain from this single change. Unfortunately, to make that comparison would have taken me back to the stone stock truck, with no accessories, stock gearing and OE tire diameter. I made all of the current modifications before trying the Max Energy programming. If you do make this upgrade with no other changes to your Ram truck, please share the gains! This would be valuable to others considering the software program re-tune. Moses

Woodstock...The SEMA Show was huge and productive, I'm always glad to go, it's great to get home, too! Have HD video to share at the magazine, footage in post-production now. The full transmission flush is useful in any case at this mileage. This could relieve a problem, and at the least, this will reduce risk of obstructions or sludge within the transmission. The cooler inside Wrangler radiators seldom clog, and if they do, engine coolant temperature generally rises or becomes erratic. Critical ground points will be obvious: battery to engine, to the frame, to the body. Check these grounds and the PCM or transmission controller grounds. A simple check is the ohmmeter resistance reading from the battery to the device. For more accurate testing, ground circuits can be tested with a lamp load test. Here's more info on that test: http://forums.4wdmechanix.com/topic/429-testing-ground-and-wiring-circuits/?hl=%2Blamp+%2Bload+%2Btest. I'm not sure about your climate. If humid, there is risk of poor connections and oxidation at plug connector contacts. (This can occur from water fording as well.) Connector oxidation is typically a "black" coating or tarnish at the contacts. This is difficult to remove and should never be scraped with sharp objects. A good electrical contact cleaner and Scotch Brite pads work best for me, and I start with "Fine" grade. Brush rather than scrub if you need to clean up small contacts. Larger ground eye-ring terminals and attachment points can be cleaned with a more aggressive approach. Battery acid corrosion cleans up well with baking soda, water and a brush. Wear eye protection and protect painted surfaces. As for the time I allot to the forums, members' questions are always worth addressing! Members are a great bunch of enthusiasts, DIY mechanics and shop personnel seeking credible and even urgent answers. That's my job! Moses

Hi, jeepstroker!…Can’t think of any manual 2 or 3-speed that will handle 800 horsepower. (An Atlas II transfer case, by itself, would be a 2-speed that could handle this torque.) For 800 horsepower, racers use a racing version of the Powerglide 2-speed automatic transmission. Advance Adapters might be able to configure an adapter for the 4.0L Jeep engine to a Powerglide or the GM Turbo 350 or 400 3-speed automatics, which can be rebuilt and upgraded to handle this high horsepower. Manual transmissions that can handle the torque you describe typically use a 4-speed, 5-speed or 6-speed “truck” type platform. Also, Jeep used the Chrysler 727A automatic, a three speed. This same transmission design was also used behind Dodge/Plymouth 426 hemi muscle car engines and in Dodge class A motor homes. You could adapt a 727 Torqueflite from a late 1980s to 1991Grand Wagoneer to the Jeep engine. The AMC 360 V-8 is the same bellhousing pattern as your 4.0L. A racing build 727 Torqueflite could handle 800 horsepower. You will also need a transfer case that can handle this torque is you are running 4WD and low range. The Advance Adapters Atlas II, well tested in 4x4 truck and Ultra4 racing, can handle this kind of torque. If you still want a manual transmission, you need an NV4500 or NV5600 truck transmission for this kind of torque and horsepower…See NV4500 adapters to the 4.0L engine at Advance Adapters: www.advanceadapters.com. Any passenger car or light duty/compact truck or Jeep XJ Cherokee/Wrangler transmission will not handle this horsepower. Advance Adapters can supply the adapters and likely a rebuilt NV4500 transmission. There will be driveshaft length changes needed. Moses

Connercop...In the PDF I provided on the 2006 Ram models, I also found that there is only a listing for the 3.73 gears with the 6-speed NV5600 transmission. Your rpm at 60-65 mph in overdrive (6th gear) would indicate otherwise. Here is the NV5600 ratio data for the 2006 models from the PDF linked above: TRANSMISSION: NV5600—MANUAL, SIX-SPEED OVERDRIVE Availability____________________________________Std. with 5.9-liter high-output diesel engine Description_________________________________________________Synchronized in all gears Gear Ratios 1st_______________________________________________________________________3.21 2nd______________________________________________________________________1.83 3rd______________________________________________________________________1.41 4th_______________________________________________________________________1.00 5th_______________________________________________________________________0.82 6th_______________________________________________________________________0.63 Reverse__________________________________________________________________4.44 Overall Top Gear Ratio_________________________2.72 with 3.73 axle; 2.99 with 4.10 axle ratio Note that the final drive ratio is a 2.72:1 equivalent in 6th gear overdrive with the 3.73 axle. With 4.10:1, the final drive ratio equivalent in overdrive (6th) is 2.99:1. Your tires should be in the 31.4" to 31.6" diameter range depending upon wheel rim width and tire manufacturer. Let's use 31.5" as a baseline. At 65 mph, this translates to 1886 rpm for the 3.73 ratio axle in 6th gear and 2073 rpm for 4.10:1 axle gearing in 6th gear. There is a distinct difference. Your data for 65 mph (speedometer presumed accurate), with the corrected tach rpm, is clearly the 4.10:1 axle. You can very simply determine the rear axle ratio with the vehicle's rear axle and tires perched safely off the ground. Mark a tire and the driveshaft position with chalk. Rotate both wheels simultaneously one exact revolution forward while counting the driveshaft rotations. You need to rotate the wheels together in order to cancel the differential's effect. (Sometimes this will occur naturally if you have a limited slip axle.) This is the actual ring gear rotation. The pinion shaft will multiply the number of rotations based upon the ring-and-pinion gear tooth counts. If the driveshaft rotates 3.73 times, you have 3.73 gears. If the driveshaft rotates 4.10 times, you have 4.10 gears. Another way to do this is with the differential cover removed, like when you're changing the lube with the wheels off the ground. Mark the ring gear or tone ring and rotate it exactly one rotation while counting the pinion shaft/driveshaft rotations. You'll once again be looking for either 3.73 or 4.10 rotations of the pinion shaft/driveshaft to one rotation of the ring gear. Moses

I'm back from the SEMA Show, Jason...Thanks for the additional information. Let's follow your hint that the 42RLE is throwing these trouble codes in and of itself, with none of your vehicle modifications applying. Some areas to consider... Do you have a transmission temperature gauge? Are there any telltale signs of a plugged transmission cooler and actual heating up of the transmission? You've been driving this Jeep a very long time, how does the engine temperature seem when these codes occur? I'm seeking a correlation between the transmission malfunction codes. Collectively, they point to the possibility of a higher operating temperature for the transmission, fluid thinning or even a filter/pickup issue. Have you changed the transmission filter and fluid? These units use Mopar ATF-4 or equivalent synthetic ATF and do require routine maintenance, including periodic filter changes. The 4WD version of this transmission first appeared in the Liberty KJ, models that tend to get more deliberate fluid and filter maintenance, often at the dealership. How often have you changed the fluid in this transmission, and with all the work done to date, how old is the current filter and fluid? Any kind of restriction, cooler flow issues or even a filter not installed properly can wreak havoc. Taking into account that there have been trips inside this oil pan with valve body and solenoid work, did that work include a new filter installation? If so, if codes existed before and after the transmission work, we're looking for a trouble spot outside of the valve body and solenoids. That could be a cooler or cooler flow restriction, or restricted fluid pick up. If this were my Jeep, I would first run actual transmission pressure test sequences at the case test ports to see if there is an actual pressure problem anywhere. I would check cooler (at the radiator) flow to be certain there is no restriction at the cooler or cause for a hotter running transmission. If the Jeep has done a lot of trail running, I would do a full transmission flush to eliminate converter and internal case and clutch unit debris. This is not simply relying on a "fluid change", which is nothing more than draining the accessible fluid in the pan, a portion of the overall fluid, and replenishing fluid additives at best. Automatic transmissions are hypersensitive to debris, and friction discs slough off material that finds its way to nooks and crannies of the transmission and torque converter—tending to stay there short of a complete overhaul or at least a successful full flush (done with a flushing machine). Since this is a come-and-go issue, should we suspect any wiring or plug/connector issues, perhaps a poor signal to the PCM that's causing these random code cycles? A common connector with contact corrosion? Ground issues? As for grounds, they are just as vital as "hot" circuits on a 12VDC system. A poor or corroded ground at the powertrain, chassis or engine can be a trouble source. I would check over the grounds, PCM connectors, and any wiring that relates to the 42RLE transmission. Poor connections, corrosion or faulty grounds will generate trouble codes. Moses

Hi, connercop, pleased to see your participation at this topic! First off, glad you had the tach corrected, as these engines and fuel efficiency are very closely related to engine rpm, load and road speed. You should have a tag on the rear axle indicating the ratio, and if not, at least a code tag. Please share that information and indicate whether you have a manual or automatic transmission. If an automatic, it will be the 48RE that we have in our '05 Ram 3500 4x4. The manual is likely an NV5600 six-speed...Please clarify. If you are running 2000 to 2100 rpm at 65 with stock tires in overdrive, I am reasonably certain that you do have 4.10 gears and not 3.73. Regardless of transmission type, a taller tire might help if you do have the 4.10 gears in the AAM 11.5" axle. If you have 3.73 gears, common with the automatic and your tire size (which was my OEM, too), a taller tire could actually hurt mileage, as I've clarified in posts above. Especially with the 11,000 pound trailer, taller tires that effectively act like a taller axle ratio, would place a greater load on the engine and geartrain. We do far less towing with our '05 3500 4x4 and have only pulled a load like yours a few times. Most of our trailering has been within the 5,500-8,000 pound trailer weight range. The 21 MPG empty at 65 is less than the peak I achieved when our '05 was totally stock and had 3.73 gears with the 48RE automatic transmission. if your road was essentially flat, with no headwinds or other load variables, I would expect 23-24 MPG running empty at that road speed. That stated, with an 11,000 pound trailer in tow, 3.73 gears would likely deliver much poorer towing mileage than the 4.10 gears. In a nutshell, heavy loads and taller gearing (numerically lower) are not practical. Increasing tire diameter then towing your 11,000 pound trailer loads would likely result in poorer towing fuel mileage as well. Add to this the extra load on the powertrain. The stock peak torque point with your truck's 5.9L is fairly low at 1600 rpm. I would assert that taller gearing or larger tires would be tolerable and actually increase fuel efficiency when running empty. (Stone stock truck with 3.73 gears, I always achieved the best mileage between 1,600-1,900 rpm, the closer to 1,600 the better.) Pulling a trailer with taller gearing (axle ratio change or larger diameter tires) would tax the powertrain, though, and likely produce poorer fuel efficiency when towing. Especially with the 48RE, I would not do the larger diameter tires or a gear change to 3.73 ratio if pulling an 11,000 pound trailer regularly. All of this considered, you might benefit from the Hypertech 'Max Energy' reprogramming as I did. (Click here for the HD video and article I did at the magazine on the Hypertech Max Energy programs for the Ram/Cummins and Jeep 4.0L. The Ram coverage applies to your engine and powertrain.) This torque and horsepower boost also pushes up the peak torque rpm to 2,100 rpm. This is where you currently drive and perhaps want to tow with your truck. The program boasts being "tow friendly", though I cannot substantiate this from personal testing, we don't tow an 11,000 pound trailer with the '05 and the Max Energy programming. If I were to use the Max Energy full-performance mode (which I currently do on my Ram 3500) and planned to tow beyond our current 8,000 pound trailer weight limit, I would install an engine pyrometer on the exhaust manifold (pre-turbo side at the manifold's higher heat point). I'd want to monitor the exhaust temperature and use that as a "barometer" for when to back my foot out of the throttle and protect the engine. Here are the official specifications for your 2006 Ram truck, scroll down for Cummins 2500/3500 details: http://www.media.chrysler.com/dcxms/assets/specs/2006DodgeRamMegaCabSpecs.pdf. Looking forward to your comments and thoughts! Moses

Sound like you do have the later Mopar EFI conversion setup in its entirety, 60Bubba! I would mount the fuel pump close to the tank, it's a push type pump and likes to pick up from a short distance. The pressure regulator/filter goes between the fuel pump and the engine. Think of this in comparison to the factory 1997-up fuel pump module: pump in the tank, the regulator mounted atop the module (post-pump) then the single line going to the engine fuel rail. Your tank return from the regulator can now be short and goes directly into the existing return pipe at the tank, as you share in your photos. Here is a view of the factory pump module with regulator/filter at the top. You can see the orientation of these parts, even though in your case they are outboard of the fuel tank. This will make sense: 1997-up TJ Wrangler Fuel Pump and Sender Module.pdf The "module" depicted has a filter at the bottom like your sock filter on the CJ pickup tube should have. Inside the module, considered part of an assembly, is the fuel pump. This is a actually a replacement item with an aftermarket Walbro (now TI Automotive) pump. The unseen pump pushes fuel up to the "filter" at the top that looks like your remote regulator module. In this case, though, your filter/regulator has a custom bottom chamber that permits the remote location outside the fuel tank. The other component of the factory '97-up module is the fuel gauge sender, you see the float arm in this illustration. Your CJ fuel gauge and float assembly are within the fuel tank with the two pipes coming out the top of that assembly or "module". One pipe is the pickup pipe for fuel supply, the other pipe is the return line from original Jeep CJ 4.2L fuel filter near the carburetor. Conveniently, the Mopar EFI conversion uses this return pipe for its filter/regulator fuel return to the tank. An advantage of the shorter lines is quicker fuel return to the tank. Even though the return line is unrestricted into the tank, the longer distance (current setup on your CJ) does create a load of sorts for the pump. As you can see from the factory setup, the regulator is designed to simply spit the overage fuel right back into the fuel tank, with no return line of any kind. With the Mopar kit's remote regulator/filter, I would try to shorter the distance to the tank and more closely emulate the factory method. 1981-86 Jeep CJ Fuel Tanks.pdf Another concern is the pickup sock in the tank. Above is the illustration of what that setup looks like. (I included both the 15 and 20 gallon tank views.) The sock is important in your case because it fits before the fuel pump and is the only protection for the electric fuel pump itself. The filter/regulator is after the pump, so it only protects the injectors—not the pump itself. I would want to make sure that the in-tank pickup tube filter "sock" is intact and clean, sealing well on the pickup pipe and serving the purpose of filtering fuel before the fuel pump. If you decide to remove the tank/gauge assembly to inspect the pickup tube and filter/sock, look carefully within the tank for any signs of debris or corrosion. If so, try to safely (no sparks, please!) clean up the tank while the gauge sender assembly is removed. This opening is sizeable. Moses

Jason...Do you still have the ABS brakes and sensors? Is the speedometer driven gear corrected for the tire diameter? Or do you have an electronic correction device? Does the transmission ever exhibit slip or other symptoms that correlate to low supply pressure or lack of prime? Are shift points normal? I'm still hinting about a mismatch of gearing, tires and ABS wheel speed sensing. Do you have drum or disc rear brakes? Where is the rear ABS sensor now, at a tone ring on the diff carrier or at wheel sensors? Moses

This actuator is like the Jeep YJ Wrangler and XJ Cherokee with a front axle shaft "disconnect" system. The idea is to reduce frictional losses by "splitting" one axle shaft, which effectively stops the front driveline from rotating when in 2WD mode. What this does, however, is speed up the differential pinions, as the connected axle shaft is still rotating the side gear and pinions in the differential. The ring gear does not turn. This is much like a vehicle with an open differential when an axle shaft breaks. The differential can only be "open" with this system, as a limited slip would want to spin the differential case and ring gear. For the later front diffs to be limited slip types, there could not be a disconnect system like the '91 had. If the later models do not have a front axle shaft disconnect system, it's possible they could have a multi-plate clutch type limited slip. I'm away from my library at the SEMA Show Las Vegas, but if you're curious, I can look up the 1994-95 Dakota front axles in the Mopar catalog of official parts when I get home. I'll see whether there was a limited slip available on the Dodge Dakota 4x4 front axles in 1994-95. Moses

Jason...Do you have a lift kit and oversized tires? An axle gearing change? Is this a Rubicon or standard LJ? Which transfer case and vehicle speed sensor type, gear driven or a reluctor ring? Reflecting on your 42RLE's symptoms, I'm wondering if you have a VSS (speed sensor) to ABS sensor problem between the chassis, PCM and transmission controller? Loss of prime would be a noticeable issue, with slip and no gear engagement. What are the actual symptoms outside of limp mode? Moses

Hi, Jason, welcome to the forums! I'm at the SEMA Show Las Vegas and away from my office library and Jeep tech information. I'll be back in information access mode by Friday. Perhaps others can assist meanwhile, and if not, I'll share insights by the weekend! Moses

Case, this is definitely the later Mopar EFI conversion kit parts for a single rail system. The giveaway is the pressure regulator (with filter built in), which is a modified 1997-up pressure regulator. The factory '97-up system mounts the top portion of your pressure regulator atop the fuel tank module. The modified version like yours takes the tank module regulator and adds a machined aluminum lower fuel chamber, making this a free standing regulator/filter outside the tank. You have the fuel pump that is common to both Mopar kits. The earlier system uses a fuel filter and the remote fuel pump, your system does not need a replaceable fuel filter, as the filter is part of the 1997-up regulator. (There's a sock at the fuel tank pickup as additional protection.) The pressure on the earlier two-rail EFI is normally controlled at the fuel rail while yours is controlled by the modified '97-up type tank module regulator, which is now free of the tank. Your rail should not have a factory return hose. The hose I see going to a pipe is actually the return line from the regulator to the tank. The regulator is supposed to mount closer to the fuel tank with a short return hose to the tank's gauge module return pipe. It works the way your system is set up; however, your pump is pressing fuel a longer distance to the regulator and then a long way back to the fuel tank. The remote fuel pump is designed to be mounted as close to the tank as safe and practical. The 1997-up modified regulator/filter fits near the remote fuel pump on the engine side of the pump. This regulator/filter should end up just a short distance from the pump and the fuel tank. Check to see whether the fuel rail has two parallel lines going to it. If one is a return, that would be a two-rail system. If there is no return line, that's the '97-up single rail. The reason I bring this up is to eliminate the possibility that the 1995 two-rail intake was installed with the '95 4.0L engine, and the installer left the modified '97-up regulator in place. This would by a hybrid with a fuel supply system like the later Mopar EFI conversion with a stock 1995 induction system. Would that work? Well, yes it could. The factory 1995 regulator and return line could be doubling up the fuel pressure regulation. Pressure would be higher from the '97 up modified regulator. (1997-up operates at a higher pressure than the two-rail earlier system.) The two-rail regulator, if the return line exists, is dropping the pressure lower than the modified '97-up regulator setting. That could work. Or, the two-rail 1995 EFI could simply have the return hose eliminated or blocked off, relying on the modified '97 up regulator to return excess fuel/pressure to the tank. (Pressure is controlled by dumping the excess fuel volume back into the tank, which also helps prevent vapor lock by keeping fuel from stagnating in the lines.) The higher pressure could make the engine run a bit richer. What I'm suggesting is that the Jeep at one point had the later Mopar EFI single-rail induction system and fuel supply system. It may still have all of that if the Mopar 4.2L EFI conversion intake was bolted to the 1995 4.0L head. This will fit, I did it on my son-in-law's 4.0L engine swap into the '87 YJ Wrangler. The entire later Mopar EFI kit was used with the 4.0L long engine—like your 1995 XJ Cherokee 4.0L swap engine. The only point of interest at this stage is whether the installer swapped the 4.2L EFI conversion intake system onto the 1995 4.0L engine. This is easy to determine by which intake manifold and fuel rail setup is in place. Moses

Welcome to the forums, ripatte, let's get that XR650R in operational dual-sport mode! My previously owned XR650R came with a stock stator and an earlier Baja Designs kit without a key, considered the "Classic". I learned quickly that the battery is imperative for at least continuity. I checked all wiring out before condemning the battery pack. These are tricky battery packs, NiCad, and can only be charged with the 0.5A charger offered through Baja Designs. (This charger is also available elsewhere though I purchased mine through Baja Designs.) Even my Battery Tender at .75A could not be entrusted with the charging task on this stack of NiCads. The CTEK chargers that I just evaluated for the magazine won't work with NiCad, either. Beyond that, your concern is the stator and wiring plus whether the stator has been rewound for higher output. Being a non-dual sport prior to your ownership, the only incentive for higher output would be added lighting. Or maybe the cycle did have a conversion kit at one time? In any case, the staff at Baja Designs is very well informed and willing to help if you can't wade through this issue. In the meantime, to give you some reading material and perhaps an insight or a fact that you need, here are four PDFs from the Baja Designs library: 1) http://www.bajadesigns.com/tech-info/dual-sport-kit-faq 2) http://www.bajadesigns.com/docs/tech-info/installation-instructions-for-rewound-stator-on-xr650r-with-quick-release-dual-sport-kit.pdf?sfvrsn=4 3) http://www.bajadesigns.com/docs/tech-info/installation-instructions-for-rewound-stator-on-xr650r-with-classic-dual-sport-kit.pdf?sfvrsn=4 4) http://www.bajadesigns.com/docs/tech-info/xr650r-dual-output-rewind---no-dual-sport-kit.pdf?sfvrsn=4 Read through these PDFs, I did more than once, and if nothing else, you'll be way up the learning curve on XR650R dual-sport kits and wondering whether you need a stator rewind. If you don't have a high draw headlamp and are using the standard Watt hi-lo lamp that comes with the Baja Designs basic kit, I can attest that the stock stator is sufficient. If you raise the output of the headlight, you're leaning into the realm of a rewind for the stator. If you have a burning desire to know whether the stator is rewound or reworked, remove the stator cover and note how many coil windings are now involved in the output. Generally, the wires coming out of the stator housing provide a clue as to whether the stator is stock or rewound, saving the trouble of removing the stator cover. Keep in mind, though, that there are some who rewind their own stator, which could confuse the wiring scheme and color coding. Don't suspect a rewind or strange wiring just yet, start with identifying what stock wires and color coding should be. And check the battery pack for continuity and voltage. The Baja Designs contact phone number ((760) 560-BAJA (2252) can link you to helpful staff. Hours are Pacific Time 8:30 to 5:30, I have called mid-morning or mid-afternoon Pacific Time for best results. Call with as much information as you can muster, and the staff can quickly help you reach a solution... Your findings and that solution will be valued by others, so let us know how this resolves. We'd like to learn more about your XR650R motorcycle, too! Moses

CTEK is the Swedish developer and manufacturer of premier battery chargers endorsed by World Class automotive and powersports brands. In an HD video how-to, learn why CTEK chargers offer superior protection against battery damage, how to properly store and protect the battery in an RV, 4x4, ATV/UTV or motorcycle, and the unique way to recondition and recover a sulphated or badly depleted battery. At the magazine, a 14:46-minute HD video is available. Here is the trailer for that video coverage with a brief overview: Enjoy the video and discover ways to protect and preserve your 4x4 and powersports batteries! Moses

Biggman...As the author of the Jeep Owner's Bible, guess I should respond here...All three are Jeep (Kaiser era) FCs (Forward Control). The smaller ones are FC150 models, the bigger one an FC170. The 150s have the F-head four-cylinder engine. The larger FC170 boasts a 226 L-head inline six. These vehicles debuted in 1956 (FC150, the FC170 in '57). There is a great accounting for these vehicles at this Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeep_Forward_Control. You'll discover that there were several derivative Jeep forward control models, some experiments, specialty editions and even foreign (India) licensees. A rare diesel (Perkins) powered model showed up at the Moab Jeep Safari two years ago, leaving a cloud of thick, half-burned hydrocarbons in its wake. You can pin down the equipment and details after studying the Forward Control info at Wikipedia. There is a distinct and somewhat "cult" following for these FC models. My earliest encounter and contribution to the lore recalls an FC mastering a dramatically steep hill at El Dorado Canyon near Carson City in the mid-'sixties during a Jeep/Land Cruiser/Scout/all new Bronco hill climb competition. Danny Howerton, a member of the Douglas County Sheriffs Search & Rescue group that organized the event, had a Jeep FC. Though the vehicle could not climb the hill like the V-6 and V-8 powered short wheelbase 4x4s, the FC was able to come down the ridiculously steep slope—as steep a vertical gradient as a Cat crawler tractor can cut! Most impressive was Howerton's prowess at keep the vehicle straight on such a radical downslope and not becoming paralyzed by the bizarre view one would get through a forward control cab windshield! Ground school for Dan Howerton was his teen years spent in the Pacific during WWII. He served on the last combat cruise of the USS Pennsylvania, which ended at Okinawa. During his wartime military service in the U.S. Navy, Dan was knocked out of his berth when his Navy ship was hit. Experiences like that undoubtedly helped raise Dan Howerton's threshold for extreme challenges. Moses

Biggman...I'll begin by saying that every one of my 4x4s since the late 1980s has benefitted from a Centerforce clutch. The design is simply unbeatable as an aftermarket solution, especially when clutch size (diameter) is limited by bellhousing or flywheel face and bolt spacing. The reason I'm this emphatic is that the Centerforce weighted fingers are the only contemporary design to offer an alternative to heavy clutch springs and manual clamping force. By design, the patented Centerforce clutch design places flyweights on diaphragm-type fingers. The faster the clutch cover spins, the more clamping force applies, sandwiching the disc that much more tightly between the flywheel face and pressure plate surfaces. I have installed Centerforce II clutches behind everything from 383 Chevy stroker V-8s to a modified Pinto arrangement retrofitted to an F-head four-cylinder vintage Jeep! Pedal pressure is smooth and minimal, clamping force remains high. Sensible use of the clutch means that one Centerforce II assembly/kit is the last clutch I ever need. This makes the program cost effective...With a resurfaced or flat and true flywheel, the new Centerforce clutch assembly and release bearing simply pay for themselves over time. I'm not "shilling" for Centerforce, this is simply my experience. Centerforce support for our forums would be great, but facts are simply facts. (On this note, our sponsor Advance Adapters is a Centerforce dealer by choice.) There are many other "performance" clutches, but the ones that rely on high clamping force, without the benefit of centrifugal force like the Centerforce, simply create high pedal pressure and the limited benefits of high spring-apply pressure. We can take this further, Biggman...My other approach would be a larger Chrysler truck clutch that might fit your 3.9L flywheel. We can explore the fit options here. Moses

Biggman...The issue is the limited slip. Did not know front limited slip was available in these Dakota models. If so, you likely need to add friction modifier if this is a Spicer/Dana TracLok (multi-plate friction clutch) design. A slightly binding limited slip will cause exactly the symptoms you describe. The most glaring example of this is when I lock up the front of the XJ Cherokee with the ARB Locker and make a maneuver like you describe. Without a large amount of traction loss/slip surface at one front wheel or the other, I would expect steering wheel "jacking" and a limited turning radius. The only vehicle I've ever owned with a factory multi-plate clutch (automatic locker) limited slip was the 1985 Ford Bronco II we bought new. In 4WD mode, it would jack the steering on anything other than a full-slip road surface like mud, and in that case, if the road was cambered, the front axle would spin both wheels, the rear would too with its matching limited slip, and you could expect the vehicle to slide sideways and stay at the bottom of the road edge. I once did this on a safe and muddy stretch of road for 3/8ths of a mile. The Bronco II kept moving forward yet did not climb off the bottom berm of this muddy clay road for that entire distance. I used every trick in the book to get away from the berm edge, but the Bronco II was quite content to stay there. If you have a multi-plate limited slip in the front, your symptoms are right on par for the course. With the ARB Air Locker, I purposely align the vehicle straight before locking up and applying torque to the front axle in four-wheel-drive. Realistically, I can count on one hand the number of times I've used the front locker. The rear is a whole other thing, as the rear axle does not have steering or generate the two-angled wheel turning geometries and radii that occur at the front end. Rear lock-up gets used far more often and effectively. Avoid applying heavy torque with the steering turned tightly in 4WD, this is very stressful to the front axle shaft joints and axle shafts. As for the short steering angles symptom, confirm that you have a TracLok (I can look this up if you'd like) type front limited slip. If so, add friction modifier and report back—the plates are sticking slightly. Moses

Biggman...This is valuable detail about the conversion to a 5.9L V-8. I was intrigued by the "slightly worse" gas mileage over the 3.9L V-6 in the '94 Dakota. I've always believed that a smaller engine simply cannot get good mileage when overworked. For clarification, this is a 5.2L V-8 to 5.9L V-8 swap—not a 3.9L V-6 to 5.9L V-8. The Dakota is a 1995 4x4 V-8 chassis. Which transmission do you have now, and does that work with the torque from the 5.9L V-8? Thanks for doing the lifting here, others will benefit greatly from your homework! Moses

Good points, one and all, Biggman! There's a lot of controversy online about the use of dielectric grease. My most recent encounter with a supportive reference was the test of the Enerpulse Pulstar® spark plugs, which was publicized at the magazine and posted at the forums. Enerpulse emphasizes the use of dielectric grease on the terminal end of the spark plug. This is clearly a conductive and critical part of the plug. I also add dielectric grease to the insulator between the shell and terminal to create a moisture barrier for the spark cable boot. Thanks for sharing your experience here...Always great to see your posts! Moses

The symptom sounds like a front differential with a limited slip or for many 4x4s, simply the steering radius pull (caused by inside and outside wheel turning radii) in four-wheel drive. I'm taking it for granted that this symptom is on a sufficiently loose road surface. Wheel alignment can help, as this symptom is often steering geometry related. I'd like to know the front end alignment results for the one truck (1995) to see what caster/camber and cross-caster look like. Steering axis inclination is often overlooked. When caster, camber and toe are correct and the SAI (steering axis inclination) is off, there is a bent spindle or knuckle in the case of an IFS like your Dakotas. A simple toe set or even caster, camber and toe is not enough. You do need an SAI read to know how the knuckles and spindles line up. With unit bearing hubs, there's little "spindle" to consider other than bad unit bearings or a bent wheel hub flange. Issues are usually related to the knuckle. Moses

The magazine had the opportunity to test Pulstar® spark plugs in the 1999 Jeep XJ Cherokee 4.0L. These unique spark plugs received our extensive testing in the XJ Cherokee and the two Honda dirt motorcycles. The plugs work optimally with both gasoline and natural gas engines. The magazine article is available at: http://www.4wdmechanix.com/Testing-the-Enerpulse-Pulstar-Spark-Plugs.html. We will continue testing and discussing these spark plugs at the magazine and these forums! Here are our findings with the XJ Cherokee: 1999 Jeep XJ Cherokee 4x4 4.0L—This inline six-cylinder engine is nearly stock. The addition of a Borla header, Random Technologies' performance catalytic converter and the Hypertech 'Max Energy' program tuning are the only modifications. The vehicle's approximate curb weight of 3,800 pounds with a Warn front winch and an aftermarket ARB front bumper and Warn rear heavy duty bumper. The axles have 4.10:1 ring and pinions to compensate for the 33" diameter tires and a 6-inch long-arm suspension lift. Prior to testing with the Pulstar® spark plugs, this vehicle operated with Bosch spark plugs that burned well with a fully functional ignition and EFI/MPI system. There were no issues with ignition misfire or EFI fuel supply problems, and this engine has normal, uniform compression and cylinder seal. The change to Pulstar® plugs gapped to factory 0.035" was the only change made for this test. We waited for the first tank of fuel to burn through before making comparisons. At that point there were several distinct improvements: 1) Better tip-in throttle response at any road speed and under heavy acceleration. 2) Less throttle needed to sustain normal "cruise" road speeds. 3) Less downshifting on grades with cruise control applied. Acceleration improved with both forced and cruise control downshifts. 4) Distinct improvement in fuel efficiency; approximately one mile per gallon improvement (5.5%) under "city" and "highway" or interstate test conditions. 5) Starts immediate; this engine has always started well. Details and actual spark plug installation coverage can be seen in the HD video: Moses

Given the opportunity to test the Pulstar® PlasmaCore spark plugs, we targeted the magazine's Honda XR350R and XR650R motorcycles. The XR350R is air cooled, the XR650R has liquid cooling. Both cycles use fixed jet, slide type carburetors. The XR350R has twin Keihin carburetors, the XR650R uses a single, large Keihin carburetor. We rode the bikes extensively. The XR350R is OHV permitted for dirt only use, and that testing took place in high desert and mountainous terrain, both dirt roads and single track. The XR650R with its dual-sport conversion received a full test at both dirt and asphalt riding. The HD video shares installation details, riding footage and an evaluation of the Pulstar® spark plugs: The magazine article is available at: http://www.4wdmechanix.com/Testing-the-Enerpulse-Pulstar-Spark-Plugs.html. We will continue testing and discussing these spark plugs at the magazine and these forums! Here are our test results and findings: Honda XR650R Motorcycle—This bike is a highway legal dual-sport conversion and ongoing project feature at the magazine. The top-engine is freshly rebuilt to "blueprint" standards, featuring a cylinder head overhaul by L.A. Sleeve Company and a moly-chrome cylinder liner with new piston and rings. We performed all work as a how-to project that became a feature HD instructional video at Vimeo On Demand. The head and upper engine work includes a Hot Cams Stage 1 camshaft. Spark timing and valve timing are "stock" with Honda Power-Up Kit tuning. This popular "uncorking" of the engine's jetting, induction system and exhaust have each been covered in detail at the magazine and the magazine's forums. This iconic motorcycle model has a large following, as the XR650R is the largest displacement enduro single cylinder bike built by Honda specifically to win the Baja 1000 and other open desert races. The magazine's viewers and forum members have followed the performance gains made with this engine build-up and tuning. The addition of the Enerpulse Pulstar® spark plug provided these noticeable results: 1) Since the rebuild and tuning, the engine has produced superior torque (49 lb-ft estimated) and a high horsepower output (approximately 55 horsepower). Along with the Pulstar® spark plug change, we added a 6.3 gallon fuel tank (5 extra gallons of fuel at approximated 40 pounds net weight gain between the fuel and the large tank) to the motorcycle. Testing the Pulstar® spark plug, performance with the additional weight is slightly better than with the lighter 2.6 gallon factory fuel tank. 40 extra pounds is significant for a dirt enduro motorcycle. When we reinstalled the 2.6 gallon tank for further testing, acceleration and throttle response showed noticeable improvement. Torque increased, and fewer downshifts were necessary under load. 2) A converted dual-sport, highway legal machine, the XR650R is kick start only. Tuning has enabled ready starts with a stock-type NGK spark plug. The Pulstar® spark plug fires the engine with equal ease. 3) Flooding is always a concern on a large displacement single cylinder motorcycle engine. The Pulstar® spark plug strongly resists fuel fouling. The spark plug readily fires through richer mixtures at altitude. 4) This engine has a fixed-jet factory Keihin slide-type carburetor. Altitude sensitivity is always an issue with fixed jets. Larger displacement engines are more susceptible to fuel fouling at higher altitudes. The Pulstar® spark plug, with superior spark output and more complete fuel burn, clearly maximizes performance over a wider range of altitude—even with a fixed jet carburetor. During the road and dirt testing, this motorcycle operated between 4,400 and 7,600 feet elevation with no sign of "rich" mixture spark plug fouling. The fixed carburetor jet setting is for 1,500 and 5,000 feet elevation. Clearly, the Pulstar® spark plugs burn cleaner and more efficiently, producing better power and performance at higher altitudes. Honda XR350R Motorcycle—This OHV bike is strictly set up for dirt riding. The stock motorcycle was upgraded for desert hare-and-hound scrambles, tuned and jetted for optimal performance at 4,400 feet altitude with the stock factory dual Keihin carburetors. In top condition, with normal compression and peak tuning, the only change was the switch to a Pulstar® spark plug. Our extensive testing in the high desert and mountains spans from 4,000 feet elevation to 6,500 feet elevation. A single cylinder, air cooled engine provides an optimal test bed for combustion and fuel burn comparisons. Pulstar® spark plug test conclusions: 1) Starting is easy whether cold or hot. Starts readily with the choke on. Warms normally as with the stock type NGK spark plug. 2) Throttle response is crisp and noticeably improved. Engine stability under load has improved, requiring less downshifting to compensate for load. (Watch the video.) 3) Again, the most significant gain is less sensitivity to altitude changes with fixed jets in these two carburetors. We operated the motorcycle from 4,000-6,500 feet without adjusting the carburetors or altering the jets. The motorcycle performed flawlessly. 4) This motorcycle has always been miserly on fuel compared to two-stroke engines or larger displacement four-stroke thumpers. Testing revealed a noticeable improvement in fuel efficiency. The motorcycle ran our pre-determined course under load and used less fuel-per-hour than with the stock-type NGK spark plug. This improvement can only be attributed to the Enerpulse Pulstar® spark plug. We'll continue to evaluate these spark plugs over time. They offer a significant breakthrough in spark and combustion technology. Enjoy the video! Moses

Bruce, the symptoms did sound fuel pressure regulator related, you did a great follow-up, let's watch this success unfold! Vacuum lines can be as difficult to troubleshoot as wiring issues. This one was simpler. The factory vacuum line may not be available, you can check with a local Jeep dealer. This could be an item that gets replaced with vacuum hose as you did. I suggest that if you're getting a good vacuum seal now, make sure the vacuum hose is higher grade and reasonably heat resistant. (Route carefully, away from high heat.) There are various grades and qualities of hose available. NAPA and others offer traditional, heavy-duty vacuum replacement hose. As long as the seal at connections is good and the hose will not become brittle and crack prematurely, this can work. Congrats on the smoker! Glad you took the time to be innovative and troubleshoot at this level. If you ever suspect that the pressure regulator is defective, the regulator can be tested for a diaphragm leak using a vacuum hand pump/gauge. Better to invest in a vacuum hand pump with gauge than to replace parts that are not defective. Keep us posted! Moses

Very pleased to get your update, Tim...Glad you're past finals and the buddy build! Looking forward to your participation and some insights into your Raptor 700 at the ATV/UTV forum. Know you'll have a significant contribution to make there, and the segment could use your input and enthusiasm! Moses