Absolutely! How could I possibly forget the ridiculous OPDA. That should have been the first on my list.
If we remastered the TJ and LJ? 🤔
- Thread starter bedhed
- Start date
With 28 or 29 inch tires, I cant remember what the factory equipped them with. Heck even 30 inch tires, the Dana 60 center section would be a ground clearance issue. More so than the, "shovel," of a skid plate that comes from the factory.
Although it would force the engineers to design a slim gas tank to resolve the issue of pinion length that the Dana 60 would present.
Last edited:
I bet if you asked CJ owners around 1985 it would like this:
* same engine, fuel injected
* wider wheelbase
* shift on the fly 4wd
* a real dash
* a/c
* a quieter/drier /warmer top
* carpet
* a bigger console
* front disc brakes
* coil spring front end
* better ride / handling
* swing out tailgate
* better ergonomics
* a sound bar
Sounds familiar? That’s a TJ .
Eventually , life gives us most everything...just not all at once.
* same engine, fuel injected
* wider wheelbase
* shift on the fly 4wd
* a real dash
* a/c
* a quieter/drier /warmer top
* carpet
* a bigger console
* front disc brakes
* coil spring front end
* better ride / handling
* swing out tailgate
* better ergonomics
* a sound bar
Sounds familiar? That’s a TJ .
Eventually , life gives us most everything...just not all at once.
Damn. That’s an interesting angle.
You've pretty much got it. The carmaker does very little these days besides engineering and final assembly. The suspension and body fasteners are probably done there, but you get drivetrain assemblies from Dana, new process, aisin and they're all using whatever fasteners they chose and that's carried through the whole vehicle and every OEM supplier.
Having come out of the CJ5 world to my LJ, I can see a lot of this. Some of the list were on my last CJ5 (1980) from the factory, like the disc front brakes and while mine didn't have them, a/c and carpet were options on the more upscale ones. But there's a few things I do miss about the old CJ5s.
There's times I miss the drop down tailgate. I'd suggest a swing out spare tire holder separate from the tailgate, but a tailgate like some of the early 70s Ford station wagons had that could either open as a door or drop like a regular tailgate. Way back when I've owned a couple of those old Gran Torino wagons and that was one of the features I loved about them.
Someone mentioned a new straight six engine. If I was designing it, in the 300 ci range, rugged cast iron block and head, cross flow head for better flow, either overhead cam like the old Jeep Tornado engine, but if OHV, side covers to get to the lifters easier like on a Chevy six. The idea of pulling the head to replace the lifters just doesn't appeal to me.
I'm with you 100 percent on that displacement , man that would be great .
Dang, man. Lot's of good ideas. As I said before, I'm no gear head, so I don't know what the downsides would be if any), but I like this idea. With the power being produced with 6 and even 4 cylinder engines these days, along with 8 cylinder engines higher gas mileage, it would be great to have more power and greatly increase the fuel economy at the same time.
I completely agree. That's the only negative I have for them. I think it's the length of them. They would need to be shortened a little, so that they don't protrude from the front as much as the AEV Hi-Line fenders. That would involve a redesign of the fender's shape along the front, but it would look so much better and allow 33's to fit without modifications.
Never thought much about that. I guess I'm on the fence with that too. But, for the sake of maintaining it's appearance, I think I would vote to keep them there.
Absolutely! I recently put one of the factory fit, drop-in style android headunits in mine. Never been happier with any other headunit purchases. Although, in this case, I'd vote to make it a little taller and have smaller buttons so that it could maybe house 7" screen.
Good call! Without that, you know even with a remastered model, "they" would most likely feel like new colors are needed. Keep with the originals. I don't recall any color of their time that was terrible.
Oh, and I remembered another quirky thing. Get rid of the joined area between the back of the fender and the front of the doors. I guess it's too early for TJs, but I've seen many CJs with cracking paint and underlying rust along that joint. I assume they kept it for ease of fabrication and/or aesthetics. Anyone know the reasoning?
Last edited:
Great reply. I agree with you. Unfortunately it will never happen. However, any one of us can make the changes that we believe are for the best for our TJ's/LJ's.
Out of curiosity anyone know how much the Ford 300 I6 weighs? And it's length? That might be a decent upgrade. They put out plenty of torque. Much better engine than the 302 V8 in the older trucks.
From what I can find out, about 560lbs and the block length is about 32". The fuel injected versions of the 90s were rated around 150hp with 260ish ft/lbs of torque.
Back in the 80s, when I was still driving my old 4 banger CJ5, a couple of my buddies were running straight sixes in their 4x4s and would use some decidedly salty language if someone suggested they swap to a V8. On was in a late 70s Blazer with a 292 six and the other in a fairly new F-150 with a 300 six. Both trucks were pretty much unstoppable.
Let’s be honest, compared to modern engines, old engines suck. The technology, research, and design today is simply amazing.
The fact is, you can swap a modern smaller V8 (GM’s 4.8/5.3) into a Wranglers engine compartment and come out with room to work, double the power, and be lighter weight. Who wouldn't want that?
If you dont, you might fall in the same catagory as those who have yet to swap gears and realize how much it wakes up once gear swapped. Ignorance is bliss!
The 300 from Ford is pretty comparable to the factory 4.0.150 HP/260 ft lbs of TQ. Not much of a winner there
The 4.0, while great in stock trim (tires, wheels), sucks when adding weight (bigger tires, heavier wheels, bumpers, winches, etc) which isnt Jeep’s fault.
I am starting to believe that the 4.0 with bigger tires is the same as the gears when adding bigger tires. Some folks will say they notice no difference in power. But once swapped, they would never go back.
I’m willing to be dollars to donuts that @LieutenantJohnson who has a GM 5.3 swap would never go back. Life is good with 300+ horsepower in a TJ/LJ.
Wish they had done this.... 1997 Dakar Concept
amazing how the bumper looks kinda JL.
amazing how the bumper looks kinda JL.
I would think it would have to be plastic. Its a federal mandate on all new cars. It increases the chance of survival for pedestrians who are struck by vehicles.
IIRC have a 40% chance of living if struck at 20 mph and 20% chance if struck at 40 mph.
Let’s discuss. The Jeep factory 4.0 makes its peak tq at what RPM? And what does it make at 2000 RPM? What about
The 5.3 V8 from GM? It makes 210 ft lbs at 2000 RPM and 300 ft lbs of torque at 2500 RPM.
Is 2k -2.5k RPM high engine speed to you?
Last edited:
Similar threads
