Kevin in San Diego

lol

" Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:vVMeb.2854$0d5.2224@newssvr23.news.prodigy.co m...
> Dammit, I can't find where I saw that... all refs I
> see now say 'bottom of fill hole'... checked Chiltons,
> Haynes, FSM, AllDataDIY... I know I saw it *somewhere*,
> dammit... probably some misinfo here!
>
> Ignore my misinfo below...
> __
> Steve
> .
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:3F7B85B6.E2ABF89E@***.net...
> > This was copied form the '97 TJ Factory Service Manual:
> > http://www.----------.com/refill.jpg because it had the Dana 35c we're
> > talking about, but it's virtually the same in my '01 XJ, '03 TJ.
> > Sorry, but I just can't believe we have to guess about the level in any
> > gear box. Maybe they do things like that in Japan, but not here.
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:--------------------
> >
> > Stephen Cowell wrote:
> > >
> > > Manual says to leave 1/2" below on mine... forget if
> > > front or rear ('00XJ).
> > > __
> > > Steve
>
>

Joe M

Hi Bill, I agree! It seems foolish to change to a system that makes it
difficult to easily determine proper quantity... I raised the subject
because I had this dilemma on my 90XJ back in March. I asked on this forum
at that time and someone suggested 3.5 pints. That brought the level up to
1/4 - 1/2 inch below the hole and that is working well for me with no
leakage.

The '90 FSM has different wording than your '97. It says to fill with 2.5
pints (plus limited slip additive) and torque the fill plug ( it never says
fill to hole... it also never mentions the rubber plug!? ).

FWIW, I just looked in a Mitchell manual and for the Model 35 it shows 2.5
pints for years 89-94, 3.5 pints for years 95-96.

Joe, '90 XJ



"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3F7A7430.F196B02E@***.net...
> Hi Joe,
> All my life I have been filling to the fill hole, I never heard nor
> read any different, and I was a Chevron dealer/owner for some fifteen
> years: http://www.----------.com/chevron.jpg Also the capacity will vary
> with the gear ratio.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Joe M wrote:
> >
> > FYI... Per the FSM, refill with 3 pints of gear oil. This will leave the
oil
> > level approx an inch below the bottom of the fill hole. The rubber plug
will
> > leak if over filled. - Joe

Joe M

Hi Bill, I agree! It seems foolish to change to a system that makes it
difficult to easily determine proper quantity... I raised the subject
because I had this dilemma on my 90XJ back in March. I asked on this forum
at that time and someone suggested 3.5 pints. That brought the level up to
1/4 - 1/2 inch below the hole and that is working well for me with no
leakage.

The '90 FSM has different wording than your '97. It says to fill with 2.5
pints (plus limited slip additive) and torque the fill plug ( it never says
fill to hole... it also never mentions the rubber plug!? ).

FWIW, I just looked in a Mitchell manual and for the Model 35 it shows 2.5
pints for years 89-94, 3.5 pints for years 95-96.

Joe, '90 XJ



"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3F7A7430.F196B02E@***.net...
> Hi Joe,
> All my life I have been filling to the fill hole, I never heard nor
> read any different, and I was a Chevron dealer/owner for some fifteen
> years: http://www.----------.com/chevron.jpg Also the capacity will vary
> with the gear ratio.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Joe M wrote:
> >
> > FYI... Per the FSM, refill with 3 pints of gear oil. This will leave the
oil
> > level approx an inch below the bottom of the fill hole. The rubber plug
will
> > leak if over filled. - Joe

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

It is the gear ratios and whether the differential has a traction
device that fills up the housing reservoir area that determines it's
capacity, that's why making a fill hole at the full level works.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Joe M wrote:
>
> Hi Bill, I agree! It seems foolish to change to a system that makes it
> difficult to easily determine proper quantity... I raised the subject
> because I had this dilemma on my 90XJ back in March. I asked on this forum
> at that time and someone suggested 3.5 pints. That brought the level up to
> 1/4 - 1/2 inch below the hole and that is working well for me with no
> leakage.
>
> The '90 FSM has different wording than your '97. It says to fill with 2.5
> pints (plus limited slip additive) and torque the fill plug ( it never says
> fill to hole... it also never mentions the rubber plug!? ).
>
> FWIW, I just looked in a Mitchell manual and for the Model 35 it shows 2.5
> pints for years 89-94, 3.5 pints for years 95-96.
>
> Joe, '90 XJ

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

It is the gear ratios and whether the differential has a traction
device that fills up the housing reservoir area that determines it's
capacity, that's why making a fill hole at the full level works.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Joe M wrote:
>
> Hi Bill, I agree! It seems foolish to change to a system that makes it
> difficult to easily determine proper quantity... I raised the subject
> because I had this dilemma on my 90XJ back in March. I asked on this forum
> at that time and someone suggested 3.5 pints. That brought the level up to
> 1/4 - 1/2 inch below the hole and that is working well for me with no
> leakage.
>
> The '90 FSM has different wording than your '97. It says to fill with 2.5
> pints (plus limited slip additive) and torque the fill plug ( it never says
> fill to hole... it also never mentions the rubber plug!? ).
>
> FWIW, I just looked in a Mitchell manual and for the Model 35 it shows 2.5
> pints for years 89-94, 3.5 pints for years 95-96.
>
> Joe, '90 XJ