If that was your intended use you would get the Heflin version.
Unfortunately it has only the 5.7 liter engine.

I suppose you could send your SRT8 to Hess and Eisenhart for conversion.



"Earle Horton" <nurse--NOSPAM--busters@msn.com> wrote in message
news:43d79b6f$0$1343$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> Are you absolutely sure that "outrunning da man" while "'takin' care of
> bizness" is not legitimate SUV use? I know plenty who would disagree with
> you. This vehicle is just adapted to different terrain, that's all. In
> other surroundings you would want a lift, big tires, and a tail light
> cut-off switch. ;^)
>
> Earle
>
> "billy ray" <billy_ray@fuseSPAM.net> wrote in message
> news:b378a$43d79790$4831b233$22769@FUSE.NET...
>> Quite so.
>>
>> My reply to Bill was on his use of a SRT8 picture as representative of
>> all
>> new Grand Cherokees.
>>
>> Upon researching that particular model it became apparent that it was
>> specifically NOT intended to be capable of any serious (legitimate) SUV
>> use.... as "factory poser" so to say.
>>
>>
>> "Earle Horton" <nurse--NOSPAM--busters@msn.com> wrote in message
>> news:43d72c27$0$1334$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
>> > Their money is just as good as ours.
>> >
>> > Earle
>> >
>> > "billy ray" <billy_ray@fuseSPAM.net> wrote in message
>> > news:d3f5a$43d6ebde$4831b233$30355@FUSE.NET...
>> > ---snippy---
>> >>
>> >> This edition is tuned for its intended audience - the urban gangsta,
>> >> wanna
>> >> look kewl, ghetto dweller who will require the standard "run-flat"
> tires
>> > to
>> >> be ."outrunning da man" while 'takin' care of bizness" with his 'hos
>> >> 'n
>> >> homies on suede leather seats
>> >>
>> >> Perhaps you are right..... the SRT8 should not carry the name 'Jeep"
> The
>> >> only options I see missing is a "Continental Kit" , 1000 watt stereo,
> and
>> >> huge whitewalls to have a perfect "factory" pimp-mobile.
>> >>
>> > ---snippy---
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

 

If that was your intended use you would get the Heflin version.
Unfortunately it has only the 5.7 liter engine.

I suppose you could send your SRT8 to Hess and Eisenhart for conversion.



"Earle Horton" <nurse--NOSPAM--busters@msn.com> wrote in message
news:43d79b6f$0$1343$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> Are you absolutely sure that "outrunning da man" while "'takin' care of
> bizness" is not legitimate SUV use? I know plenty who would disagree with
> you. This vehicle is just adapted to different terrain, that's all. In
> other surroundings you would want a lift, big tires, and a tail light
> cut-off switch. ;^)
>
> Earle
>
> "billy ray" <billy_ray@fuseSPAM.net> wrote in message
> news:b378a$43d79790$4831b233$22769@FUSE.NET...
>> Quite so.
>>
>> My reply to Bill was on his use of a SRT8 picture as representative of
>> all
>> new Grand Cherokees.
>>
>> Upon researching that particular model it became apparent that it was
>> specifically NOT intended to be capable of any serious (legitimate) SUV
>> use.... as "factory poser" so to say.
>>
>>
>> "Earle Horton" <nurse--NOSPAM--busters@msn.com> wrote in message
>> news:43d72c27$0$1334$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
>> > Their money is just as good as ours.
>> >
>> > Earle
>> >
>> > "billy ray" <billy_ray@fuseSPAM.net> wrote in message
>> > news:d3f5a$43d6ebde$4831b233$30355@FUSE.NET...
>> > ---snippy---
>> >>
>> >> This edition is tuned for its intended audience - the urban gangsta,
>> >> wanna
>> >> look kewl, ghetto dweller who will require the standard "run-flat"
> tires
>> > to
>> >> be ."outrunning da man" while 'takin' care of bizness" with his 'hos
>> >> 'n
>> >> homies on suede leather seats
>> >>
>> >> Perhaps you are right..... the SRT8 should not carry the name 'Jeep"
> The
>> >> only options I see missing is a "Continental Kit" , 1000 watt stereo,
> and
>> >> huge whitewalls to have a perfect "factory" pimp-mobile.
>> >>
>> > ---snippy---
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

 

LOL - I knew I saved this dead 1987 I-6 ICM for something and lo and behold
this conversation is it. Now I can finally throw it out (unless someone has
value for it as a museum piece?).

I am looking at it right now. It is indeed a Motorcraft part. "Duraspark
Ignition - tested tough". It is six wires that disappear into an orange
polymer filled pot.

I never did any diagnostics on it, just swapped out the $65 part on a
friend's recommendation and it cured my problems like magic. It had failed
at about 140K miles.

Now I can tell the wife 'see - I knew I saved it for a reason...'
Tomes

"Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
news:dr8251$1cd$1@reader2.panix.com...
> AMC's ignition module -- at least for the 1976-1982 I-6 -- was an
> off-the-shelf Ford part.
>
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
>> AMC didn't sell enough cars, to be able to say that their ignition module
>> was problematic or not. Chrysler modules would fail, as does everything
>> else on a vehicle, but only because Chrysler vehicles were capable of
>> operating long enough, for components to wear out. I am of course
>> excluding
>> the vehicles, that left the factory with engine mount bolts missing, rod
>> caps improperly torqued, ring gaps still aligned, transmission cooling
>> line
>> fittings not drilled all the way through, etc. (These are all from
>> memory.)
>> Sometimes, but not always, it would be caught in "Dealer Prep."
>>
>> One thing they did, that I never understood, was about the middle of
>> 1978,
>> when they shortened the outboard end of the ignition rotor by about
>> 1/16".
>> Maybe the change had something to do with FCC regulations, or making the
>> rotors cheaper. The guys in the Dodge dealer service bays were all
>> suspicious of this change. A number of customer vehicles, with nothing
>> else
>> to explain a poor performance complaint, left the garage with an old
>> style
>> rotor installed.
>>
>> Usually if the ignition module is bad, it is pretty easy to figure out.
>> Everything else is working, but there is no spark. If this vehicle kept
>> coming back for the same complaint, the mechanics failed to diagnose the
>> real cause, choosing instead to throw parts at it. The guys at the Dodge
>> dealer got pretty good at diagnosis, again because Chrysler sold enough
>> vehicles for them to get the practice they needed.
>>
>> Earle
>>
>> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
>> news:43D6BA08.DC2794FC@***.net...
>>
>>> Please write him. I've never heard of troubles with AMC or Fords
>>>ignition modules. Many with Chrysler's attempts at transistor ignition.
>>> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>>
>>>billy ray wrote:
>>>
>>>>I was gone those years except for a couple trips home so I don't know
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>history in depth. I did drive it once to the airport as was impressed
>>
>> at
>>
>>>>the road manners of the AWD.
>>>>
>>>>My Dad drove 30-35K miles a year and was good about scheduled
>>
>> maintenance so
>>
>>>>it wasn't the cost that bothered him as much as the unreliability
>>>>
>>>>I seem to recall him saying after a breakdown (No Start) and tow to the
>>
>> AMC
>>
>>>>dealership they would do "a tune up" and then he would be good again for
>>
>> a
>>
>>>>while when it would happen again.
>>>>
>>>>Did these things have a Crank Sensor?
>>>>
>>>>I'll send him an e-mail and ask what he recalls..
>>
>>

 

LOL - I knew I saved this dead 1987 I-6 ICM for something and lo and behold
this conversation is it. Now I can finally throw it out (unless someone has
value for it as a museum piece?).

I am looking at it right now. It is indeed a Motorcraft part. "Duraspark
Ignition - tested tough". It is six wires that disappear into an orange
polymer filled pot.

I never did any diagnostics on it, just swapped out the $65 part on a
friend's recommendation and it cured my problems like magic. It had failed
at about 140K miles.

Now I can tell the wife 'see - I knew I saved it for a reason...'
Tomes

"Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
news:dr8251$1cd$1@reader2.panix.com...
> AMC's ignition module -- at least for the 1976-1982 I-6 -- was an
> off-the-shelf Ford part.
>
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
>> AMC didn't sell enough cars, to be able to say that their ignition module
>> was problematic or not. Chrysler modules would fail, as does everything
>> else on a vehicle, but only because Chrysler vehicles were capable of
>> operating long enough, for components to wear out. I am of course
>> excluding
>> the vehicles, that left the factory with engine mount bolts missing, rod
>> caps improperly torqued, ring gaps still aligned, transmission cooling
>> line
>> fittings not drilled all the way through, etc. (These are all from
>> memory.)
>> Sometimes, but not always, it would be caught in "Dealer Prep."
>>
>> One thing they did, that I never understood, was about the middle of
>> 1978,
>> when they shortened the outboard end of the ignition rotor by about
>> 1/16".
>> Maybe the change had something to do with FCC regulations, or making the
>> rotors cheaper. The guys in the Dodge dealer service bays were all
>> suspicious of this change. A number of customer vehicles, with nothing
>> else
>> to explain a poor performance complaint, left the garage with an old
>> style
>> rotor installed.
>>
>> Usually if the ignition module is bad, it is pretty easy to figure out.
>> Everything else is working, but there is no spark. If this vehicle kept
>> coming back for the same complaint, the mechanics failed to diagnose the
>> real cause, choosing instead to throw parts at it. The guys at the Dodge
>> dealer got pretty good at diagnosis, again because Chrysler sold enough
>> vehicles for them to get the practice they needed.
>>
>> Earle
>>
>> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
>> news:43D6BA08.DC2794FC@***.net...
>>
>>> Please write him. I've never heard of troubles with AMC or Fords
>>>ignition modules. Many with Chrysler's attempts at transistor ignition.
>>> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>>
>>>billy ray wrote:
>>>
>>>>I was gone those years except for a couple trips home so I don't know
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>history in depth. I did drive it once to the airport as was impressed
>>
>> at
>>
>>>>the road manners of the AWD.
>>>>
>>>>My Dad drove 30-35K miles a year and was good about scheduled
>>
>> maintenance so
>>
>>>>it wasn't the cost that bothered him as much as the unreliability
>>>>
>>>>I seem to recall him saying after a breakdown (No Start) and tow to the
>>
>> AMC
>>
>>>>dealership they would do "a tune up" and then he would be good again for
>>
>> a
>>
>>>>while when it would happen again.
>>>>
>>>>Did these things have a Crank Sensor?
>>>>
>>>>I'll send him an e-mail and ask what he recalls..
>>
>>

 

LOL - I knew I saved this dead 1987 I-6 ICM for something and lo and behold
this conversation is it. Now I can finally throw it out (unless someone has
value for it as a museum piece?).

I am looking at it right now. It is indeed a Motorcraft part. "Duraspark
Ignition - tested tough". It is six wires that disappear into an orange
polymer filled pot.

I never did any diagnostics on it, just swapped out the $65 part on a
friend's recommendation and it cured my problems like magic. It had failed
at about 140K miles.

Now I can tell the wife 'see - I knew I saved it for a reason...'
Tomes

"Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
news:dr8251$1cd$1@reader2.panix.com...
> AMC's ignition module -- at least for the 1976-1982 I-6 -- was an
> off-the-shelf Ford part.
>
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
>> AMC didn't sell enough cars, to be able to say that their ignition module
>> was problematic or not. Chrysler modules would fail, as does everything
>> else on a vehicle, but only because Chrysler vehicles were capable of
>> operating long enough, for components to wear out. I am of course
>> excluding
>> the vehicles, that left the factory with engine mount bolts missing, rod
>> caps improperly torqued, ring gaps still aligned, transmission cooling
>> line
>> fittings not drilled all the way through, etc. (These are all from
>> memory.)
>> Sometimes, but not always, it would be caught in "Dealer Prep."
>>
>> One thing they did, that I never understood, was about the middle of
>> 1978,
>> when they shortened the outboard end of the ignition rotor by about
>> 1/16".
>> Maybe the change had something to do with FCC regulations, or making the
>> rotors cheaper. The guys in the Dodge dealer service bays were all
>> suspicious of this change. A number of customer vehicles, with nothing
>> else
>> to explain a poor performance complaint, left the garage with an old
>> style
>> rotor installed.
>>
>> Usually if the ignition module is bad, it is pretty easy to figure out.
>> Everything else is working, but there is no spark. If this vehicle kept
>> coming back for the same complaint, the mechanics failed to diagnose the
>> real cause, choosing instead to throw parts at it. The guys at the Dodge
>> dealer got pretty good at diagnosis, again because Chrysler sold enough
>> vehicles for them to get the practice they needed.
>>
>> Earle
>>
>> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
>> news:43D6BA08.DC2794FC@***.net...
>>
>>> Please write him. I've never heard of troubles with AMC or Fords
>>>ignition modules. Many with Chrysler's attempts at transistor ignition.
>>> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>>
>>>billy ray wrote:
>>>
>>>>I was gone those years except for a couple trips home so I don't know
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>history in depth. I did drive it once to the airport as was impressed
>>
>> at
>>
>>>>the road manners of the AWD.
>>>>
>>>>My Dad drove 30-35K miles a year and was good about scheduled
>>
>> maintenance so
>>
>>>>it wasn't the cost that bothered him as much as the unreliability
>>>>
>>>>I seem to recall him saying after a breakdown (No Start) and tow to the
>>
>> AMC
>>
>>>>dealership they would do "a tune up" and then he would be good again for
>>
>> a
>>
>>>>while when it would happen again.
>>>>
>>>>Did these things have a Crank Sensor?
>>>>
>>>>I'll send him an e-mail and ask what he recalls..
>>
>>