Looking to buy
09-30-2005, 04:53 PM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
If you are thinking manual, go for a 94 or 95 - they have an external
hydraulic clutch slave cylinder.
I think 94 1/2 and 95's have bigger U-joints in some places compared to
previous years, also.
-jd
lovs2fly wrote:
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
hydraulic clutch slave cylinder.
I think 94 1/2 and 95's have bigger U-joints in some places compared to
previous years, also.
-jd
lovs2fly wrote:
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
09-30-2005, 04:53 PM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
If you are thinking manual, go for a 94 or 95 - they have an external
hydraulic clutch slave cylinder.
I think 94 1/2 and 95's have bigger U-joints in some places compared to
previous years, also.
-jd
lovs2fly wrote:
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
hydraulic clutch slave cylinder.
I think 94 1/2 and 95's have bigger U-joints in some places compared to
previous years, also.
-jd
lovs2fly wrote:
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
09-30-2005, 04:53 PM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
If you are thinking manual, go for a 94 or 95 - they have an external
hydraulic clutch slave cylinder.
I think 94 1/2 and 95's have bigger U-joints in some places compared to
previous years, also.
-jd
lovs2fly wrote:
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
hydraulic clutch slave cylinder.
I think 94 1/2 and 95's have bigger U-joints in some places compared to
previous years, also.
-jd
lovs2fly wrote:
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
09-30-2005, 04:58 PM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
1994 got an external clutch slave cylinder. This is nice, if you ever have
to replace it. I don't know the years, but my 1995 has factory undercoating
and galvanized sheet metal. There is a heavy-duty rear axle option, the
Dana 44, that many people here like. The opinion expressed is, that the
standard D35C is weak for the six cylinder engine and off road use. Some
people here say that the later AX15 transmission is a lot better than
earlier offerings, such as the AX5 and Peugeot. This is only for the six
cylinder engine. The four cylinders came with the AX5, which seems to be
adequate for use with that engine.
Why do you want to do a frame-off rebuild? Lots of Wranglers that you may
find in this year range, won't need it for years to come. I have had my
1995 since it was new, 70,000 miles, and it barely looks used. Runs good
too. Another option is to build one from scratch, using parts, including
the frame, that are available from aftermarket manufacturers. Check the
mail order houses for more information.
Earle
"lovs2fly" <lovs2fly@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3bCdncsvnq_bsqDeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
to replace it. I don't know the years, but my 1995 has factory undercoating
and galvanized sheet metal. There is a heavy-duty rear axle option, the
Dana 44, that many people here like. The opinion expressed is, that the
standard D35C is weak for the six cylinder engine and off road use. Some
people here say that the later AX15 transmission is a lot better than
earlier offerings, such as the AX5 and Peugeot. This is only for the six
cylinder engine. The four cylinders came with the AX5, which seems to be
adequate for use with that engine.
Why do you want to do a frame-off rebuild? Lots of Wranglers that you may
find in this year range, won't need it for years to come. I have had my
1995 since it was new, 70,000 miles, and it barely looks used. Runs good
too. Another option is to build one from scratch, using parts, including
the frame, that are available from aftermarket manufacturers. Check the
mail order houses for more information.
Earle
"lovs2fly" <lovs2fly@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3bCdncsvnq_bsqDeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
09-30-2005, 04:58 PM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
1994 got an external clutch slave cylinder. This is nice, if you ever have
to replace it. I don't know the years, but my 1995 has factory undercoating
and galvanized sheet metal. There is a heavy-duty rear axle option, the
Dana 44, that many people here like. The opinion expressed is, that the
standard D35C is weak for the six cylinder engine and off road use. Some
people here say that the later AX15 transmission is a lot better than
earlier offerings, such as the AX5 and Peugeot. This is only for the six
cylinder engine. The four cylinders came with the AX5, which seems to be
adequate for use with that engine.
Why do you want to do a frame-off rebuild? Lots of Wranglers that you may
find in this year range, won't need it for years to come. I have had my
1995 since it was new, 70,000 miles, and it barely looks used. Runs good
too. Another option is to build one from scratch, using parts, including
the frame, that are available from aftermarket manufacturers. Check the
mail order houses for more information.
Earle
"lovs2fly" <lovs2fly@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3bCdncsvnq_bsqDeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
to replace it. I don't know the years, but my 1995 has factory undercoating
and galvanized sheet metal. There is a heavy-duty rear axle option, the
Dana 44, that many people here like. The opinion expressed is, that the
standard D35C is weak for the six cylinder engine and off road use. Some
people here say that the later AX15 transmission is a lot better than
earlier offerings, such as the AX5 and Peugeot. This is only for the six
cylinder engine. The four cylinders came with the AX5, which seems to be
adequate for use with that engine.
Why do you want to do a frame-off rebuild? Lots of Wranglers that you may
find in this year range, won't need it for years to come. I have had my
1995 since it was new, 70,000 miles, and it barely looks used. Runs good
too. Another option is to build one from scratch, using parts, including
the frame, that are available from aftermarket manufacturers. Check the
mail order houses for more information.
Earle
"lovs2fly" <lovs2fly@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3bCdncsvnq_bsqDeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
09-30-2005, 04:58 PM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
1994 got an external clutch slave cylinder. This is nice, if you ever have
to replace it. I don't know the years, but my 1995 has factory undercoating
and galvanized sheet metal. There is a heavy-duty rear axle option, the
Dana 44, that many people here like. The opinion expressed is, that the
standard D35C is weak for the six cylinder engine and off road use. Some
people here say that the later AX15 transmission is a lot better than
earlier offerings, such as the AX5 and Peugeot. This is only for the six
cylinder engine. The four cylinders came with the AX5, which seems to be
adequate for use with that engine.
Why do you want to do a frame-off rebuild? Lots of Wranglers that you may
find in this year range, won't need it for years to come. I have had my
1995 since it was new, 70,000 miles, and it barely looks used. Runs good
too. Another option is to build one from scratch, using parts, including
the frame, that are available from aftermarket manufacturers. Check the
mail order houses for more information.
Earle
"lovs2fly" <lovs2fly@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3bCdncsvnq_bsqDeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
to replace it. I don't know the years, but my 1995 has factory undercoating
and galvanized sheet metal. There is a heavy-duty rear axle option, the
Dana 44, that many people here like. The opinion expressed is, that the
standard D35C is weak for the six cylinder engine and off road use. Some
people here say that the later AX15 transmission is a lot better than
earlier offerings, such as the AX5 and Peugeot. This is only for the six
cylinder engine. The four cylinders came with the AX5, which seems to be
adequate for use with that engine.
Why do you want to do a frame-off rebuild? Lots of Wranglers that you may
find in this year range, won't need it for years to come. I have had my
1995 since it was new, 70,000 miles, and it barely looks used. Runs good
too. Another option is to build one from scratch, using parts, including
the frame, that are available from aftermarket manufacturers. Check the
mail order houses for more information.
Earle
"lovs2fly" <lovs2fly@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3bCdncsvnq_bsqDeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch out
> for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some point I
> plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
09-30-2005, 05:02 PM
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
At least your rebuild is only 20 bucks for the kit and an hour or so of
soaking/spraying.
If the OP is comfortable around carbs and tune ups, then the 258 is a
nice engine. If not, I second the FI in the later ones as a better buy.
The 258 has a longer stroke and tons of low rpm torque and that carb can
be made to behave with a little TLC and a kit come tune up time. It
gets better mileage than the 4.0 also.
The OP needs to watch for rust around the body mounts and frame tails.
I find that most vehicles have been driven to the limits of their
modifications which causes a lot of wear and tear, so the more stock the
better.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
RoyJ wrote:
>
> Forgot to mention: I have an '87 with BOTH the Carter and the Peugot.
> Puegot tranny has never given me any grief, Carter is sitting on the
> bench waiting for a rebuild. Jeep is in the garage with the hood up.
>
> RoyJ wrote:
> > Get a '91 or later with the 6 cylinder 4.0 FI engine. That will avoid
> > the dreaded Carter BBD carb. '89 and later will avoid the Peugot tranny.
> > Other than that, look for one that has not been abused; check to see if
> > there is rust on the frame or body (and bodywork that covers up the
> > rust). 6 cyl is good for 100k to 150k with just basic oil changes.
> >
> > lovs2fly wrote:
> >
> >> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch
> >> out for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some
> >> point I plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >>
soaking/spraying.
If the OP is comfortable around carbs and tune ups, then the 258 is a
nice engine. If not, I second the FI in the later ones as a better buy.
The 258 has a longer stroke and tons of low rpm torque and that carb can
be made to behave with a little TLC and a kit come tune up time. It
gets better mileage than the 4.0 also.
The OP needs to watch for rust around the body mounts and frame tails.
I find that most vehicles have been driven to the limits of their
modifications which causes a lot of wear and tear, so the more stock the
better.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
RoyJ wrote:
>
> Forgot to mention: I have an '87 with BOTH the Carter and the Peugot.
> Puegot tranny has never given me any grief, Carter is sitting on the
> bench waiting for a rebuild. Jeep is in the garage with the hood up.
>
> RoyJ wrote:
> > Get a '91 or later with the 6 cylinder 4.0 FI engine. That will avoid
> > the dreaded Carter BBD carb. '89 and later will avoid the Peugot tranny.
> > Other than that, look for one that has not been abused; check to see if
> > there is rust on the frame or body (and bodywork that covers up the
> > rust). 6 cyl is good for 100k to 150k with just basic oil changes.
> >
> > lovs2fly wrote:
> >
> >> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch
> >> out for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some
> >> point I plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >>
09-30-2005, 05:02 PM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
At least your rebuild is only 20 bucks for the kit and an hour or so of
soaking/spraying.
If the OP is comfortable around carbs and tune ups, then the 258 is a
nice engine. If not, I second the FI in the later ones as a better buy.
The 258 has a longer stroke and tons of low rpm torque and that carb can
be made to behave with a little TLC and a kit come tune up time. It
gets better mileage than the 4.0 also.
The OP needs to watch for rust around the body mounts and frame tails.
I find that most vehicles have been driven to the limits of their
modifications which causes a lot of wear and tear, so the more stock the
better.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
RoyJ wrote:
>
> Forgot to mention: I have an '87 with BOTH the Carter and the Peugot.
> Puegot tranny has never given me any grief, Carter is sitting on the
> bench waiting for a rebuild. Jeep is in the garage with the hood up.
>
> RoyJ wrote:
> > Get a '91 or later with the 6 cylinder 4.0 FI engine. That will avoid
> > the dreaded Carter BBD carb. '89 and later will avoid the Peugot tranny.
> > Other than that, look for one that has not been abused; check to see if
> > there is rust on the frame or body (and bodywork that covers up the
> > rust). 6 cyl is good for 100k to 150k with just basic oil changes.
> >
> > lovs2fly wrote:
> >
> >> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch
> >> out for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some
> >> point I plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >>
soaking/spraying.
If the OP is comfortable around carbs and tune ups, then the 258 is a
nice engine. If not, I second the FI in the later ones as a better buy.
The 258 has a longer stroke and tons of low rpm torque and that carb can
be made to behave with a little TLC and a kit come tune up time. It
gets better mileage than the 4.0 also.
The OP needs to watch for rust around the body mounts and frame tails.
I find that most vehicles have been driven to the limits of their
modifications which causes a lot of wear and tear, so the more stock the
better.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
RoyJ wrote:
>
> Forgot to mention: I have an '87 with BOTH the Carter and the Peugot.
> Puegot tranny has never given me any grief, Carter is sitting on the
> bench waiting for a rebuild. Jeep is in the garage with the hood up.
>
> RoyJ wrote:
> > Get a '91 or later with the 6 cylinder 4.0 FI engine. That will avoid
> > the dreaded Carter BBD carb. '89 and later will avoid the Peugot tranny.
> > Other than that, look for one that has not been abused; check to see if
> > there is rust on the frame or body (and bodywork that covers up the
> > rust). 6 cyl is good for 100k to 150k with just basic oil changes.
> >
> > lovs2fly wrote:
> >
> >> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch
> >> out for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some
> >> point I plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >>
09-30-2005, 05:02 PM
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
At least your rebuild is only 20 bucks for the kit and an hour or so of
soaking/spraying.
If the OP is comfortable around carbs and tune ups, then the 258 is a
nice engine. If not, I second the FI in the later ones as a better buy.
The 258 has a longer stroke and tons of low rpm torque and that carb can
be made to behave with a little TLC and a kit come tune up time. It
gets better mileage than the 4.0 also.
The OP needs to watch for rust around the body mounts and frame tails.
I find that most vehicles have been driven to the limits of their
modifications which causes a lot of wear and tear, so the more stock the
better.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
RoyJ wrote:
>
> Forgot to mention: I have an '87 with BOTH the Carter and the Peugot.
> Puegot tranny has never given me any grief, Carter is sitting on the
> bench waiting for a rebuild. Jeep is in the garage with the hood up.
>
> RoyJ wrote:
> > Get a '91 or later with the 6 cylinder 4.0 FI engine. That will avoid
> > the dreaded Carter BBD carb. '89 and later will avoid the Peugot tranny.
> > Other than that, look for one that has not been abused; check to see if
> > there is rust on the frame or body (and bodywork that covers up the
> > rust). 6 cyl is good for 100k to 150k with just basic oil changes.
> >
> > lovs2fly wrote:
> >
> >> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch
> >> out for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some
> >> point I plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >>
soaking/spraying.
If the OP is comfortable around carbs and tune ups, then the 258 is a
nice engine. If not, I second the FI in the later ones as a better buy.
The 258 has a longer stroke and tons of low rpm torque and that carb can
be made to behave with a little TLC and a kit come tune up time. It
gets better mileage than the 4.0 also.
The OP needs to watch for rust around the body mounts and frame tails.
I find that most vehicles have been driven to the limits of their
modifications which causes a lot of wear and tear, so the more stock the
better.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
RoyJ wrote:
>
> Forgot to mention: I have an '87 with BOTH the Carter and the Peugot.
> Puegot tranny has never given me any grief, Carter is sitting on the
> bench waiting for a rebuild. Jeep is in the garage with the hood up.
>
> RoyJ wrote:
> > Get a '91 or later with the 6 cylinder 4.0 FI engine. That will avoid
> > the dreaded Carter BBD carb. '89 and later will avoid the Peugot tranny.
> > Other than that, look for one that has not been abused; check to see if
> > there is rust on the frame or body (and bodywork that covers up the
> > rust). 6 cyl is good for 100k to 150k with just basic oil changes.
> >
> > lovs2fly wrote:
> >
> >> Looking to buy a wrangler in the 89-95 year range. Anything to watch
> >> out for? Any years to stay away from? Any must have options? At some
> >> point I plan to do a frame-off rebuild if that matters.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >>
10-01-2005, 08:10 AM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Looking to buy
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote
*snip*
: I find that most vehicles have been driven to the limits of their
: modifications which causes a lot of wear and tear, so the more stock the
: better.
Mike,
That is best explanation I have ever seen for that.
After years and years of building, modding and driving different types of
vehicles I never quite found the words to explain to someone this exact
theory, which in my opinion is right on target
Kate
2O|||||||O5 Liberty
*snip*
: I find that most vehicles have been driven to the limits of their
: modifications which causes a lot of wear and tear, so the more stock the
: better.
Mike,
That is best explanation I have ever seen for that.
After years and years of building, modding and driving different types of
vehicles I never quite found the words to explain to someone this exact
theory, which in my opinion is right on target
Kate
2O|||||||O5 Liberty