CRWLR

Oops, I did it again -0 I hit the Send button way too soon ...


> Thanks for that. So what you are saying is that I don't need to worry
> about the tranny went as it closes under water. I already have a high
> level on my front axle. That leaves me with transfer case and rear axle.
> I need to spend some more time under the TJ to find out where they are.
Do
> you happen to know the approximate location and sizes? Also whats the
best
> way of putting a downward bend on the a/c went as highway winds tend to
> push water back in under certain conditions (like about 80kmph speeds).
>

Correct, you don't need to worry about the trans. The tcase and the rear
diff vent tubes look exactly like the front diff vent tube that you already
found. The tcase tube is attached to the firewall near the battery - maybe
closer to the engine than the battery, but on that side. The rear diff vent
tube goes up inside the fender, it comes off of the axle itself very similar
to the front.

At those speeds, there is positive pressure on the end of the vent tubes,
water mist from highway travel is not going to get in. The problem water is
that which can keep a fish happy.

CRWLR

"JimG" <jimg@cj7_2muchspam.com> wrote in message
news:vvjlfh39sjddf2@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:vvjdpuqq21ns0d@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > First, you want a lower ratio, which is a higher numeric value.
> >
>
> Now see, I wondered about that and left it alone...
>
> Mathematically speaking, wouldn't a higher "ratio" be correct, which
> correspond to a "lower" gear? For example: If you use a higher (50:1 vs.
> 25:1) gas to oil ratio in your chain saw, you are adding more gas to the
> oil.
>
> Naturally we all know that the higher the number (ratio), the lower the
gear
> and visa versa. Maybe we should only use "higher" and "lower" when
> referring to gears.
>

Your fuel analogy is flawed. 25:1 is a richer mixture than 50:1, but 50:1
gears are easier to turn than 25:1. (not that this would be a very useful
gear ratio for an automobile).

In the fuel ratio, you are using 25 parts of gas for each part of oil, or 50
parts of gas for each part of oil. If you have a 25:1 fuel ratio, then you
have twice as much gas as compared to the 50:1 ratio that you suggested.

But, an engine with a differential of 25:1 must work harder than one with a
50:1 ratio. You will not get as much work done with the 50:1 ratio, but the
work that is done will be with less strain on the engine, assuming we are
not talking about running around at redline.

CRWLR

"JimG" <jimg@cj7_2muchspam.com> wrote in message
news:vvjlfh39sjddf2@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:vvjdpuqq21ns0d@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > First, you want a lower ratio, which is a higher numeric value.
> >
>
> Now see, I wondered about that and left it alone...
>
> Mathematically speaking, wouldn't a higher "ratio" be correct, which
> correspond to a "lower" gear? For example: If you use a higher (50:1 vs.
> 25:1) gas to oil ratio in your chain saw, you are adding more gas to the
> oil.
>
> Naturally we all know that the higher the number (ratio), the lower the
gear
> and visa versa. Maybe we should only use "higher" and "lower" when
> referring to gears.
>

Your fuel analogy is flawed. 25:1 is a richer mixture than 50:1, but 50:1
gears are easier to turn than 25:1. (not that this would be a very useful
gear ratio for an automobile).

In the fuel ratio, you are using 25 parts of gas for each part of oil, or 50
parts of gas for each part of oil. If you have a 25:1 fuel ratio, then you
have twice as much gas as compared to the 50:1 ratio that you suggested.

But, an engine with a differential of 25:1 must work harder than one with a
50:1 ratio. You will not get as much work done with the 50:1 ratio, but the
work that is done will be with less strain on the engine, assuming we are
not talking about running around at redline.

CRWLR

"JimG" <jimg@cj7_2muchspam.com> wrote in message
news:vvjlfh39sjddf2@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:vvjdpuqq21ns0d@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > First, you want a lower ratio, which is a higher numeric value.
> >
>
> Now see, I wondered about that and left it alone...
>
> Mathematically speaking, wouldn't a higher "ratio" be correct, which
> correspond to a "lower" gear? For example: If you use a higher (50:1 vs.
> 25:1) gas to oil ratio in your chain saw, you are adding more gas to the
> oil.
>
> Naturally we all know that the higher the number (ratio), the lower the
gear
> and visa versa. Maybe we should only use "higher" and "lower" when
> referring to gears.
>

Your fuel analogy is flawed. 25:1 is a richer mixture than 50:1, but 50:1
gears are easier to turn than 25:1. (not that this would be a very useful
gear ratio for an automobile).

In the fuel ratio, you are using 25 parts of gas for each part of oil, or 50
parts of gas for each part of oil. If you have a 25:1 fuel ratio, then you
have twice as much gas as compared to the 50:1 ratio that you suggested.

But, an engine with a differential of 25:1 must work harder than one with a
50:1 ratio. You will not get as much work done with the 50:1 ratio, but the
work that is done will be with less strain on the engine, assuming we are
not talking about running around at redline.

-jc

"CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> Your fuel analogy is flawed. 25:1 is a richer mixture than 50:1, but 50:1
> gears are easier to turn than 25:1. (not that this would be a very useful
> gear ratio for an automobile).
>
> In the fuel ratio, you are using 25 parts of gas for each part of oil, or
50
> parts of gas for each part of oil. If you have a 25:1 fuel ratio, then you
> have twice as much gas as compared to the 50:1 ratio that you suggested.

Bzzzzt ... wrong answer. 50:1 is a richer mixture. Think of what burns in
the combustion chamber ... fuel and air. The oil is for lubrication and
cooling and doesn't burn. 50 parts fuel to 1 part oil results in more fuel
being delivered when compared to 25:1. You will have to lean out your
jetting to accommodate running at 50:1.


--
- Jeff
- ........................ then again, what do I know.

-jc

"CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> Your fuel analogy is flawed. 25:1 is a richer mixture than 50:1, but 50:1
> gears are easier to turn than 25:1. (not that this would be a very useful
> gear ratio for an automobile).
>
> In the fuel ratio, you are using 25 parts of gas for each part of oil, or
50
> parts of gas for each part of oil. If you have a 25:1 fuel ratio, then you
> have twice as much gas as compared to the 50:1 ratio that you suggested.

Bzzzzt ... wrong answer. 50:1 is a richer mixture. Think of what burns in
the combustion chamber ... fuel and air. The oil is for lubrication and
cooling and doesn't burn. 50 parts fuel to 1 part oil results in more fuel
being delivered when compared to 25:1. You will have to lean out your
jetting to accommodate running at 50:1.


--
- Jeff
- ........................ then again, what do I know.

-jc

"CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> Your fuel analogy is flawed. 25:1 is a richer mixture than 50:1, but 50:1
> gears are easier to turn than 25:1. (not that this would be a very useful
> gear ratio for an automobile).
>
> In the fuel ratio, you are using 25 parts of gas for each part of oil, or
50
> parts of gas for each part of oil. If you have a 25:1 fuel ratio, then you
> have twice as much gas as compared to the 50:1 ratio that you suggested.

Bzzzzt ... wrong answer. 50:1 is a richer mixture. Think of what burns in
the combustion chamber ... fuel and air. The oil is for lubrication and
cooling and doesn't burn. 50 parts fuel to 1 part oil results in more fuel
being delivered when compared to 25:1. You will have to lean out your
jetting to accommodate running at 50:1.


--
- Jeff
- ........................ then again, what do I know.

JimG

CRWLR wrote:

> 25:1 is a richer mixture than 50:1

richer in oil? yes

> If you have a 25:1 fuel ratio, then you
> have twice as much gas as compared to the 50:1 ratio that you suggested.

Using the following formula: X oz gas. / ratio = Y oz. oil
Based on:
http://www.csgnetwork.com/oilfuelcalc.html

If I want a 50:1 mixture, then I add 125.5 ounces of gas and 2.5 ounces of
oil.
If I want a 25:1 mixture, then I add 123.0 ounces of gas and 5.0 ounces of
oil.
(numbers rounded for simplicity)

Total = 128 oz. or 1 gal.

Which mixture has a higher ratio of gas?

JimG

JimG

CRWLR wrote:

> 25:1 is a richer mixture than 50:1

richer in oil? yes

> If you have a 25:1 fuel ratio, then you
> have twice as much gas as compared to the 50:1 ratio that you suggested.

Using the following formula: X oz gas. / ratio = Y oz. oil
Based on:
http://www.csgnetwork.com/oilfuelcalc.html

If I want a 50:1 mixture, then I add 125.5 ounces of gas and 2.5 ounces of
oil.
If I want a 25:1 mixture, then I add 123.0 ounces of gas and 5.0 ounces of
oil.
(numbers rounded for simplicity)

Total = 128 oz. or 1 gal.

Which mixture has a higher ratio of gas?

JimG

JimG

CRWLR wrote:

> 25:1 is a richer mixture than 50:1

richer in oil? yes

> If you have a 25:1 fuel ratio, then you
> have twice as much gas as compared to the 50:1 ratio that you suggested.

Using the following formula: X oz gas. / ratio = Y oz. oil
Based on:
http://www.csgnetwork.com/oilfuelcalc.html

If I want a 50:1 mixture, then I add 125.5 ounces of gas and 2.5 ounces of
oil.
If I want a 25:1 mixture, then I add 123.0 ounces of gas and 5.0 ounces of
oil.
(numbers rounded for simplicity)

Total = 128 oz. or 1 gal.

Which mixture has a higher ratio of gas?

JimG