• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

battery size 34 vs 58

md21722

NAXJA Forum User
Location
TN
My 1997 calls for a Type 58 battery

My 2001 calls for a Type 34 battery

The Type 58 is a bit smaller and weighs about 10 pounds less and from what I can tell they are interchangeable in the XJ. Is there any reason to continue using a Type 58 battery? Was it done for weight savings similar to the way composite rotors were used in 97 but by 01 they were cast?
 
Battery tray would need the lip trimmed off on one of the sides to make a 34 fit, that's what we had to do on my friends 95. Other then that I don't see why to even use a 58
 
The weight comes from the lead in the battery. More lead means more power.
 
My 1997 calls for a Type 58 battery

My 2001 calls for a Type 34 battery

The Type 58 is a bit smaller and weighs about 10 pounds less and from what I can tell they are interchangeable in the XJ. Is there any reason to continue using a Type 58 battery? Was it done for weight savings similar to the way composite rotors were used in 97 but by 01 they were cast?

weren't the composite rotors 00 01?
 
Did this have anything to do with using LP Dana 30s from TJs already assembled vs HP Dana 30s?

Doubt it, it probably more has to do with the fact that the 00-up unit bearings are the exact same for the TJ/98.5-upXJ, and ZJ. AS long as you have the matching rotors for the unit bearings you are running, then they are plug n pray.

Sorry for the OT post.

I think I have a "34" battery or something of the sort. It fits the tray better, even though it is larger.
 
Back
Top