T-case question

I'm going to be picking up a '86 XJ Wagoneer for parts in 3 weeks and have been told that it has a selec-trac transfer case with a fixed output shaft. Can anyone tell me what model t-case was used behind the 2.8L/auto trans combo in the Waggys? Also is this case stronger the the NP231J in my '95XJ, and if it's swappable into mine. I don't really have experience with the earlier models. I am buying the Waggy for the 4.10 geared axles, and anything else I can't use I'll be selling.

One more question, the D35 in the Waggy has a limited slip with 201K on it ... is it worth rebuilding and where would I source a kit to rebuild?

Many thanks!

Go to randy"s ring and pinion. com. They have about the cheapest prices I have found and their tech staff is great. Ask to speak with Paul. I don't know much about the stuff at all but he broke it down for me and a lot of folks aroudn here deal with them.

An '86 Waggy with Selec-Trac will have either an NP228 or NP229. They are similar, except that one uses a viscous coupling internally and the other a mechanical differential. According to the FSM, these are only full-time cases in high range -- no locked 4-Hi position.

I believe the 229 was also used in the full-size Grand Wagoneers, but not sure of that. If so, it should be strong enough to live behind a 4.0L -- if you can accept the lack of a real high range 4-wheel drive.

Eagle said:

I believe the 229 was also used in the full-size Grand Wagoneers, but not sure of that. If so, it should be strong enough to live behind a 4.0L -- if you can accept the lack of a real high range 4-wheel drive.

Click to expand...

I'd rather have a real high range than get the fixed output that easy. I guess I'll just (hopefully) take proceeds from the sale of parting out the drivetrain on the '86 Waggy and make other improvements.

Thanks,

I've got a 228 or 229 from my 86 XJ laying around that I was going to swap into my 89, but it's got a 23spline input (my aw4's 12 spline )

I LOVED that case for two reasons...

1. it ALWAYS shifted EFFORTLESSLY and INSTANTLY

2. the part time low, hell. if ya need part time.. low ain't gonna hurt anything.

it too was coupled with a trac-lok in the rear and that bad boy would go ANYWHERE!

the drive chain in the 228/229 is 1.75" as opposed to 1" in the 231/242.

they are however HUGE transfer cases

CheapXJ said:

I've got a 228 or 229 from my 86 XJ laying around that I was going to swap into my 89, but it's got a 23spline input (my aw4's 12 spline )

I LOVED that case for two reasons...

1. it ALWAYS shifted EFFORTLESSLY and INSTANTLY

2. the part time low, hell. if ya need part time.. low ain't gonna hurt anything.

it too was coupled with a trac-lok in the rear and that bad boy would go ANYWHERE!

the drive chain in the 228/229 is 1.75" as opposed to 1" in the 231/242.

they are however HUGE transfer cases

Click to expand...

Hmmm ... maybe I'll make my mind once I get the parts Waggy back to PA. My '95 has the 5 speed AX-15 which would be 23 spline so the 228/229 "should" bolt right up. I'll have to keep a pros and cons list going and see which wins out.

CheapXJ said:

I've got a 228 or 229 from my 86 XJ laying around that I was going to swap into my 89, but it's got a 23spline input (my aw4's 12 spline )

I LOVED that case for two reasons...

1. it ALWAYS shifted EFFORTLESSLY and INSTANTLY

2. the part time low, hell. if ya need part time.. low ain't gonna hurt anything.

it too was coupled with a trac-lok in the rear and that bad boy would go ANYWHERE!

the drive chain in the 228/229 is 1.75" as opposed to 1" in the 231/242.

they are however HUGE transfer cases

Click to expand...

Does that mean that the 228 from behind a V6 2.8 would be 23 spline??

Kejtar said:

Does that mean that the 228 from behind a V6 2.8 would be 23 spline??

Click to expand...

I think that all of the 228 and 229 cases are 32 spline outputs. I counted mine on both my 228 and 229 and they are both 32. I have a 2.5 four cylinder but I don't think that they changed the spline count for the 2.8 V6. Not sure on that though.

Kim