Chrystler VS AMC...pros and cons!

[steveC]

1994/1995 - I'd have to check timing on this, but I think this was about when Daimler/Benz bought ChryCo, making the new "Daimler/Chrysler" company. A definite step backwards...

Jon, 1998 was the year Mopar died. Our old '99 WJ (built in 09/1998) had only one reference to DCX, and that was the address in the warranty papers, everything else had a pentastar on it. On the other hand, my Y2K Dakota has Daimler printed on everything.

Other stuff:

* The '99 WJ did indeed have a D30 front axle, albeit with CV joints and tone rings at each wheel. The CVs needed new boots about every 25K miles.

* You know, DCX just considers Jeep a brand, which all value has pretty much been sucked out of by now. The "Compass", are you freakin' kidding me? The only real Jeep left is the Wrangler (and the 4-door one is kinda cool, and people ARE buying it, even if it does have a car motor), all the other models are otherwise pretty much tall station wagons at this point.

* The ZJ was actually an AMC design, but they didn't have the funding to put it in production. It was really what caught Iacocca's interest when he bought AMC, because he was after the high-margin customers he knew it would draw. Allpar.com has more info on this. Many AMC engineers did work for Mopar for awhile, but most are said to have retired or moved on.

 

[5-90]

Jon, 1998 was the year Mopar died. Our old '99 WJ (built in 09/1998) had only one reference to DCX, and that was the address in the warranty papers, everything else had a pentastar on it. On the other hand, my Y2K Dakota has Daimler printed on everything.

Other stuff:

* The '99 WJ did indeed have a D30 front axle, albeit with CV joints and tone rings at each wheel. The CVs needed new boots about every 25K miles.

* You know, DCX just considers Jeep a brand, which all value has pretty much been sucked out of by now. The "Compass", are you freakin' kidding me? The only real Jeep left is the Wrangler (and the 4-door one is kinda cool, and people ARE buying it, even if it does have a car motor), all the other models are otherwise pretty much tall station wagons at this point.

* The ZJ was actually an AMC design, but they didn't have the funding to put it in production. It was really what caught Iacocca's interest when he bought AMC, because he was after the high-margin customers he knew it would draw. Allpar.com has more info on this. Many AMC engineers did work for Mopar for awhile, but most are said to have retired or moved on.

That late? I'll have to check my notes and put that source down as "possible apocrypha."

Yeah, most of what's going on is just "business practices" without any regard for tradition. Yes, the Jeep marque has a tradition to it - of being tough, dependable, and can go pretty much anywhere. "Jeeps don't go anywhere fast, they just go anywhere." AMC understood that, Lee Iacocca didn't. Dr. Z doesn't.

So, the WJ D30 front was still IFS, using CV halfshafts? Sorry, but I've long thought that Rzeppa joints just have no place on anything remotely considered a truck, and definitely don't belong on anything with four-wheel drive (too easy to break a boot, contaminate the joint, and then you're changing the halfshafts...)

Considering that you can probably still get RENIX parts at the dealerships with AMC logos on them, you're just dealing with parts they haven't run out of yet. Ditto the ChryCo/DCX changeover - no point in throwing parts away if they can still be sold, no? I bought a lower hose out of the "turtle tank" for my 89 last year that had an AMC logo on it - from Normandin Chrysler. They're still out there, and they're what collectors would call "NOS" - "New Old Stock."

 

[Zoro]

5-90 The ZJ & WJ have a dana 30 solid front axle but instead of regular shafts with u-joints like the XJ has they use a CV shaft on each side. Wierd combo if you ask me.

 

[5-90]

So it's a Dana 30 centre section with CV/Rzeppa halfshafts, like on FWD cars? That would make it IFS, since if it had solid tubes, you'd have a "Solid Live Axle" setup.

I'll have to peruse a few things around here, but I'm still thinking that IFS was standard on the WJ. It's not that I'm unwilling to be convinced, but that the information seems to be leaning my way so far...

Check your PM box - I answered you.

 

[steveC]

So it's a Dana 30 centre section with CV/Rzeppa halfshafts, like on FWD cars? That would make it IFS, since if it had solid tubes, you'd have a "Solid Live Axle" setup.

No, it's just like the XJ setup, except that where the XJ has a U-joint, the WJ has a single booted Rzeppa-style CV. Otherwise, it's identical, the ball joints and knuckles are the same as the XJ. You pull the axle out of the diff just like the XJ.

The *really* bad deal about this (excepting that an Rzeppa CV is too weak for 4-wheeling) is that the CV got in the way of the 3 bolts that hold the wheel bearing assembly on. I never did find a way to get to one of them with a proper torque wrench, just no room for it, so I had to guess.

Trust me, I had to do replacement boots on that turkey twice

 

[Zoro]

This kinda shows it but replace number 25 w/#21

Samae exact as an XJ as stated above but no U-Joints

 

[5-90]

So they still run a toothpick down a tube, but stick a Rzeppa on it instead of a Cardan? What idiot did that?

I suppose the key point here is that I'm trying to make sure it's a tube (making it, technically, a "Solid Live Axle") rather than a naked halfshaft going from the centre section to the wheel. Is there a tube?

 

[steveC]

So they still run a toothpick down a tube, but stick a Rzeppa on it instead of a Cardan? What idiot did that?

Good question

To be fair, a Cardan joint would probably be too long for the stock assembly; it had to fit in the same space as a standard U-joint. And I think the point of the Rzeppa is that it would run smoother than the standard u-joint would. This is to appeal to the customer base that the WJ (and ZJ) was targeting, which weren't your standard wheeler types, and wouldn't care about strength, but would certainly complain about noise or vibration.

It is indeed a tube, and is just the same as the photo Zoro posted. The only difference is the joint at the end of the axleshaft.

 

[5-90]

Good question

To be fair, a Cardan joint would probably be too long for the stock assembly; it had to fit in the same space as a standard U-joint. And I think the point of the Rzeppa is that it would run smoother than the standard u-joint would. This is to appeal to the customer base that the WJ (and ZJ) was targeting, which weren't your standard wheeler types, and wouldn't care about strength, but would certainly complain about noise or vibration.

It is indeed a tube, and is just the same as the photo Zoro posted. The only difference is the joint at the end of the axleshaft.

All right - that makes sense now. I was just trying to figure out that one point...

Damn people - don't they realise that these are Jeeps, and supposed to be noisy? All these NVH refinements just served to dilute the accepted purpose of the vehicle line. If you want a quiet ride, get a Caddy!

Damn Yuppies...

 

[Zoro]

Damn people - don't they realise that these are Jeeps, and supposed to be noisy?

You should take a ride in my XJ, after the first mile or so you just stop asking what each noise is

 

[j99xj]

I usually get a phillips screwdriver out every few months and snug down the screws in my interior.

 

[1985xjlaredo]

Just because Chrysler bought out AMC doesn't mean all AMC engineers got fired

Yes most Chrysler senior engineers were let go and AMC took over the Chrysler Engineering Dept.

 

[Matthew Currie]

On the front u-joint issue, perhaps they put CV joints in the Grand because it's often, if not always, a full time 4WD setup, and CV joints are kinder to tires as well as being smoother. If I recall, the early selec-trac XJ's had these as well, didn't they?

 

[flht1997]

when i was working at the Plymouth garage and i had to work on a Jeep. i recall it was the ZJ's that had the CV style joint. every once in awhile a XJ would have it, but that was too long ago for me to remember the specifics. also it was 98' when Diamler came in, because it coincided with me leaving the Chyrsler shop. not cause of the buyout, but i went back to school. but man i thank God i am not working on some of the stuff they make now. but i bet all those chyrsler techs were saying the same thing when all those AMC's started coming in with the RENIX stuff. I was a pretty good tech, but i admire an all-makes tech that can jump from make to make and be able to preform accurate/timely diagnosis.

 

[88XJSport]

Kinda makes me wonder how long the XJ was in the design phase

Ah, im glad you asked! To answer your question, designing began for the Cherokee XJ in 1979. So about 4 or so years or designing.

 

[steveC]

This is interesting. I've seen other threads about "which year is best", etc. Here's a different question in the same vein:

If you wanted to "resurrect" an XJ into near-new condition, mostly stock, but with some performance/driveability/wearability/appearance improvements, which year would you start with, and what would you do to it?

 

[Zoro]

Ah, im glad you asked! To answer your question, designing began for the Cherokee XJ in 1979. So about 4 or so years or designing.

I think it's funny that they started the design phase for the XJ in the absolute peak of FSJ production. However after '79 build numbers dropped and FSJ Cherokee's went out in 83 except for Austrailia where they built 'em till 85

 

[5-90]

I think it's funny that they started the design phase for the XJ in the absolute peak of FSJ production. However after '79 build numbers dropped and FSJ Cherokee's went out in 83 except for Austrailia where they built 'em till 85

Ah - but the FSJ survived here (as "Grand Wagoneer") until 1990 or so, when it was replaced by the ZJ. The 3-door FSJ Cherokee was replaced by the XJ Cheroke and XJ Wagoneer, but the FSJ Grand Waggy got to hang around a little more (using the AMC360 and A999, I think) until about 1990 - I know it's covered in my 1990 FSM...

 

[87manche]

I know that the grand waggy made it until 88, cause I've got a friend selling an 88, it's a 360 auto.

 

[steveC]

I think it's funny that they started the design phase for the XJ in the absolute peak of FSJ production.

Ah, there was a *reason* for that; they wanted a platform that appealed to SJ buyers (which were notably well off, and were consistent, high-margin customers), but that was light and efficient enough to get decent mileage and smog numbers, and would be affordable to produce, and flexible enough to configure in a wide range of trim levels. Those literally were the design requirements for the XJ.

Note that in 1993 (first year of ZJ production), there was a ZJ produced with wood paneled sides and a "Grand Wagoneer" nameplate on the side, with the "limited" level interior trim. They wanted this to appeal those SJ buyers. I've only seen 2 of them in real life, and they looked pretty goofy (whereas the GW on the XJ chassis still had some class; you could still see the 1965 Rambler Ambassador heritage in it's front end...).