• Hello Guest, we are proud to now have our Wiki online that is completely compiled and written by our members. Feel free to browse our Jeep-CJ Wiki or click on any orange keyword when looking at posts in the forum.

Jp Magazine

Highlights Only
Jp Magazine
Petescj

Petescj

Member
Lifetime Supporter
Posts
23,105
Media
190
Solutions
1
Thanks
185
Location
PA
Vehicle(s)
1982 CJ-7 258 / T-18 / Dana 300 31 in All Terrains.
1978 CJ-7 304 / TH 400 / Quadratrac 32 in Mud Terrains
Dont read it that often anymore but once in awhile the wife grabs one at the grocery store. Congrats to Certifiable Jeep for making an appearance in Jeep shots with the Scram J-7. Also a writeup on Fuzz 401 s Drag strip CJ7 . There was a suprising amount of Cjs in the readers rides. :chug:
 
man i like jp i read it every month, every body rags on it but you gotta think theres only so many things you do to and write about on a cj eventually as a magazine (an ALL jeep mag at that) you have to move on and write more stories about newer, different jeeps. i mean you wouldn't read a newspaper that only wrote about news from 30years ago would you? that being said congrats certifiablejeep. :chug:
 
I really enjoyed this issue. I learned from the wheel article, the tire article and the soldering iron article. The white and teal 48 willys pickup was pretty nice. What about that 85 CJ-10? Oh, and I'm gonna use the CB and antenna info when I redo my dash. I guess I'm just a rookie. I just started messing with Jeeps last year. I still don't understand what the front bumpers that look like an upside down V are for. Do they help climb steep rocks? I don't get out much!
 
jeffgtoman said:
I really enjoyed this issue. I learned from the wheel article, the tire article and the soldering iron article. The white and teal 48 willys pickup was pretty nice. What about that 85 CJ-10? Oh, and I'm gonna use the CB and antenna info when I redo my dash. I guess I'm just a rookie. I just started messing with Jeeps last year. I still don't understand what the front bumpers that look like an upside down V are for. Do they help climb steep rocks? I don't get out much!
Click to expand...
If your talking about these
31166-lg.jpg

Some people call em stinger, some hoops. Lots of names. There there to hopefully stop your momentum on a downhill roll, and have also heard on a sideways rollover, they save your engine/radiator so that you might be able to still drive out.
 
jeepardy said:
If your talking about these
31166-lg.jpg

Some people call em stinger, some hoops. Lots of names. There there to hopefully stop your momentum on a downhill roll, and have also heard on a sideways rollover, they save your engine/radiator so that you might be able to still drive out.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's it. Thanks for the explanation. I couldn't figure it out looking at pictures.
 
The purpose of the stinger is to offer a high point to attach a recovery or stabilizing strap during rock climbs. the high point of attachment makes it easier to control a vehicle that wants to go backwards (picture a Jeep with it's nose in the air and the cog dangerously compromised).
 
OK. I can relate to that. When I was 16, I worked at a junkyard. The boss got a pristine 65 Catalina 4 door in. It was white with red interior. He told me to tow it to his personal lot instead of putting it in the junkyard. I got stuck going thru the junkyard. I got another wrecker and pulled on it from the other end. The Catalina was stretched in between 2 wreckers. It lifted the car off the ground and the car flipped upside down. (I was using homemade wreckers with no slings, just a cable and hook.) I shoved the clutch in and the Catalina landed upside down in a big mud hole. There was no longer a need to take it to the personal lot. Live and learn.
 
jeepardy said:
If your talking about these
31166-lg.jpg

There there to hopefully stop your momentum on a downhill roll, and have also heard on a sideways rollover, they save your engine/radiator so that you might be able to still drive out.
Click to expand...

CJim7 said:
The purpose of the stinger is to offer a high point to attach a recovery or stabilizing strap during rock climbs. the high point of attachment makes it easier to control a vehicle that wants to go backwards (picture a Jeep with it's nose in the air and the cog dangerously compromised).
Click to expand...

I think the stinger front end is a fad that will soon die. If you really wanted to protect the radiator during a roll you should have the bars closer to the grill and shaped like the grill. Many stingers are too small to protect anything but the top of the hood. The stinger below is much bigger than most but still not as good as bars that follow the top of the grill.
If you wanted to attach a cable to the stinger you should have an attachment point on the stinger.
seats004.sized.jpg

​
 
Last edited:
BusaDave9 said:
I think the stinger front end is a fad that will soon die. If you really wanted to protect the radiator during a roll you should have the bars closer to the grill and shaped like the grill. Many stingers are too small to protect anything but the top of the hood. The stinger below is much bigger than most but still not as good as bars that follow the top of the grill.
If you wanted to attach a cable to the stinger you should have an attachment point on the stinger.
seats004.sized.jpg

​
Click to expand...

That makes sense. Thanks.
 
There was an article a couple of weeks ago that some one posted that I would like to read again but can not find. It was about mod misconceptions and falicies. the thing I am most interested in is a discussion about the 4.0 head swap being of no great advantage with out a cam change. Does anyone remember this and where it was??
I can't remember if it was from JP or somewhere else, I can't find it in "I'm not spam".
Certifiable has a very cool rig and would be a good addition to any magazine.:cool:
 
I remeber it, still got the issue. It was about the differences in the years of 4.0 heads whether or not one was better than the other. It wasn't comparing the AMC 258 i6 / 4.2l and the 4.0 heads. There is no doubt the 4.0 is better. It also had a comparison of the 4.0 intakes.

Sent from my DROID2
 
no, thats not it. something about doing a dyno test after swapping the head and not getting enough improvement to measure. I would not have read it in the magazine so I thought it was the I'm not spam thread but I couldn't find it there ,
I'll keep looking.

Cheepjeep85 said:
I remeber it, still got the issue. It was about the differences in the years of 4.0 heads whether or not one was better than the other. It wasn't comparing the AMC 258 i6 / 4.2l and the 4.0 heads. There is no doubt the 4.0 is better. It also had a comparison of the 4.0 intakes.

Sent from my DROID2
Click to expand...
 
I seem to remember they actually did a dyno on a 4.0 head conversion.

Cheepjeep85 said:
ah thought you were talking about the jeep myth artical they done not to long ago.
Click to expand...
 
IOPort51 said:
I seem to remember they actually did a dyno on a 4.0 head conversion.
Click to expand...
I'd be really interested in reading that. I'd still be inclined to think they didn't do something right with the swap, because too many people have done it and swear by how much more power they have on the highway! The higher compression alone that you get with the 4.0 head would be worth a lot of measurable HP. Add in much better flowing intake and exhaust runners, and a much better flowing exhaust manifold, and there's no chance you wouldn't see a serious gain.

So you're saying it wasn't JP magazine that did the dyno, but instead it was some forum member that posted their numbers????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Jeep-CJ Donation Drive

Help support Jeep-CJ.com by making a contribution.

Help support Jeep-CJ.com by making a contribution.
Goal
$200.00
Earned
$0.00
This donation drive ends in
0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
  0.0%
Contribute
Back
Top Bottom