Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
Just my opinion. There might be differences of who owned what at different times and we can debate for years what's better, but from what I've seen from the classic car scene the hate is almost always from personal, individual insecurity. It has nothing to do with AMC vs Chrysler vs GM vs Ford vs Dodge. They all made good cars and crappy cars.
I've always owned GM cars but one of my best friends has a 71 Mach I Mustang with 351C his parents bough for him new when he was 4. I always preferred and enjoyed my GMs, and had a few very nice, restored cars, but in all honesty probably have more respect for him and his Mustang than anything I've ever owned.
Do you happen to have any pictures of those square headlighted CJ's? I can't seem to find any.
"It was Chrysler that went back to the round lights and softer planes."
Good point. Jeep enthusiasts complaints got the best of them. That was probably the most blatant and most often talked about change that folks hated about these wranglers.
"As my preference & love for CJ's is demonstrated"
*The truth is that that the CJ had outlived its production run and needed many upgrades.
*unadequate 4-wheel drum brakes,
* under powered flat-head 4's,
*Ross steering (shudder),
*such weak axles as the Dana 25/Dana 41 combo that I wouldn't use them under a wheel-barrow, let alone a 'wheeler.
*their body integrity was ,
*the ignition system was poor,
*build quality was below par even for its era,
*carbs in the 80's were horrible.
*my '85 AMC/Renualt (and obviously pre-Chrysler) CJ7 was one of the worse vehicles I have ever owned in terms of reliability and such.
*The engine made poor power
*the Carter carb was junk,
*as was the way-outdated ignition system.
*The valve cover might was well have been cardboard.
*The T-4 was poor as was the AMC20 axle in stock form
*the L/P Dana 30 front was decidedly weakish with anything but the passenger car all-season radials
*the rusted floorboards that seem to be a dealer installed option anywhere near any salt?
*a vehicle that needed that many mods to be livable would not be tolerated by anyone but an enthusiast.
Why? There is a reason why they haven't. A solid axle is better for off roading a jeep is made for offroad. An IFS would put a jeep into the same category as a ford explorer so to speak.
I agree about the appearance of the CJ and I have never owned a YJ, but the Chrysler-era TJ is more rounded than the AMC-designed YJ. Every new jeep since '79 had moved to square headlights & body, though, and that was an AMC decision that continued to the YJ, not a Chrysler one. It was Chrysler that went back to the round lights and softer planes. The truth is that that the CJ had outlived its production run and needed many upgrades. If such upgrading hadn't always been the case then they would still only be making CJ2a 's with an interior that many of us would have trouble fitting into, unadequate 4-wheel drum brakes, under powered flat-head 4's,Ross steering (shudder), and such weak axles as the Dana 25/Dana 41 combo that I wouldn't use them under a wheel-barrow, let alone a 'wheeler. The CJ3b , CJ5 , or CJ7 would never have been made. As my preference & love for CJ's is demonstrated, I still can't over look that their body integrity was , the ignition system was poor, build quality was below par even for its era, and stuff like the carbs in the 80's were horrible. I love them in spite of these issues but ignoring them doesn't mean they didn't exist. With all due respect, my '85 AMC/Renualt (and obviously pre-Chrysler) CJ7 was one of the worse vehicles I have ever owned in terms of reliability and such. AMC was not circling the drain without cause. The engine made poor power and the Carter carb was junk, as was the way-outdated ignition system. The valve cover might was well have been cardboard. The T-4 was poor as was the AMC20 axle in stock form and the L/P Dana 30 front was decidedly weakish with anything but the passenger car all-season radials that came on the thing. Now the Dana 300 was a bright spot but did it make up for the rusted floorboards that seem to be a dealer installed option anywhere near any salt? But I loved it as a Jeep and just used it as a base to modify: having said that, a vehicle that needed that many mods to be livable would not be tolerated by anyone but an enthusiast. The fact that the first YJ more than doubled the last CJ's production numbers indicates that an upgrade was long over-due. And the YJ got the first pure jeep engine in decades, and maybe the best, in the 4.0.... Everyone recognizes the YJ as a small evolution of the CJ, not a replacement. Had they called the YJ a CJ7A or CJ7 -2 or even just a CJ7 no one would have said a word beyond that the model had been "freshened." Put round fender flares on a YJ tub and bolt on a Cj front clip ( a very easy swap) and probably not even 95% of "jeepers" would notice the remaining differences without a close examination. Heck, even the frames are an easy swap.
I think some one has been reading too many magazine articles or on-line forums.
But you're entitled to your opinion.
If you over extend and abuse your equipment, one can certainly expect problems. Not all driving styles are the same.
How many new Jeeps have you purchased over the years ?
What models were they ?
I'm just curious.
I think some one has been reading too many magazine articles or on-line forums.
But you're entitled to your opinion.
If you over extend and abuse your equipment, one can certainly expect problems. Not all driving styles are the same.
How many new Jeeps have you purchased over the years ?
What models were they ?
I'm just curious.
I noted that you have upgraded your CJ2a from stock specs... " 47 CJ2a 225V6 T-90 D18 Dana 30Dana 44 ". I did the 225/T-90 /Dana 20Dana 30 /Dana 44 swap to my 2 mine after finding the factory stuff inadequate due to my driving style....
I noted that you have upgraded your CJ2a from stock specs... " 47 CJ2a 225V6 T-90 D18 Dana 30Dana 44 ". I did the 225/T-90 /Dana 20Dana 30 /Dana 44 swap to my 2 mine after finding the factory stuff inadequate due to my driving style....
Well, the '79 CJ5 was purchased in 1981 and was bone stock as my brother bought it new.... The '85 was bought in '86. I took over the payments for a friend who got in money trouble. It was 9 months old and bone stock when I got it. The '05 KJ was new and went off-road the first weekend I owned it...which led to the lift...M/T's instead of A/T's, and the rear locker.
A break down:
1945 CJ2 : was stock when I purchased it and stayed that way for about 2 years, Loaded as it had both a heater and a floor shift. not column. Flat head blew up so I swapped in a 1971 Commando drive-train, 225/T-90 /Dana 20 and narrow track CJ5 axles after the factory D25/D41's keep breaking with the V6. Homemade leaf packs to clear 11-15 tires (about 32"). Fender well headers and the V6 were a cool combo through the turbo-style mufflers. Some discrepancy as to year: In the 40's some states still titled a vehicle for the rear purchased so an early '46 made sold in late '45 could be titled as a '45. Titled clearly as '45 though and the VIN matched. I was younger and I never should have sold it. A friend of a friend still owns it but is is stretched with all the drive pieces from a K20 in it now.
1963 CJ5: Owned for a couple of years: very rusty but stock
1963 Wagoneer: I6 3spd low option stocker. A driver. Owned from '82-'85
1971 C101 Jeepster Commando: 225/3pd/Dana 20 . Ended up swapping in Scout Dana 44 's and welding the rear to run 33's after sawzalling for tire clearance. Very fun toy. Owned for 5 or 6 years
1972 C104 Jeep Commando: AMC 304 /GM Turbo 400 /Dana 20 : Stock. Driver but frame was rusted and it broke while 'wheeling. parted out
1979 CJ5: Bought from my brother in 1981. Renegade appearance package AMC 304 /3spd/Dana 20 . 10-15 Goodyears Wranglers on stock waggy wheels. Drove it for about 4 years. Sold it when I got the '85 CJ7 below.
1979 FSJ Cherokee Chief: 360/T18a/Dana 20Dana 44 's front/rear. Owned for 5 years. Fit 285/75/16's (33x11.5-ish) tires with no lift due to wide-track axles and flares. Eventually welded the rear.
1980 2dr FSJ Cherokee N/T: rare body style. Government fleet vehicle. Swapped the AMC 258 i6 / 4.2l /T178/208 and Dana 44 's for 360/T18a/Dana 20 & Gm DRW D60F and rear DRW D70HD on un-recentered H1 beadlocks and 37's Goodyear HI tires. The tires sucked everywhere.
1981 J10: 360/727/208 Dana 44 's, Stock. Owned from '89-'94
1985 CJ7: AMC 258 i6 / 4.2l /T-4 /Dana 300 bought in '86. I took over the payments for a friend who got in money trouble. It was 9 months old and bone stock when I got it. Ended up trussing the rear and kept grenading the Dana 30 with 33's. Learned about the M20's issues by fixing this one a bunch. Numerous issues like valve cover and junk carb...a common problem. Wound up adapting a 2100 motorcraft onto the engine.
1988 MJ: Shortbed 4x4 4.0/AW4/231. HP Dana 30 front and rare factory LSD Dana 44 rear with tow package. Nice truck. Lifted it 4" and ran 32x11.5x15's on Gambler rims. Very nice jeep with an unusually clean body. Sold to a friend as his daughter's sweet 16 present.
1991 MJ: 4.0/AW4 shortbed 2wd parts runner. Bought from 2nd owner whose G-pa bought it new. Body rusty/wrecked a bit but at almost 220,000 it is super dependable. It is not unusual for me to drive it 300 to 400 miles a day when I use it. Nothing bigger than a fuel pump or alt. repair. I have had this since 2009. I have everything to do the pretty easy 4wd conversion just haven't started on it.
1995 XJ 2dr: 4.0/AW4/231. Bought and flipped within two months. Person thought it was blown up due to knock. When I went to replace the engine after purchase I found that the flexplate bolts had backed out and where hitting the block. Replaced the bolts and that was the knock.
2005 KJ: Bought new 2/06. 3.7 V6/NSG360/ 241 Transfer Case . Yes, 241 not 231. 2.5" lift, 31" M/T's. Aussie locker. My DD. gets 18 mpg city and a pure highway tank can net 24. Well-used at Badlands/Haspin/Bill's 491.
Well, the '79 CJ5 was purchased in 1981 and was bone stock as my brother bought it new.... The '85 was bought in '86. I took over the payments for a friend who got in money trouble. It was 9 months old and bone stock when I got it. The '05 KJ was new and went off-road the first weekend I owned it...which led to the lift...M/T's instead of A/T's, and the rear locker.
A break down:
1945 CJ2 : was stock when I purchased it and stayed that way for about 2 years, Loaded as it had both a heater and a floor shift. not column. Flat head blew up so I swapped in a 1971 Commando drive-train, 225/T-90 /Dana 20 and narrow track CJ5 axles after the factory D25/D41's keep breaking with the V6. Homemade leaf packs to clear 11-15 tires (about 32"). Fender well headers and the V6 were a cool combo through the turbo-style mufflers. Some discrepancy as to year: In the 40's some states still titled a vehicle for the rear purchased so an early '46 made sold in late '45 could be titled as a '45. Titled clearly as '45 though and the VIN matched. I was younger and I never should have sold it. A friend of a friend still owns it but is is stretched with all the drive pieces from a K20 in it now.
1963 CJ5: Owned for a couple of years: very rusty but stock
1963 Wagoneer: I6 3spd low option stocker. A driver. Owned from '82-'85
1971 C101 Jeepster Commando: 225/3pd/Dana 20 . Ended up swapping in Scout Dana 44 's and welding the rear to run 33's after sawzalling for tire clearance. Very fun toy. Owned for 5 or 6 years
1972 C104 Jeep Commando: AMC 304 /GM Turbo 400 /Dana 20 : Stock. Driver but frame was rusted and it broke while 'wheeling. parted out
1979 CJ5: Bought from my brother in 1981. Renegade appearance package AMC 304 /3spd/Dana 20 . 10-15 Goodyears Wranglers on stock waggy wheels. Drove it for about 4 years. Sold it when I got the '85 CJ7 below.
1979 FSJ Cherokee Chief: 360/T18a/Dana 20Dana 44 's front/rear. Owned for 5 years. Fit 285/75/16's (33x11.5-ish) tires with no lift due to wide-track axles and flares. Eventually welded the rear.
1980 2dr FSJ Cherokee N/T: rare body style. Government fleet vehicle. Swapped the AMC 258 i6 / 4.2l /T178/208 and Dana 44 's for 360/T18a/Dana 20 & Gm DRW D60F and rear DRW D70HD on un-recentered H1 beadlocks and 37's Goodyear HI tires. The tires sucked everywhere.
1981 J10: 360/727/208 Dana 44 's, Stock. Owned from '89-'94
1985 CJ7: AMC 258 i6 / 4.2l /T-4 /Dana 300 bought in '86. I took over the payments for a friend who got in money trouble. It was 9 months old and bone stock when I got it. Ended up trussing the rear and kept grenading the Dana 30 with 33's. Learned about the M20's issues by fixing this one a bunch. Numerous issues like valve cover and junk carb...a common problem. Wound up adapting a 2100 motorcraft onto the engine.
1988 MJ: Shortbed 4x4 4.0/AW4/231. HP Dana 30 front and rare factory LSD Dana 44 rear with tow package. Nice truck. Lifted it 4" and ran 32x11.5x15's on Gambler rims. Very nice jeep with an unusually clean body. Sold to a friend as his daughter's sweet 16 present.
1991 MJ: 4.0/AW4 shortbed 2wd parts runner. Bought from 2nd owner whose G-pa bought it new. Body rusty/wrecked a bit but at almost 220,000 it is super dependable. It is not unusual for me to drive it 300 to 400 miles a day when I use it. Nothing bigger than a fuel pump or alt. repair. I have had this since 2009. I have everything to do the pretty easy 4wd conversion just haven't started on it.
1995 XJ 2dr: 4.0/AW4/231. Bought and flipped within two months. Person thought it was blown up due to knock. When I went to replace the engine after purchase I found that the flexplate bolts had backed out and where hitting the block. Replaced the bolts and that was the knock.
2005 KJ: Bought new 2/06. 3.7 V6/NSG360/ 241 Transfer Case . Yes, 241 not 231. 2.5" lift, 31" M/T's. Aussie locker. My DD. gets 18 mpg city and a pure highway tank can net 24. Well-used at Badlands/Haspin/Bill's 491.
'79 Jeep CJ7 Renegade with 304ci V8, TH400 auto, Quadratrac T-case, Stock 20 and 30 rears with no mods yet, not sure of the gear ratio.. 4" Softride Superlift, w/widetrac shock towers and 35x12.50x15 BFG Mud-Terrains
'76 CJ5, 232 ci, T-150 3-speed, D20 T-case, Corp. 20 rear w/full float axles and lockout hubs and Detroit auto locker, D30 front w/lockout hubs, gear ratio is unknown..
I noted that you have upgraded your CJ2a from stock specs... " 47 CJ2a 225V6 T-90 D18 Dana 30Dana 44 ". I did the 225/T-90 /Dana 20Dana 30 /Dana 44 swap to my 2 mine after finding the factory stuff inadequate due to my driving style....
well, weren't talking about me, at least I wasn't....
So we can agree that you're an aggressive off-roader, and you were suffering lots of drive train failures, that most likely weren't due to weak or defective components; they just failed for whatever reason under the stress or conditions at the time.
My point was going to be that most folks start to speak badly about parts or components, only because they read it somewhere, or some Bubba messed up their Jeep before they purchased it. They didn't get to experience the product when it was brand new.
Also, now that substantial time has passed since many of these components were brand new, items just flat wear out; if a replacement can't be had, either for a reasonable price, or the item not being manufactured anymore, people come up with other remedies.
Having experience with the Jeep products when they were new, they were quite capable and very trustworthy in their stock configuration. Oh sure, there were some little quirks here and there, but for the most part the CJs were very satisfactory as equipped from the factory.
Some of the components you complain about, the BBD, the Dana 30 , the Model 20 rear axle, were all fine doing what they were designed to do.
If you asked for more out of the product , you sometimes got predictable results.
Most BBD problems and complaints are from folks who know other carbs, but aren't familiar with this model; others are confused by the vast array of vacuum hoses and the electronics; throw in previous owners who didn't know what they were doing, and the owner starts blaming the parts or components instead of the real cause, one or more previous owners. The carb, in my opinion, performed well, and when adjusted properly, gave little to no trouble at all. The most known and well publicized problem would be the plugging up of the idle tubes/air bleed tubes, whatever you want to call them.
The Model 20 rear axle seems to have quite a bit of negativity associated with lots of forums, but it's actually quite strong in it's original design and mode of use. The tapered axle and hub design is quite strong when maintained and not over abused. The axle bearing and seal design, to me, doesn't give as much trouble as the so-called, thank-me-lord one piece aftermarket designs, whose axle bearing and seal failures are well documented on any Jeep forum.
A 1978 CJ5 rear axle lives down the street from me, and even though it only sees the sand dunes, the high horsepower and driver neglect this owner has given his M20 would probably make most people call me a liar if I was to say he's had no axle/hub failures in the 20+ years since he's owned and built the Jeep.
To me it all comes down the to driver and his technique, not the equipment.
Since you commented about my Jeep, I'll tell you more.
It's a 1947 CJ2a my father acquired in 1974. It was all stock, except for the F-head 4 cylinder engine.
Regarding the D25, I broke one front axle, the Rezeppa style, on a run when I was still in high school. I replaced both D25 front axle shafts with spicer u-joint type shafts. In or around 1975/1976, I purchased a powerlock for the D25. With the factory 5:38 axle ratio, that combo served me well, until 2010, when I decided to install a Dana 30 for tighter turning capabilities; I added a powerlock, kept my 11" brakes and called it good. I never blew the D25, except for the axle shaft, and that was with 31" tires, for your curiousity.
Currently, the Dana 30 with 33's has done everything that I have asked out of it with no problems.
The D41 axle served me faithfully until about 1979 or so, when I decided I wanted to add a powerlock to the rear axle. With no options available for the 10 spline D41, at that time, I purchased a brand new CJ5Dana 44 which had the 19 spline axles I needed for the powerlock.
I did break one D41 rear axle, I was doing some speed shifting/tire chirping in front of my high school in 2wd low range, you know, showing off in front of other kids. Snap goes the axle and limp home.
I broke one or two Dana 44 tapered axles, one off road, the other on pavement.
When Dana quit making the shafts, and the only option was Crown or other off shore manufacturers, I went full float for two reasons; towing and no more limp home/wheel fall off should a shaft break. Sorry, no axle failures to report.
The F4 served me well until 1983, when it tired, so the V6 swap happened that year. It continues to serve me well to this day. That just seemed logical, having learned how to Jeep with the 4 cyl, but always wanting more power...you know, the Tim Allen effect.
So my reasons for making changes to my Jeep are similar maybe to yours, but also very different. There are other mods with other reasons, but you understand.
Mad at Chrysler......
To keep this post on track, Chrysler discontinued the Comanche from the getgo, without really giving it a chance, as it was a perceived threat to the sales of their Dakota truck.
They managed to keep Durango and Cherokee side-by-side, but their project 2000 was too ambitious in trying to force out the small, single line dealers, and get all their products under one roof, one showroom of all the million dollar dealers. It was more for the Jeep product to adorn the Chrysler showrooms, and to heck with the existing jeep guys.
They failed to understand the Jeep brand, how to sell and market it, and almost destroyed it, in my opinion; very much the way Renault almost did.
I would say it's right up there with what Coke did to Coke....
With Jeep, if you build it, they will come.
You can't say that about a lot of other car makes/models.
Jeep is truly an enthusiast's vehicle and the CJ is probably the most modded model ever. I'd bet that a higher ratio of CJ's are moderately to heavily modded vs. remaining bone stock then just about any other model in any other mass-produced vehicle segment. That they can be modded even to outrageous levels fairly easily and relatively cheaply makes it that much better.
What mods work for a vehicle has a lot to do with the use of the jeep and where it is used. Here around the Great Lakes mud is unavoidable. I do not mean mud bogs but just general trail conditions. So if you 'wheel ( if you wheel at all) in a dry environment or drive on the street 4-wheel drum brakes may be adequate even though they were deemed inadequate by the industry decades ago. I laugh when I see the trashier CA-based 4x rags test "mud tires" in what amounts to a wet patch alongside a road. Pack your drums with mud and your stopping power goes to near zero. Thus 4-wheel drums bring the suck in my world and I generally convert to 4-wheel disc ASAP on anything I take off-road much. It is not that I hate on drums: my last bracket race car was a '71 Road Runner that weighed over 4,300 #'s ()with me in it. I'd run the quarter in about 11.30 at 120 MPH. I had no trouble at all stopping the car with a well-working factory manual 4-wheel drum system and always made the first of the two turn-off's to leave the track. If 4-wheel drums or disc/drum set-ups work well for someone else with how they use their jeep, color me jealous that they didn't have to spend $500 on a rear disc set-up with a parking brake. But I felt that expenditure was a necessity for how I use the jeep.
Environmental factors are huge: Most rock crawling is actually done in fairly high traction conditions. The dry rocks and sticky tires offer great traction ( which leads to its own breakage and upgrade issues but that is another topic.) Add even a half of an inch of good mud into "Mickey's Bath Tub" and see how many rigs that previously navigated it now need the strap. It is not saying that one type or area is better, just different. So the rigs need to be built to take that into consideration.
The Power-lok may be the finest factory LSD ever. I love them. The Gleason type of LSD works great but is just different. But do you know why they upgraded the 25 to the 27 and then to the 30? Because the previous versions were inadequate. If not then Economics 101 dictates that they would not have spent a dime redesigning them. An early 19-spline Dana 44 ( mostly with those 2-piece tapered rear axle shafts and hubs) were almost completely replaced by 1970 and upgraded to the measurably stronger 30-spline flanged axle design. Why? Because they are better and stronger. Again, r&d $ would not have been spent if there was no need for it. Ross steering was cutting edge 1930 technology and is still adequate for a riding lawn mower...but the vast improvements of a saginaw-style steering system led to the death of that system in most of the light-duty automotive segment many years before jeep abandoned it in '71. Jeep always seemed to retain outdated technology longer than most and I think having always been owned by second-fiddle corporations (before Chrysler) made that a necessity.
"jeep-cj.com is a new site devoted to one of most loved and greatest off-road vehicles ever produced" is how this site is introduced. Many here, including my main protagonist, have stated that factory equipment is fine for the intended use of the CJ and, according to them, that does not included anything approaching good off-roading. But that is certainly contrary to how the vehicle was marketed over the years even if much of the factory equipment was more suited to inclement weather on-road driving or what amounts to an un-improved road off-pavement. That the various owners of jeep generally cheaped-out on factory equipment but made the vehicle easily modifiable to me indicates that they knew the jeeps would be modified so the most economical production model was one that, in keeping with their comparatively meager resources, tried to keep initial buy-in as low as possible with barely adequate equipment and low options. Outside of the Tuxedo Park Park Edition, Kaiser did not try to upscale the CJ. They created the CJ6 based but very different Jeepster Commando to go after a higher level market at a higher price point and equipment content. And that left the CJ in its original position and that was good. It was AMC that tried to take the CJ up-market and it did lead to sales increases by bringing in a different customer base. So that trend of "softening" the 1/4 ton utility began again with AMC, considered a good jeep nameplate overlord, not Chrysler, who takes the blame for "softening" jeep when it had already been the trend for nearly a decade when they saved Jeep. Along with this softening comes the thinking that a 9 month old jeep with the Carter BBD carb is just fine because even though the vehicle was nearly brand new and needed carb work it is not the carb's fault but the mechanic's... I think this is the reasoning that killed AMC/Renault or at least AMC.
That Chrysler changed the dealer format and other things is not a fail, as many seem to think, but a plus. Remember that AMC had for all intents and purposes folded around 1980 and only an influx of French cash in the form of Renault kept the jeep name alive until the Chrysler buy-out, which at least returned an American icon to American control even of it was not to last as then came German ownership and now the Italian control...but considering what jeep's past holds who knows what it in store for the future?
Why? There is a reason why they haven't. A solid axle is better for off roading a jeep is made for offroad. An IFS would put a jeep into the same category as a ford explorer so to speak.
The military when to four wheel independant suspension 50 years ago and never looked back.
"With some M151A2-units still in US Military service in 1999, the M151-series achieved a longer run of service than that of the WW2 MB/GPW, M38 and M38A1 series combined."
The Humvee, although not a jeep but a close cousin as it was designed and built by AMC subsidiary AMGeneral, used IFS & IRS... Heck the differentials in it were from an AMC Model 20 axle!
The Humvee, although not a jeep but a close cousin as it was designed and built by AMC subsidiary AMGeneral, used IFS & IRS... Heck the differentials in it were from an AMC Model 20 axle!
The humvee didn't come out till couple years after I got out.
The early m151's were prone to flipping over but the later A2's were a nice rig. I used to do things everyday with an m151a2 that break your back in a rig with leaf springs.
Unfortuantely they didn't have crumple zones and other features required to be released to the general public.
1986 cj7 258, t-176 4-speed, d-300, moser one piece axle in back in amc 20,G2 4.10 gears front and back, detroit truetac front and back,G2 4340 chromoly front axles in a d-30, 4" rough country lift, 33" tires
Jeep is truly an enthusiast's vehicle and the CJ is probably the most modded model ever. I'd bet that a higher ratio of CJ's are moderately to heavily modded vs. remaining bone stock then just about any other model in any other mass-produced vehicle segment. That they can be modded even to outrageous levels fairly easily and relatively cheaply makes it that much better.
What mods work for a vehicle has a lot to do with the use of the jeep and where it is used. Here around the Great Lakes mud is unavoidable. I do not mean mud bogs but just general trail conditions. So if you 'wheel ( if you wheel at all) in a dry environment or drive on the street 4-wheel drum brakes may be adequate even though they were deemed inadequate by the industry decades ago. I laugh when I see the trashier CA-based 4x rags test "mud tires" in what amounts to a wet patch alongside a road. Pack your drums with mud and your stopping power goes to near zero. Thus 4-wheel drums bring the suck in my world and I generally convert to 4-wheel disc ASAP on anything I take off-road much. It is not that I hate on drums: my last bracket race car was a '71 Road Runner that weighed over 4,300 #'s ()with me in it. I'd run the quarter in about 11.30 at 120 MPH. I had no trouble at all stopping the car with a well-working factory manual 4-wheel drum system and always made the first of the two turn-off's to leave the track. If 4-wheel drums or disc/drum set-ups work well for someone else with how they use their jeep, color me jealous that they didn't have to spend $500 on a rear disc set-up with a parking brake. But I felt that expenditure was a necessity for how I use the jeep.
Environmental factors are huge: Most rock crawling is actually done in fairly high traction conditions. The dry rocks and sticky tires offer great traction ( which leads to its own breakage and upgrade issues but that is another topic.) Add even a half of an inch of good mud into "Mickey's Bath Tub" and see how many rigs that previously navigated it now need the strap. It is not saying that one type or area is better, just different. So the rigs need to be built to take that into consideration.
The Power-lok may be the finest factory LSD ever. I love them. The Gleason type of LSD works great but is just different. But do you know why they upgraded the 25 to the 27 and then to the 30? Because the previous versions were inadequate. If not then Economics 101 dictates that they would not have spent a dime redesigning them. An early 19-spline Dana 44 ( mostly with those 2-piece tapered rear axle shafts and hubs) were almost completely replaced by 1970 and upgraded to the measurably stronger 30-spline flanged axle design. Why? Because they are better and stronger. Again, r&d $ would not have been spent if there was no need for it. Ross steering was cutting edge 1930 technology and is still adequate for a riding lawn mower...but the vast improvements of a saginaw-style steering system led to the death of that system in most of the light-duty automotive segment many years before jeep abandoned it in '71. Jeep always seemed to retain outdated technology longer than most and I think having always been owned by second-fiddle corporations (before Chrysler) made that a necessity.
"jeep-cj.com is a new site devoted to one of most loved and greatest off-road vehicles ever produced" is how this site is introduced. Many here, including my main protagonist, have stated that factory equipment is fine for the intended use of the CJ and, according to them, that does not included anything approaching good off-roading. But that is certainly contrary to how the vehicle was marketed over the years even if much of the factory equipment was more suited to inclement weather on-road driving or what amounts to an un-improved road off-pavement. That the various owners of jeep generally cheaped-out on factory equipment but made the vehicle easily modifiable to me indicates that they knew the jeeps would be modified so the most economical production model was one that, in keeping with their comparatively meager resources, tried to keep initial buy-in as low as possible with barely adequate equipment and low options. Outside of the Tuxedo Park Park Edition, Kaiser did not try to upscale the CJ. They created the CJ6 based but very different Jeepster Commando to go after a higher level market at a higher price point and equipment content. And that left the CJ in its original position and that was good. It was AMC that tried to take the CJ up-market and it did lead to sales increases by bringing in a different customer base. So that trend of "softening" the 1/4 ton utility began again with AMC, considered a good jeep nameplate overlord, not Chrysler, who takes the blame for "softening" jeep when it had already been the trend for nearly a decade when they saved Jeep. Along with this softening comes the thinking that a 9 month old jeep with the Carter BBD carb is just fine because even though the vehicle was nearly brand new and needed carb work it is not the carb's fault but the mechanic's... I think this is the reasoning that killed AMC/Renault or at least AMC.
That Chrysler changed the dealer format and other things is not a fail, as many seem to think, but a plus. Remember that AMC had for all intents and purposes folded around 1980 and only an influx of French cash in the form of Renault kept the jeep name alive until the Chrysler buy-out, which at least returned an American icon to American control even of it was not to last as then came German ownership and now the Italian control...but considering what jeep's past holds who knows what it in store for the future?
I think you just made the point about the cj. About being one of the easiest and cheapest vehicle's to modify. I have also modified my cj from bone stock. But I also think that any modifications done to ones vehicle is a extension of ones personality. I kept my drive-line stock except the axles in the AMC20 and Dana 30 . 4.10 gearing and 4" lift. The interior is stock because I wanted to keep it simple and closer to stock. Its all about personal prefreanes and I prefer the cj's over the newer models. This doesn't mean I wouldn't own a new model I just prefer the easy of maintenance and looks of the cj's. As for the carter bbd it gets a bad rap, I've rebuilt mine and it works great. The worst part about the bbd is the Idle pick up tubes being to small in diamitar and getting clogged. This can be fixed with a simple drilling out of the tubes to.032" or just a simple clean out with some wire.No problems since.
I do not hate the new Jeeps. I do not like Chrysler very much at all. My 1994 Grand Cherokee had a slew of electrical problems and a big one with the full time Transfer Case . My 2002 Dakota had serious brake problems after only 10,000 miles and the motor was a slow gas hogging turd. I wanted to buy a new Jeep in a bad way but I cannot get myself to own another Chrysler vehicle and that is what turns me away.
Even I learned a long time ago when it was time to just say 'we agree to disagree', some just want to beat a dead horse and do not know when to or cannot walk away...
,
)
)with me in it. I'd run the quarter in about 11.30 at 120 MPH. I had no trouble at all stopping the car with a well-working factory manual 4-wheel drum system and always made the first of the two turn-off's to leave the track. If 4-wheel drums or disc/drum set-ups work well for someone else with how they use their jeep, color me jealous that they didn't have to spend $500 on a rear disc set-up with a parking brake. But I felt that expenditure was a necessity for how I use the jeep. 
