Yet another... Build thread for an xj on 40s and one tons in norcal

831_xj said:
No the quarter drive impact



It's not just for sockets like the 1/2" you can put tips like Phillips magnetic 5/16" etc
Click to expand...


That would be the 1/4" hex drive. And the 18v milwaukee version of that puts out about 150ish lbsft. That is my goto at work. I drive 4-5" anchors in solid wood all day long on one battery. It is legit. A bit more versatile than the 1/2" drive. It can do 1/4",3/8",1/2, and alot others with the adapters.
 
GordoSmasho said:
That would be the 1/4" hex drive. And the 18v milwaukee version of that puts out about 150ish lbsft. That is my goto at work. I drive 4-5" anchors in solid wood all day long on one battery. It is legit. A bit more versatile than the 1/2" drive. It can do 1/4",3/8",1/2, and alot others with the adapters.
Click to expand...

I have that same little impact and use it for everything. I haven't used an electric drill or screw gun for fasteners since
 
that 1/4" looks tiny too which should fit in tight spaces nicely. I figure between the massive torque of the 1/2" and the small size and versatility of the 1/4" I should be set in the garage and on the trail.
 
so. it seems like MJ leaves would work awesome in my situation on my XJ. it would kick the axle back 3", and shoot the shackle angle to a better angle, getting the 40s out of the wheel well, and it would also stretch the rig from 103" to 106" or 105" if I use the center hole in the ruffstuff perches since its currently in the front hole to stretch an inch.

The shackle relocation boxes would allow the current 5" long shackles to soak it up or to use the boomerangs I have lying around which are around 6" or so.

I would have to deal with driveshaft lengthening , shock mounts and moving the frame side bump stop mounts .

At that point it would be interesting to try to get another 1" or 2 up front and make longer control arms to get closer to 107-108" total wheelbase with the 40s...
 
I was thinking about gearing/tire size and weight real quick and made a table to put gearing into perspective between my MJ, my XJ, and a stock rig. I think I would be torn between a 4.3 and 5:1 atlas for the MJ. the 3.8 is about just right in the XJ, and I could have probably gone with a 4.3 to get over stock.

 
If I am reading the table right, your math is wrong. Crawl ratio is determined by the order of the gearing it goes through. Trans, t-case, then axle.

The first section, stock MJ shows a final crawl ratio of 27.03. My math says 26.8...

All the calculations are a bit off because of the order you put the infomration in.

Other than that, I have no clue what the hell you are talking about. :D
 
Bryan C. said:
Other than that, I have no clue what the hell you are talking about. :D
Click to expand...


Same here!!!
Are you trying to compare final ratios with different tcase gears in the mj?
 
yeah just comparing crawl ratios , but accounting for tire size and vehicle weight to try to scale it accordingly, basically trying to account for the changes in weight and tire size , not just looking at crawl ratio in a vacuum.
 
blondejoncherokee said:
yeah just comparing crawl ratios , but accounting for tire size and vehicle weight to try to scale it accordingly, basically trying to account for the changes in weight and tire size , not just looking at crawl ratio in a vacuum.
Click to expand...


You have some crazy physics going on there!!! Hahaha
 
XJ_Rudolph said:
You have some crazy physics going on there!!! Hahaha
Click to expand...

Fix crawl ratio at XX.XX :1 . then vary vehicle weight and tire size. See, crawl ratio makes sense only when comparing a fixed tire size and vehicle weight, so you have to create an index controlling for vehicle weight and tire size.

What got me thinking about it was the fact that the XJ and MJ could have the same crawl ratio , but one has much larger tires and is heavier, so it still would not be the same. come on people this is like high school level algebra LOL !


There are some scenarios where 4.88s don't get you back to a stock "setup" due to the increased weight and tire size .

It appears a 4.3 or a 5:1 in the MJ with stock gears would be ideal...
 
Bryan C. said:
If I am reading the table right, your math is wrong. Crawl ratio is determined by the order of the gearing it goes through. Trans, t-case, then axle.

The first section, stock MJ shows a final crawl ratio of 27.03. My math says 26.8...

All the calculations are a bit off because of the order you put the infomration in.

Other than that, I have no clue what the hell you are talking about. :D
Click to expand...

He's got a significant digits error...showing 2.7 instead of 2.72, but then letting the calculation show four decimal points.

Jon, you know that stock gears with a 4.3 case is not ideal because you still have to drive the thing to the trail. 3.55s and 33s is not ideal.

You should put the 3.8 in the MJ because it is not supposed to be a hardcore crawler, right? Nice camping rig? Then 4.3 or 5.0 in the big crawler. Transmission will shift, it's an automagic with overdrive.

And come on, this IS second grade math.
 
LOL.

33s and 3.55s was not that bad at all honestly on road.

on trail it sort of sucked.
 
ok whats the gear ratio to tire index? Im on my computer now and determined to figure this out.

This is EXACTLY why im not on pirate, its like id have to have a masters in mechanical engineering just to post there
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

EricsXJ
  • Locked
  • Sticky
2025 Official Trail Runs and Events
Replies
1
Views
162
EricsXJ
EricsXJ
tmbuster
Back in an XJ finally!
Replies
0
Views
47
tmbuster
tmbuster
Carol.92124
  • Poll Poll
Holiday Party Saturday 12/7/2024 in Long Beach!
Replies
7
Views
270
Carol.92124
Carol.92124
N
WTB: 2001 124A alternator
Replies
0
Views
333
N8N_99xj
N
blondejoncherokee
can anyone can grab 2 tikis for me in orange? Norcal NAXJA guy asking
Replies
3
Views
558
JohnX
JohnX
Back
Top