1977 J10 Honcho "Magnum"

Helping Ty with his leaf springs was my penance for suggesting I could help Jim change his leaf springs with a spring compressor :D

Well we were pretty exhausted by the time the difference in U bolt size came up, all it would have taken was a quick peek to see why:

The night before the trail run Trent came over to help me line up my steering wheel is at it was off after the lift. I put in a new steering stabilizer and a new set of spark plugs. Spark plugs are gapped to .045 because the distributor is an HEI, I guess they can handle the bigger gaps because of the higher voltage and it makes for a better burn.

The test drive the night before was enough to convince me to go on the run, unfortunately the service engine light was on for the entire drive to Idaho Springs and the entire trail and rest of the day. I had a blast despite this, this truck is SO fun to wheel. Sure its bouncy and noisy but engaging the low range on it is just instant fun; even with a barely running engine.

I rewarded myself for tidying up the garage tonight by taking it on another test drive, this time with the air cleaner off. I had a theory that the air cleaner being metal it was interfering with the potentiometer that is the Throttle Position Sensor, which is what was throwing the code and putting me into limp mode all day. Sure enough with the cleaner off I had a fun little drive around the neighborhood with no codes being thrown. So now the hunt is on to either shield the TPS or get a different cleaner. I'm currently using an adapter to lift the cleaner up away from the TBI and throttle bracket anyway so it might be time to just find one that fits better.

Here are some awesome photos from the club, and one from tonight to show how close the Jeeps are in height now:

So you think the metal in the air filter assembly is causing issues with the TPS? You're certain there is no physical obstruction at play. If electrical, do you think isolating the metal of the air filter assembly from the throttle body with some electrical tape / duct tape (as a temporary test) might give good results? If fruitful, perhaps find some permanent isolation material (gasket material?).

I believe you commented about photos of the car's odometer moment - here ya go:
[URL="https://www.jimwilliamson.net/automobile/2021-09-12--odometer-moment-honda-333-333-3/index.html"]www.JimWilliamson.net/automobile/2021-09-12--odometer-moment-honda-333-333-3/[/URL]
.

Would have been more interesting to have an odometer photo on Devils Canyon this weekend...is the YJ running?

[quote=TyTheJeepGuy;345253]and a new set of spark plugs. Spark plugs are gapped to .045 because the distributor is an HEI, I guess they can handle the bigger gaps because of the higher voltage and it makes for a better burn.[/quote]

yes, open the gap up like you did. OEM set-up probably ran plug gap at .030-.035. Just from my personal experience, be cautious about running too 'modern' or upgraded high mileage plugs such as 'platinum' or 'iridium' etc. Not sure how the TBI system would react, but keeping to basic Delco RS style (or equivalent) plug and just changing them out somewhat frequently seems to work best for me on these older engines. Also, I have found running one heat range higher than OEM also works well here in Colo with all the elevation changes we have to keep things from fouling - although with TBI it might not matter... YMMV...

[quote=FINOCJ;345257]is the YJ running?[/quote]

I pulled the fuel pump - suspecting the flexible fuel line had slipped off of the straight metal supply tube - but no. I did have the fuel pump set low and perhaps I set it too low such that the fuel sock/strainer was smashed against the floor of the fuel tank - restricting intake. I have in mind to put the fuel pump into a gas tank to test flow - or I might just stick in the spare pump.

Last night I deviated some time looking at Holly Hydramat fuel pump intake options - keep the pump higher and use the hydramat to make use of the whopping 15 gallons I have.

Perhaps I should just move to the newer 20 gallon with a fuel pump setup designed for fuel injection pumping.

To be continued...

I could see a station wagon photo op on Switzerland - maybe in a line-up of 4x4's

Maybe your whopping 15 gal will pack a bigger whallup if I told you the big ol J truck Honcho Magnum Ultra is packing a 10 gal

To answer your question, I do not think it is a clearance issue because I can fit a finger under there and move the TPS blade. Not very scientific... I think tomorrow after work I'm going to paint the underside of the air cleaner to ensure that it is not able to affect a potentiometer

[quote=Jim;345259]keep the pump higher and use the hydramat to make use of the whopping 15 gallons I have.[/quote]
sorry Ty for stomping on your thread....but Jim, instead of a Holley pump, what about just replacing the tank with a 20 gal aftermarket option?
[URL]https://www.amazon.com/Crown-Automotive-52002633PL-Plastic-Fuel/dp/B009X1UA6G/ref=asc_df_B009X1UA6G/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312091590621&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=16670032090650786131&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9028786&hvtargid=pla-585261206831&psc=1&tag=&ref=&adgrpid=61856009453&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvadid=312091590621&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=16670032090650786131&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9028786&hvtargid=pla-585261206831[/URL]

And so we don't leave out Ty...
[url]https://www.ebay.com/itm/371486098733?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&itemid=371486098733&targetid=1263094003866&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=9028786&poi=&campaignid=13918135803&mkgroupid=125629596220&rlsatarget=pla-1263094003866&abcId=9300613&merchantid=6490184&gclid=Cj0KCQjw18WKBhCUARIsAFiW7Jz_grtJrw2KnH8AJ1MGjh6USi5xDSpvEj0WtTTlQXdGtNT-LuXkV34aAnyUEALw_wcB[/url]

Actually I think its pretty appropriate for this thread since I'm definitely going to be looking at a fuel cell upgrade at least at some point in the J10s future. It might be earlier than later, since I am unsure if the current tank has the kind of connections I need to set up emissions systems

Not looking at a Holly pump - just their hydramat - interesting method to have all available fuel scavenged from low corners to the pump. I thought there was some competition to hydramat but I am not finding it in my bookmarks.

The larger tank, designed for FI pump mounting, is probably where I'll end up / what I should do now and get off of the fence. The only time I needed extra fuel, that I recall in 10 years, was the Maze trip. Sure, extra range on a daily basis would always be used - though not needed. Tank ($240) + Sending unit with pump ($153) + vent valves / hoses (~$70). But yes, in the end I should just do it.

The pump location is centered so it won't match my "cut in the jeep" access panel. I believe my current tank uses one strap over the center - the larger tank uses two straps - outboard. I'll want to check into modifying strap connections at the body (probably a trivial mod). A skid plate to match the larger tank then comes into the picture ($$) as I imagine I'll have ~6" of poly hanging out of the metal skid plate by the leaf springs.

Why is Johnny Cash's "One Piece at a time" coming into my ears... One of these days this 90 will become a 94.

You guys aren't going to believe this. Once again, not very scientific because I changed two parameters at once, but its easily testable later if someone is really dying to know.

The two changes:
1. Painted the underside of the aluminum air cleaner with the same paint I used on my bumpers, its like a near-bedliner.
2. I found a little extra spacer that came with the air cleaner spacer kit I used to fit the old aftermarket cleaner to the new TBI and clear the throttle body

I took it for a test drive and no service light, and I *may* have roasted those BFGs on Wadsworth. Allegedly.

I am convinced now that the aluminum air cleaner was interfering with the TPS. I don't believe physically, but electronically by messing with the resistance measurement somehow. There is a flat area of the TBI itself that hangs out by the TPS, and the spacers and air cleaner go on that. The TPS is just barely shorter than that, so I don't think physical clearance could have possibly been an issue because I can't see how the air cleaner would reach down in there, and I was able to physically move it with my fingers.

Maybe I should post this on one of the insane amount of unanswered "GM Code 21 and 22" threads.

This sounds a lot like EMI. Maybe the throttle body assembly and air-cleaner formed a resonant circuit excited by RF from the ignition system. Injectors can be pretty noisy too. I kinda wonder if the issue would also have gone away if you had a larger or smaller air cleaner or if you clipped a couple of ferrite chokes around the TPS leads or added a coupling capacitor in parallel with the TPS.... or changed the length of the wiring between the TPS and the ECM. It's probably not the best use of time to play around with it anymore if your solution is working.

Nice catch.

I think like you said with the injectors, the throttle body, plastic spacer and aluminum air cleaner I somehow created the perfect storm for throwing off the TPS. Luckily it has driven enough times with no hint of an issue since this change that I think its good, otherwise I would move on to more shielding / isolating options.

Was able to take the rig out wheelin yesterday with no issues, engine felt great even at elevation and the 4x4 worked really well. Icing on the cake was no leaf springs fell off either!

[url]https://photos.app.goo.gl/MXhpNPBGGbq6GzGy8[/url]

The exhaust leak was bothering me. Not messing w/ 44 year old exhaust replacement sounded nice to me, so I eventually found a shop that would put in two pipes with no converters (confirmed with emissions tech I didn't need them because it never had one) and flowmaster mufflers. I love the result! Its weird hearing engine sounds behind me now instead of all around me.

[url]https://photos.app.goo.gl/CmUhcJu2JmS5Q6xx5[/url]

More steps checked off - getting closer!

Nice...keep working it a bit at a time

Great news! I am only one step away from passing emissions. I think. The 1977 service manual states that non-California trucks like mine did not use the closed fuel tank vent system so I don't need a charcoal canister (though I already bought and "installed" one thinking I did) and that is a big relief because my tank didn't seem to have any vent lines for making it work. So I hooked up the PCV system (positive crankcase ventilation) which turned out to be as simple as taking leftover 3/8" fuel hose I had from the EFI conversion and taking it from the correct port on the TBI to a new valve pushed into the grommet on the manifold.

Despite that being super easy, I made it difficult at first by misidentifying the correct port on the TBI, and scratching my head and tearing through the garage to be able to find a converter for 1/4" hose to 3/8" from the PCV valve that still had a short length of 3/8" hose on it plugged up with a bolt from when the engine went in to be rebuilt. There might not have been anything wrong with the old valve but new ones are cheap and the service manual recommends changing them often so I put in a new one and trimmed up the 3/8" to the correct port and I think its probably the cleanest system in the engine bay right now. I had the other end of the PCV hooked up as the first thing I did on this emissions journey, its some loosely fitting hose around a fitting that I found for the aftermarket air cleaner that hooks up the oil filler cap vent to the air cleaner.

I am very happy to have the PCV system hooked up now because not only does the truck run cleaner but as I understand it there is less pressure in the crankcase now, and so maybe some of my oil leaking issues should end. The oil filler cap was previously pumping a good amount of dirty crankcase vapors into the engine bay and probably dirtying it up in addition to the eventual destination of the atmosphere. Now those crankcase vapors get sucked out of the intake manifold at idle, and with drop in vacuum pressure I think that the flow actually reverses. The crankcase vapors that get sucked into the TBI get re-exploded so I suppose its almost like the EGR system that I have yet to hook up.

[quote=TyTheJeepGuy;345549]as I understand it there is less pressure in the crankcase now, and so maybe some of my oil leaking issues should end.[/quote]

yes - very true....if you had abnormally high crankcase pressure (often a symptom of ring blowby) then oil will get pushed out anywhere it can squeeze past a seal or gasket (see the sbc283 I fought for a year in the wagon). The old 283 didn't have a pcv system - it used an early crankcase pressure venting system known as a draft tube. In my case it was more of an oil dump tube. Anyway...just keep an eye on how much oil may be going through the pcv hose from the valve cover and into the air filter intake/carb/tbi/throat. If its a lot, it can cause some extra oil and carbon build-up (more of an issue for a carb I would guess) and it will also foul plugs and you might notice a bit more blue/black smoke out the tailpipe (might trigger an engine code depending on sensors). Early systems feed the hose below the throttle body, which I like as the oil doesn't gum up carbs and air filters (but it does go into the combustion chamber which has long term concerns), but later units (like on my 84 cj7 258), the feedback tube enters before the air filter and thus the oil ends up saturating the paper element filter, eventually rendering it useless. But it takes a lot of oil consumption to be a problem through the pcv - and only a little to make a huge leaky mess....guessing its going to be a nice small improvement, and even more awesome if it gets you through emissions. Equally important is a breather system to get fresh filtered air directly into the crankcase when needed - sort of the opposite of the pcv valve which allows air out, but not in. Sometimes, the crankcase goes into vacuum and needs additional air, so there should be a breather cap or breather hose into one of the valve covers. It theory, it doesn't matter which valve cover port is used for pcv valve outflow, and which is used for breather in-flow...just make sure they are connected to proper place on the throttle body and/or air intake (simple breather caps won't have any hose or connection).

The cj line started running charcoal evaporative systems in the early 70s about when AMC took over - both on the I6 and v8s I believe - surprised it was not standard on the j-trucks. If somehow you have to deal with that - let me know, I might be able to help a bit as I have some familiarity with the cj charcoal systems (had one on my cj7) and I had to plug off all the tank vents on a 70s cj fuel tank that I swapped into my cj5 for my spare fuel tank. Its a pretty simple system - hard part is usually accessing the tank vents and sending units on the top of the tank (usually requires dropping the tank).

I've been checking out j-trucks again on the for sale adds....nice one up in Estes Park, but only a straight six 258 and late 70s so emissions required. There is an earlier J20 up in wyoming that is cheaper, a bit rougher, 360 v8, and I think early 70's enough to avoid emissions.....damn cool trucks!

Thanks James. In the AMC V8 case its just the PCV grommet on the intake manifold with the valve in it, then hose to a port on the TBI. The port on the TBI is dedicated to PCV system according to the Howell instructions, it looks to me like it sits below the butterfly valves so I think the TBI getting gummed up by it should be minimized. I'll take your advice and try to inspect it after some use and see if anything looks excessive. The oil filler cap to air cleaner is what I think brings the fresh air into the system. On the stock cleaner this had a little sponge filter but that isn't on my adapter thing on the Edelbrock cleaner. It is inside the cleaner housing so it gets filtered air without fouling up the paper filter. I'm now running a K&N filter anyway so maybe that will just keep it oiled :)

In the service manual and the Howell EFI instruction vac diagram I don't see any valve cover vents, so I guess the port on manifold and TBI are all it has and somehow also vent the area under the valve covers, if that's even possible.

[quote=TyTheJeepGuy;345551]The port on the TBI is dedicated to PCV system according to the Howell instructions, it looks to me like it sits below the butterfly valves so I think the TBI getting gummed up by it should be minimized.[/quote]
that sounds good to me...any excess oil flowing through the pcv will got directly into the intake manifold and burn off in the combustion chamber. If you think you are getting a lot of oil flowing through the system, check the spark plugs.

[quote=TyTheJeepGuy;345551]The oil filler cap to air cleaner is what I think brings the fresh air into the system. On the stock cleaner this had a little sponge filter but that isn't on my adapter thing on the Edelbrock cleaner. It is inside the cleaner housing so it gets filtered air without fouling up the paper filter.[/quote]
As long as the connection is 'inside' the air filter, then the air flow from the air intake directly into the valve cover/crankcase will be filtered air which is good. This is how mine (and many) were set-up, but many people remove the hose and just use a breather cap that has the filter built into it. As that is the bypass/breather inflow, there shouldn't be any issue with oil reverse flowing into the air filter housing. So sounds good there as well...

[quote=TyTheJeepGuy;345551]I guess the port on manifold and TBI are all it has and somehow also vent the area under the valve covers, if that's even possible.[/quote]
The port on the manifold may go all the way through to the pushrod 'valley' which is connected to the crankcase/valvecover pressure or air circulation. Sound likes its all good to go. Hopefully you are not getting too much oil blowby and trigger an emissions issue....the TBI/O2 sensor should really help keep the air/fuel mixture right which will help minimize too rich of a fuel mixture thus minimizing unburnt fuel hydrocarbons. It should run cleaner than it ever did on a carb - especially at idle. Make sure the engine is nicely warmed up before emissions test, especially if you have some leaky piston rings and valve seals....the heat will help tighten things up a bit, and some run time will burn off any excess oil that might have seeped through the valve seals.

Ok I'm stuck, and have done a bit of internet research but I'm coming up short. Kinda rough when you have a somewhat unique vehicle to get vehicle specific modification help. I'm going to give some context here so if you want the TL;DR that's at the end.

So I am not sure if I mentioned it already in this build thread, but after installing the 3" rough country lift kit I had some vibration between 25 and 35 ish mph. I ignored it for the sake of being able to make it out for a few trail runs before end of season and because it was pretty minimal. Its small enough that I could live with it, especially since its a project vehicle, but its been bothering me because when I was doing research for the 3" kit I saw a lot of FSJ owners saying there was no reason to have to modify anything but leafs and shocks until you start getting past a 4" kit (except maybe a steering stabilizer which I got anyway). The only thing I can think of is that while the FSJs are nearly all the same there are some slight differences, especially in terms of length and maybe axle width, between say a Grand Wagoneer and a J truck. The kit I got however specifically said that it fits a 1977 J10 and I shouldn't need anything else to get it done.

I noticed when Shane helped me put it on that A: we had to extend the drive shaft slightly to be able to locate the axle on the springs and B: the shims on the leafs seemed to be backwards, but the shackles only fit on one end so I was pretty confident I got the orientation right. Well after having to bend and beat the crap out of the shackles to fit the front leafs that I did later I realized that it isn't so far fetched I might have to do the same for the back, and a check of Rough Country's FAQ section and a phone call to their support confirmed that the thick end of the shim should face the rear bumper. The final nail in the coffin was that the support tech informed me that straight-line length from center locating pin to forward bushing should be 31.5" and that confirmed that they were originally in the wrong way, as well as when I got under there last night and switched one 75lb leaf around the driveshaft angle looked like it would be much better, but waaaaaay further back. Considering the other end measurement (center pin to other bushing) was 26.5", and that I already had to push the drive shaft out a bit, we're talking about a 5" wheelbase extension with only one axle moving!

I confirmed with the guy on the phone this afternoon before I got started on the other leaf before I wasted my time. I told him I thought it was pretty crazy to expect the original driveshaft to be able to extend that much and he seemed to think there wasn't even room for concern. Well I went out and gave it a shot and there isn't a damn thing holding that axle back besides the driveshaft. I made sure the driveshaft was greased and started wailing on it and eventually got I think a 1/4" more out of it, but it started showing these blue marks that looked like they would help someone orient it for insertion which made me nervous I really was at the end. I'll attach a picture of that. Anyone else had a similar experience?

TL;DR : Had leafs backwards, this was confirmed by Rough Country, I was assured that the OEM driveshaft could extend enough to locate axle correctly on correct spring install, but that aint happening.

I realize you guys aren't Rough Country reps but if you have some advice and/or experienced a similar situation I'd appreciate the input. Thanks!

Edit: here's the webpage for the kit. It even had reviews of happy customers and no one asking "hey why do I have to jump through hoops backwards on fire to get this baby together" so makes me feel dumb: [URL="https://www.roughcountry.com/jeep-suspension-lift-kit-645-20.html?find=1977-jeep-j10-pickup-4wd-740857#overview"]3 Inch Lift Kit | Rear Springs | Jeep Grand Wagoneer (84-90)/J10 Truck (76-88) | Rough Country[/URL]

I read through the details once...and I will do so again as I am sure I didn't pick up on everything. As one who has worked with a number of leaf spring lifts on a few different vehicles, it would be unusual for a 2-3 lift to cause issues with too short of a driveshaft - and that is even more so with a long wheelbase/long driveshaft vehicle like the J-truck. Obviously, individual shipments and orders can get screwed up, wrong parts sent etc, but I am guessing its not typical nor expected to have to deal with driveshaft issues. So, basically, that means the manufacturer either sent you something wrong, or something with the install is not quite right....ALso, once you start dealing with 40-50 years old vehicles, stuff gets changed by the previous owner, and all of a sudden, something that should bolt right on, or be a straight easy replacement becomes a chore with lots of 'why the eff did the previous owner do this?' I need to go back and read about your drive shaft shims and shackles a bit more, but something seemed 'off' there. But its also really hard to troubleshoot via the forum...I'll be up north wheeling tomorrow - don't know about what time we'll be done, but I'd be cruising through on my south if you want someone else to just take a look at with no guarantee that I will spot anything or be helpful - just let me know.

Thanks James, I just now saw this message. I'd appreciate the second glance. You summed up my exact feelings on this: all of my research before buying the kit was that I should have no problems bolting in this 3" lift while some people are doing more like a 4 or 5". I will PM you with my address in case you can swing by.

I called again today, confirmed part numbers. It says "Jeep 76-90" right there on the leaf spring and I triple checked part number, and the nail in the coffin is the measurement from center locating pin to forward facing bushing being exactly what they said it should be over the phone. Got a different tech today, he says he sells a lot of these kits and hasn't had any problems reported. When I said maybe its something specific with the J truck vs a Grand Wagoneer he said he just talked to someone who put it in a J10.

He said what they do is in the shop they will have the truck on a lift, the axle on a tranny jack, and then they would compress the leafs up and this would move the center pin closer to transfer case so less to travel for the drive shaft. Sounds to me like a lot of unnecessary effort for a 3" lift... but anyway I don't have that many jacks. I think I'm going to disconnect the driveshaft, get the axle onto the leafs, then I can compress that whole assembly up and try to extend the shaft enough to reattach to axle. Never disconnected a driveshaft before so I'll have to look into that before trying.

Ok so James came over and brainstormed with me and brought much more experience with leaf springs with him to help me make a decision. Long story short, we agree that I probably had the leafs in the right direction the first way, and we just can't see how they should be the other way. The main question is why the shims appear to be the wrong direction. Long story long, read on, but you're pretty much caught up at this point.

Here's a detail of our decision making process:
Factual givens:
- the leafs I pulled off had about 31.5" center pin to REAR bushing (nearest to rear bumper) and 26.75 from center to front
- The axle was pretty nicely centered with the new leafs in the way I originally put them in

Circumstantial givens:
- rough country says that the thick end of the shim needs to face towards the rear bumper
- with the way the shims were oriented delivered to me, this meant that the 31.5 sized end of the leafs would face towards the FRONT of the vehicle
- putting the (75 freaking pound) leafs in with the 31.5 long end towards the front of the vehicle places the rear axle quite far back, enough to give me concerns about clearing with tires on
- Two calls to Rough Country themselves assured me both times that the 31.5" end should face the FRONT of the vehicle
- the original leafs I pulled out may not be OEM or installed same direction as OEM, but this would be assuming that the wheelbase was shortened and axle not lined up with center of wheel well, and also that someone flipped around the leaf, and there is no indication that the leafs are not original. So I find the scenario they were flipped very unlikely

The red flags that kept me from wanting to continue on with the RC suggestions (but I did anyway because I had two Rough Country techs assuring me that it was the correct approach):
- The axle not being centered with the wheel well
- The driveshaft nearly coming apart and I'm still several inches away from being able to mount the axle
- Having to disconnect the breather tube to reach
- Having to fully pull out the parking brake lines to be able to reach
- Having to have the brake line (that the RC and other websites assure me should need no modification) pulled up away from the axle to be able to reach

So really, the only things that seemed to indicate that I should rotate the leafs from how I had them was the orientation of the shims and the assurance of Rough Country techs/representatives/support guys. These seem like very minor reasons compared to the very concerning compromises that it would take to carry it out. James concluded that we'll need some more info before we can be sure of a decision, but he would lean towards ignoring the support suggestions and keeping the leafs oriented how I had them originally and maybe look into rotating the shims for a better pinion angle. He has some connections with J trucks (sounds like some rad people if you ask me) and he's going to see what they have to say about their pinion angles and maybe whether they are using shims for lifts.

I was able to get the leafs back in the same way I had them originally, and was for once pleasantly surprised by how easy it is to rotate those shims. I interpret this as further circumstantial evidence that maybe Rough Country had it wrong, if its that easy to just slap them on and rotate them. I could have been convinced those were welded on and there was no hope for removing or rotating them so I'm appreciative for James' insight on that.

The clips around the edges of the leafs (James explained that their purpose to to keep the individual metal components from rotating/fanning out) rub the outer edge of the truck's frame so I will be grinding off one edge of one on each side to prevent this. There are multiple clips and if for some reason those fail the frame itself should prevent them from rotating at least one direction.

Thanks to James for all of the help. I am in my last days of being 25 and I don't think I would have the energy to crawl around under a truck after a trail run.

Considering the

edit - I see I tarry'd too long writing this while eating dinner and so forth - Ty has already said it all....

I stopped by Ty's today to see some of the issues he is dealing with....And I am essentially in agreement with him that the spring manufacturer is giving him wrong info or directions. Basically, there are two issues:
1) the rear leaf springs are not symmetrical around the axle mounting center pin - basically, one end of the spring is 5 inches longer than the other. The longer end is the 31.5" that the manufacturer says should go towards the front. In addition to all the difficulty with getting the driveshaft to extend to fit etc, you can pretty much eyeball that when the axle is mounted to the leaf spring in this arrangement, the axle is pushed so far back, that it may not even fit in the wheel wheel, and certainly the tire isn't going to sit anywhere near the center of wheel well. We essentially confirmed our suspicions when we went and measured the old take-off leaf springs - obviously they are a couple inches shorter overall as they don't have as much arch and lift - but they still have the 5 inches of difference from one end to the other, and the long end had a little 'helper' spring add on. Looking at some old photos Ty took (its always good to get documentation of stuff before you tear it apart), the long end with the helper spring was definitely in the rear....Now we don't know if the old springs are OEM or replacement or what not, but no matter what they were, they fit and its highly unlikely they were installed backwards. Given how impossible it is to install the new springs with the long end forward, I am 99.999% sure the directions from the manufacturer are backwards with regard to the spring direction.

2) The 2nd issue, and the one that is a bit more complicated, is the axle shims. The shims actually cam pre-installed in the leaf pack and its all held together with the center pin. The lift kit includes shims to help keep the pinon angle correct when the lift is installed...And it appears from our perspective, that when the leaf springs are installed in the orientation that we think they should go (short end forward), the shims are backwards.

I think its a bit of a misconception that the pinon has to be rotated up to match the driveshaft angle, as what is really needed is 'parallel but offset' between the transmission/TC output and the pinon. Basically, the pinon angle needs to match the transmission output angle (not the driveshaft). When you 'lift' the vehicle, or you can think of it as dropping the axle, you increase the offset between the trans output and the pinon, but unless the axle rotates, the parallel relationship should remain. In the case of the J10, the axle does rotate some because the geometry of the asymmetrical leaf springs and how they are mounted to the frame (rear mount is much higher than front mount) is a bit more complex. Just measuring the axle, we found about a 7 degree difference between the spring pad surface and the pinon - in other words, if the spring pads were flat and horizontal, the pinon would be angle 7 degrees up. This OEM configuration is quite purposeful I think, as the when the leaf springs are mounted high in the rear on the frame, the spring pads are pointed down to the front by a few degrees, but the pinon is horizontal to slightly up. I would guess the OEM springs would have been around a 4-5 degree down to the front orientation, and with the pinon 7 degrees higher, it would sit about 2-3" up. I think for many years, many manufacturers use a 2-3 engine inclination to the rear that then sets the trans output and the pinon angle at the same.

Now, with the slightly longer, more highly arched lift springs, the orientation of the spring pads changes, and as best as we could tell, it rotates the spring pad down to the front a bit more - although not a lot. We roughly measured maybe 7-8 degrees total. If the springs were mounted without a shim, the pinon would basically sit flat. The shims installed on the springs will cause things to rotate down in the front by another 7 degrees or so (fat end forward on a SOA set-up)....I just cannot imagine any scenario where the pinon should ever be downward. So, that means if we are correct in which direction the springs install (long end to the rear), then the shims are installed wrong. For the shims to work right, they need to be installed fat end to the rear so they rotate the pinon up (and the instructions are clear on this - the fat end goes rearward). So I think Ty is going to need to loosen the center pin and either spin the shims 180 degrees, or really, I think given the built in 7 degrees of wedge in the axle, that he might be best off to just skip the shims - I just don't see anyway the new springs are going to cause 7 more degrees of downward rotation, and using the wedges to increase the pinon angle will probably yield way to high of a pinon angle - probably around 7 degrees or so. The only way to find out I think, will be to put stuff together with the rotated shims and with no shims, and measure the pinon angle and compare to the trans output.

Kind of cluttering up Ty's thread here....but if you've come this far, Zihuatanejo isn't much farther... some 'light' reading on drivetrain and setting up driveshaft angles with pinon and transmission output
[URL]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UZ8ImxkY8KeQGwwty0hl4s8RJ55J-vk6/view?usp=sharing[/URL]

Thanks James! By the way, rotating the shims was by far the easiest part of this lift. Small impact driver on the center nut was all it took to loosen (I used clamps on either side as you suggested) and then I could swing them around very easily and retighten. I can use some help getting the axle up into place but once I use a jack to pin it against the mounting points I can measure the angles before u-bolting and decide if I should delete the shims. Based on what I'm seeing I think the shims will be necessary.

I sent out some requests to see if anyone can get some pics or measurements of their J-truck set-ups....hopefully hear back tomorrow to confirm we are doing it right. Glad the shim rotation went easy. Start there, and get the axle in place, and then measure the pinon angle and see where it is. My eyeball was kind of guessing you wouldn't need them, but 7 degree isn't a lot to see, and given we didn't have the one side spring really in place, nor did we jack the axle up in there, its quite possible its going to work well with the shims spun around. I can guarantee that the shims in this new arrangement will me WAY better than previous when they were rotating the pinon down. Let me see where things stand for tomorrow - I have been assigned some winterization duties for the house, irrigation and swamp cooler etc and I have some parts for the 58 to chase...once all that starts to work itself out, I should be able to find some time....

This afternoon I spent about 4 hours in the garage trying out the new shim orientation and getting ahead of myself. I bolted the axle back up because I thought it looked good, but now the pinion angle was so positive that the shocks couldn't reach their brackets. As it would turn out they were actually too rotated up at this point anyway. I took the shims off and rebolted by balancing the axle on the jack and locating one side at a time.

I was very pleased with the test drive. Also while I had the truck jacked and tires off I retorqued the front suspension components and trimmed the excess of the U bolts with the angle grinder. The parking brake lines are semi hooked back up, I might just need to set up some new mount points since they no longer reach the old ones along the frame.

Nice...I think no shims is the way to go....

If you get a chance...post a picture of looking along the axle tube so we can see the pinon angle and driveshaft..You sent one to my phone earlier today, but that was with the shims still, and the pinon did look way too high. And the final thought - I am still wondering if those shims would have been more useful on the front springs to manage caster angle....otherwise enjoy driving it.

If you get a nice side shot (showing the full driveline) - I can open the image in a photo editor to measure the angles at each end of the DS

Sorry I missed these posts. Attached is a photo as level as I could get it and as straight on. Kind of hard to get the right framing.

I have been driving the truck since the "lift fix" and its doing great. Today I had the pipe that was welded direct to messed up passenger manifold fixed w/ new manifold installed, this time pipe is bolted to it correctly. The manifold gaskets I bought were apparently folded in half at some point in their shipping and handling and the shop said they were worthless, so right now I'm without a gasket on passenger side. Will wait til there is a leak to add one.

The truck is not holding its weight in these photos so I expect the angle to change slightly. I'll go out tomorrow and try to get photos with truck holding itself up.

I visited family over the weekend for my uncle's funeral but there were some fun times in between; one of which was getting to check out my step-dad's CJ5 (1977) that I have seen and heard legends of but never gotten to do much more than see under a cover.

I had only heard from my step brother that he had swapped in a V8 but I just assumed it was the standard V8 or maybe a 360. Turns out he too has an AMC 401 and GM Turbo 400 transmission, and they are both I'd say medium to heavy modified. Modification mentioned included aggressive cam, clutch packs for transmission, and not really a mod but he runs it on 110 octane fuel. "It wants to vapor lock" uh yeah I wonder why :)

Here are some photos and a link to a video of it burning all 4 35" tires in low range. The video is NSFW both because of Jeep action too hot and I say "holy sh*t":
[URL]https://photos.app.goo.gl/U7zesZ38Ux3zohpa8[/URL]

[url]https://photos.app.goo.gl/XjXEVwfmdBLvUCPVA[/url]

I know, I know. His engine bay is much cleaner.

Speedo got to 30 before the body caught up :thumb:

I asked for a tachometer for Christmas and got one. The way I mounted it may be horrific, potentially sacrilegious to some, so viewer be warned:
[url]https://photos.app.goo.gl/h25hZpqB9wfCZeMe9[/url]

My main focus for this build has changed given I'm using it as my sled hauler this winter. Fixing up the fuel system and the recreating the windshield washer system has replaced body work and cleaning up the engine bay and electrical wiring in the cab in priority.

Amazon's algorithms showed their prowess and suggested a Permatex Reservoir Patch Kit that worked great. It was pretty much just some fiberglass "cloth" and a strong epoxy. I got lucky and the 45 year old reservoir motor, wiring, and switch from the cab all worked. I bought a cheap universal nozzle kit too and I'll use the hosing but I couldn't find a place I liked for the nozzles. I found that late 60s Camaro washer nozzles looked very similar to ones I saw for FSJ and were listed as less expensive than I could find. They came in but I have yet to install them. It looks like the little metal flags that are used to secure them in position are oriented opposite of the FSJ ones so there might be some challenge there. I'm waiting until I can get some help from a friend because it looks like it will be easiest to install with the hood removed.

As for the fuel system, I incorrectly reported here that I had a 10 gallon tank. I now cannot find where I got that information from, I could have sworn I saw someone online saying they had one in a J10. Anyway, not only did I have the stock 18 gallon tank, but there appears to be nothing wrong with it. I think I just put too much faith in that damn shop that I trusted with the truck after pulling it out of my dads place. They told me they hooked up the sending unit when I had them reset up that tank as the main tank. There were rotten hoses so I had also bought and delivered them a new filler hose. Pretty much every other hose connection (overflow, send and receive soft lines) were prone to leaking especially after I added more (albeit relatively low) pressure to the system when I added EFI. Also, when I'd go to the pump, I could only ever get 8 or 9 gallons in from near empty if I was lucky, before it was clearly coming up the filler hose. The shop told me that when the fuel gauge ran empty, it was definitely empty, and that the owner had taken it for a test drive and when it went empty he had to refill before continuing back to the shop. So I stupidly trusted them again and found out they were completely wrong. My gauge was reading near empty and I dropped the tank, there were gallons and gallons of fuel in there, and now on my garage floor.

After letting the garage vent out a bit my friend showed up to help get the new 18gal polyethylene tank in. I ordered it before I realized I really did have an 18 gallon already... anyway it was an opportunity to get a new sending unit in and make sure I could fix up the lines to it. Putting the new tank in was easier than taking the apparently quite full one out but unfortunately in an attempt to match the orientation of the sending unit's connections (towards driver side of the vehicle where the hard lines come up for the connection) I think I pointed the float barrel towards the nearest side of the tank. So when it fills up, I think the float barrel gets pinned against the tank wall and now it reads very low when I hand pumped in about 15 gallons. I'm going to wait on dropping the tank again to fix this but despite the sunk cost fallacy most of this adventure was to get a nice reliable and informative fuel system on the truck so it isn't something I need to worry about when going to do fun stuff.

When I started the truck up later that night it was sending a lot of gas out the send and return line connections to the sending unit. Luckily I can get to these from the rear wheel well without even removing the tire and its a tight fit but I got the clamps repositioned and snugged up, no new leaks. So I really didn't accomplish much except now I have a lighter tank with a true vent nozzle where the last tank I think vented through the filler hose. This will let me gasket up the filler cap so I don't see/smell fuel dumping out the side when I go offroading again. I guess I also accomplished some peace of mind knowing I really do have 18 gallons to work with and since I was doing ok with 8-9 that means I've doubled my range. Poly tank will be a lot easier to drop anyway so redoing the sending unit won't be TOO bad. I bought extra 3/4" line and cut off what I think was the rotten section of the overflow line so hopefully I won't be dripping gas every time I fill up now.

I don't really have any photos of the new tank but here's video evidence that I fixed the return line link:
[url]https://photos.app.goo.gl/CnKmCJUHuDmfN6VS7[/url]