ZJ 5spd Swap - Page 6 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Grand Cherokee & Commander Forums > ZJ Grand Cherokee Forum > ZJ 5spd Swap

Rugged Ridge Modular XHD Snorkel Now for both 3.8L and 3.6RIGID LED Light Blowout Sale - All Sizes, All Series, all Introducing MONSTALINER™ UV Permanent DIY Roll On Bed Line

Reply
Unread 08-14-2012, 09:34 PM   #76
General_Jeep
Registered User
1994 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Arvada, Colorado
Posts: 434
I have a Dodge ram 1500 5.2L V8 4x4 and it already has 145K miles on it. I use it as a plow truck so it gets bashed hard, I also don't drive it nicely. I've gone through 2 clutches(one was my mothers fault...) But the NV3500 is still running good.

__________________
1994 Jeep Grand Cherokee 5.2L V8- NV3500 - Blown D35 8.8 replacement some day.
2010 Jeep Patriot 5 speed manual-- DD, 27-31MPG :D
1996 Dodge Ram 1500 - Work Truck/Plow 5.2L NV3500
2005 Nissan Titan - Hauler

"The Jeep is Americas only real sports car!" - Enzo Ferrari
General_Jeep is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 08-15-2012, 11:13 AM   #77
moparrr07
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: belvidere, Illinois
Posts: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by General_Jeep View Post
I have a Dodge ram 1500 5.2L V8 4x4 and it already has 145K miles on it. I use it as a plow truck so it gets bashed hard, I also don't drive it nicely. I've gone through 2 clutches(one was my mothers fault...) But the NV3500 is still running good.
theres a guy on dakota durango forum that didnt blow his up until he he 500 lbft of torque, everyone on there agreed with him, most people find that to be the limit
__________________
-Black Limited 1998 Jeep ZJ 5.2 nv3550 np242, 35s, lots of other stuff
moparrr07 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 08-15-2012, 04:31 PM   #78
ratmonkey
R.I.P.
 
ratmonkey's Avatar
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: , Pennsylvania
Posts: 19,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by moparrr07 View Post
theres a guy on dakota durango forum that didnt blow his up until he he 500 lbft of torque, everyone on there agreed with him, most people find that to be the limit
Same forum i see them regularly blow then up with stock 360 swaps.
__________________
'97 zj 5.2, some stuff, some other suff, and some things that even work sometimes.

ratmonkey is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 08-15-2012, 08:49 PM   #79
moparrr07
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: belvidere, Illinois
Posts: 772
this guy says there are different strength nv35xx trans'

http://www.dakota-durango.com/forum/...04&postcount=5

hes just a few who have had good luck with the 3500


http://www.dakota-durango.com/forum/...46&postcount=9
http://www.dakota-durango.com/forum/...4&postcount=18
http://www.dakota-durango.com/forum/...4&postcount=21

anyone can kill any trans if they dont know how to treat it, id say 90% of the people that say they can drive a manual and do every day, do it incorrectly, and using the engine to brake without double clutching with burn through the syncos quicker than anything

im sorry you had problems with yours rat, didnt you say you had pilot bearing problems? if that pilot bearing isnt perfect the imput bearing wont last to long
__________________
-Black Limited 1998 Jeep ZJ 5.2 nv3550 np242, 35s, lots of other stuff
moparrr07 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 08-16-2012, 08:12 AM   #80
ratmonkey
R.I.P.
 
ratmonkey's Avatar
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: , Pennsylvania
Posts: 19,794
The pilot was trashed, but the input bearing was fine web i went through all the parts from the failed trans.
The synchros were in good shape too.
Stripped the input gear and counter shaft, which is a common failure.
__________________
'97 zj 5.2, some stuff, some other suff, and some things that even work sometimes.

ratmonkey is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 11-11-2012, 01:27 PM   #81
Mark-318-IT
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Desenzano del Garda (BS), Italy
Posts: 230
hi looking on the web trying to find a 5 spd for the zj i found thr ax 15 "terminator"

waht do you think about?

for street use? i mean some launches...
Mark-318-IT is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 11-11-2012, 01:35 PM   #82
ratmonkey
R.I.P.
 
ratmonkey's Avatar
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: , Pennsylvania
Posts: 19,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark-318-IT View Post
hi looking on the web trying to find a 5 spd for the zj i found thr ax 15 "terminator"

waht do you think about?

for street use? i mean some launches...
Its in v8 Toyota pickups it's a good transmission. But still truck ratios, not something friendly to drag racing. It'll hold up though.
__________________
'97 zj 5.2, some stuff, some other suff, and some things that even work sometimes.

ratmonkey is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 11-11-2012, 02:53 PM   #83
Mark-318-IT
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Desenzano del Garda (BS), Italy
Posts: 230
understood thanks, i think that maybe this can be the chioice...
Mark-318-IT is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-27-2013, 06:37 PM   #84
MurdaJs
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Woods
Posts: 2,173
Any idea on what donor vehicles have the desirable flexplate?
__________________
Built one piece at a time, and it cost me many dimes
MurdaJs is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-27-2013, 09:45 PM   #85
moparrr07
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: belvidere, Illinois
Posts: 772
a flexplate is for an automatic, flywheels are for manuals,

if you have a 5.2, get a flywheel from a manual trans dakota or ram with a 5.2
if you have a 5.9, get a flywheel from a manual trans ram with a 5.9

the 5.2 and 5.9 have different ballence methods requiring weights on the flywheel or not, so you must get one for the matching engine
__________________
-Black Limited 1998 Jeep ZJ 5.2 nv3550 np242, 35s, lots of other stuff
moparrr07 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-27-2013, 10:03 PM   #86
comptiger5000
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Stamford, CT / Rochester, NY
Posts: 4,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratmonkey View Post
Its in v8 Toyota pickups it's a good transmission. But still truck ratios, not something friendly to drag racing. It'll hold up though.
Termi AX-15 with 3.08s in the axles would be ok for street gearing and would cruise about 100 rpm lower at 60 than a stock 44/46RE / 3.73 combo. It's my plan for when my 46RE eventually gets tired of life.
comptiger5000 is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-27-2013, 10:19 PM   #87
MurdaJs
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Woods
Posts: 2,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by moparrr07 View Post
a flexplate is for an automatic, flywheels are for manuals,

if you have a 5.2, get a flywheel from a manual trans dakota or ram with a 5.2
if you have a 5.9, get a flywheel from a manual trans ram with a 5.9

the 5.2 and 5.9 have different ballence methods requiring weights on the flywheel or not, so you must get one for the matching engine
Lol, im learning as i go!

Thanks
__________________
Built one piece at a time, and it cost me many dimes
MurdaJs is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-28-2013, 12:24 PM   #88
ratmonkey
R.I.P.
 
ratmonkey's Avatar
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: , Pennsylvania
Posts: 19,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by comptiger5000 View Post
Termi AX-15 with 3.08s in the axles would be ok for street gearing and would cruise about 100 rpm lower at 60 than a stock 44/46RE / 3.73 combo. It's my plan for when my 46RE eventually gets tired of life.
The motor doesn't like running that low. It will lug and you'll get worse economy.
__________________
'97 zj 5.2, some stuff, some other suff, and some things that even work sometimes.

ratmonkey is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-28-2013, 12:43 PM   #89
comptiger5000
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Stamford, CT / Rochester, NY
Posts: 4,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratmonkey View Post
The motor doesn't like running that low. It will lug and you'll get worse economy.
Hmm... It would put the revs the same as a stock 5 speed 4.0, about 1660 at 60 mph. I currently turn 1750 and it pulls up 9% grades in OD just fine, which tells me it's probably a bit over-geared for the motor, especially considering that making an identical highway run, at the same speed on the same day in a 4.0 WJ with 3.73s and the same size tires, yields 4 - 5 mpg better than I get.

I picked up a solid 1 mpg on the highway after the cam (and pulls harder at 1100 rpm than it did stock). It's happy being lugged down to 850 rpm with the manual lockup switch, although it's not very efficient below 1200 or so, as I get better mpg at 45 than at 40.

Considering how tall GM gears some of their cars (Vettes in particular), where some of them are turning between 1500 - 1600 rpm at 70 mph, I don't think turning 1660 at 60 mph (1940 at 70 mph) is tall enough to lug the motor. Currently, I spin 2050 at 70 mph.
comptiger5000 is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-28-2013, 02:16 PM   #90
ratmonkey
R.I.P.
 
ratmonkey's Avatar
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: , Pennsylvania
Posts: 19,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by comptiger5000 View Post
Hmm... It would put the revs the same as a stock 5 speed 4.0, about 1660 at 60 mph. I currently turn 1750 and it pulls up 9% grades in OD just fine, which tells me it's probably a bit over-geared for the motor, especially considering that making an identical highway run, at the same speed on the same day in a 4.0 WJ with 3.73s and the same size tires, yields 4 - 5 mpg better than I get.

I picked up a solid 1 mpg on the highway after the cam (and pulls harder at 1100 rpm than it did stock). It's happy being lugged down to 850 rpm with the manual lockup switch, although it's not very efficient below 1200 or so, as I get better mpg at 45 than at 40.

Considering how tall GM gears some of their cars (Vettes in particular), where some of them are turning between 1500 - 1600 rpm at 70 mph, I don't think turning 1660 at 60 mph (1940 at 70 mph) is tall enough to lug the motor. Currently, I spin 2050 at 70 mph.
don't compare to a gm or other style vehicle, completely different motor and completely different aerodynamics dictating different power level needs at different speeds.

at 60 these motors do best above 2000rpm. both the v8 and the i6. they're really undergeared from the factory and hate being lugged down.
__________________
'97 zj 5.2, some stuff, some other suff, and some things that even work sometimes.

ratmonkey is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.
Note: All free e-mails have been banned due to mis-use. (Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, etc.)
Don't have a non-free e-mail address? Click here for a solution: Manual Account Creation
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.