Posted: 6/21/2010 6:54:29 PM EDT
I am replacing the leaf spring shackles on my 89 Wrangler with a set of boomerang type ones. The bolts on the rear shackles can't be removed unless you drop the gas tank.  The bolt heads face inward towards the tank and won't slide far enough to come out before hitting the side of the tank. Well, dropping the tank isn't going to happen so the sawzall will be getting a little trigger time tomorrow. To be fair though, I don't know if I should blame Chrysler or AMC for this.  Kind of makes it a pain the ass when want to change springs to add a lift too. |
|
I know pretty much zilch regarding the 4wd chrysler vehicles, but is there a good reason to have the bolts come out to the center? Or was it just some industrial engineer's wet dream?
Once you cut off the old ones, can the new bolts be put in? I've seen some wacky crap with cars that actually made sense later when I had a chance to think about it. Just wondering...I really don't know those vehicles at all.
|
|
Quoted:
I am replacing the leaf spring shackles on my 89 Wrangler with a set of boomerang type ones. The bolts on the rear shackles can't be removed unless you drop the gas tank. The bolt heads face inward towards the tank and won't slide far enough to come out before hitting the side of the tank.
Well, dropping the tank isn't going to happen so the sawzall will be getting a little trigger time tomorrow. how will you get new ones in? |
|
Meh, try putting a high-side A/C connector on a PT Cruiser. It's fitted right out of the compressor, unlike the low-side which is up on the fender where it should be.
Yuo can't get it from the bottom, since the other line is in the way. You can't get it from the top, since there's not enough room for a grown man to get his arm in between the core support, and the intake plenum. Why they didn't just put it next to the low side, is beyond me. Idiots. |
|
The new ones will slide in from the outside and I will put the nut on the inside next to the tank. No big deal really. I was going to install them that way anyway since the bolts have a grease fitting that I want to face to the outside. It is only slightly annoying that the old ones need to be cut off. I have an XJ as well, but haven't killed any blind nuts yet and I do stress the yet part.  |
|
Quoted:
THIS is Chrysler's finest engineering: http://www.vipercrazy.com/hosting/kcobean/viper/newacr/IMG_0620.jpg lolz Am I the only one that thinks those look like a giant clown shoe? That wings makes it look even worse... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
THIS is Chrysler's finest engineering: http://www.vipercrazy.com/hosting/kcobean/viper/newacr/IMG_0620.jpg lolz Am I the only one that thinks those look like a giant clown shoe? That wings makes it look even worse... No problem...I'll drive it. |
|
Quoted:
The people who design cars should be required to work on them before the design meets final approval. A lot of this stupid shit would get fixed pretty damn quick. For a period of time, Chrysler required all incoming engineers to spend 3 yrs. on the line building vehicles. Manufacturers really aren't concerned with the 5-10% of buyers that modify their vehicles. They are far more concerned about efficiencies to be gained on the factory floor. Automation dictates a lot of issues such as which way the bolts are inserted. The days of a guy standing around with an air gun shooting bolts are near extinction. As many fasteners as possible are torqued using multi spindle DC tooling. Even in 1989, ergonomic issues were likely the driving issue on which way the leaf spring bolts were inserted. |
|
Quoted:
THIS is Chrysler's finest engineering: http://www.vipercrazy.com/hosting/kcobean/viper/newacr/IMG_0620.jpg Epic win is just 20min NE of my home. 
(I've seen your car pics before and drool every time...) |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
THIS is Chrysler's finest engineering: http://www.vipercrazy.com/hosting/kcobean/viper/newacr/IMG_0620.jpg Epic win is just 20min NE of my home.
(I've seen your pics before and drool every time...) You should come up to the cruise-in here in Dulles some time. We'll take the car for a spin.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
THIS is Chrysler's finest engineering: http://www.vipercrazy.com/hosting/kcobean/viper/newacr/IMG_0620.jpg Epic win is just 20min NE of my home.
(I've seen your pics before and drool every time...) You should come up to the cruise-in here in Dulles some time. We'll take the car for a spin. 
|
|
Quoted: Meh, try putting a high-side A/C connector on a PT Cruiser. It's fitted right out of the compressor, unlike the low-side which is up on the fender where it should be. Yuo can't get it from the bottom, since the other line is in the way. You can't get it from the top, since there's not enough room for a grown man to get his arm in between the core support, and the intake plenum. Why they didn't just put it next to the low side, is beyond me. Idiots. On my 2.2 Cavalier, it faces down, sandwiched between the radiator and the exhaust manifold... |
|
In my experience the biggest cluster fuck in engineering of a chrysler vehicle I have witnessed is my '91 Dodge Dakota.. This is of course the first year they threw a 318 V8 engine in the Dakota...
If anyone has replaced an oil filter in one of these you will understand
|
|
Quoted:
THIS is Chrysler's finest engineering: http://www.vipercrazy.com/hosting/kcobean/viper/newacr/IMG_0620.jpg If you are 5'6". |
|
Quoted: If there was a side impact, would the bolt threads cut into the gas tank? How far away are we talking? A head of a bolt is safer as opposed to the threaded end if there is a puncture concern. That may be why they originally designed it that way. The bolts go through the frame and are about 2 inches away from the tank. Since the new bolts have a grease fitting that would puncture the tank as well, it is pretty much the same either way. The threads actually would be less likely to puncture than the pointier grease fitting. The frame would really have to take a hell of a whack to bend that much, but it could happen. |
|
Quoted:
If you think Chrysler engineers make things hard to work on, you should buy a German car. QFT. If you want something designed to be worked on, buy a Toyota. Toyota designers / Engineers are required to spend time working on the cars they design, hence why they are the easiest to work on. My VW Golf TDI could not be designed any more difficult to work on. It's like they got together and purposely decided to see how fucked up they could make it. |
|
Quoted:
What are "boomerang" shackles? If you trying to lift it, re-arching the spring, or getting new springs for higher lift is almost always the way to go. (I used to work at National Spring in San Diego a loooong time ago, but never heard of boomerang shackles) They are supposed to help with shackle inversion. Some do provide a small degree of lift, but that is not their main function. I liked them mainly as they were beefier and had grease fittings. When I get back from my next deployment I plan to add some new springs for additional lift. The tires are a bit tight in the wheel wells right now, but will work for a bit. I probably should have waited until I had the new springs before swapping them out, but I am impatient. Do a quick Google image search and there are numerous examples you can see.
|
|
Quoted:
My buddy had a 4 wheel drive shop. He charged $ 200 more for lift kits on jeeps over 4 years old, due to the rust. I advise you get some rust penetrant and spray any bolts a few days in advance. Wear eye protection. Good luck! Thanks for the heads up. I have been spraying the shackle bolts for a while and they actually did come out pretty easily. I can't say the same for some of the lug nuts though. This thing has been sitting for several years. |
|
Quoted:
i replaced a broken front shackle / holder thinga-ma-bob on my 84 cj.. . i could not for the life of me figure out how to screw it back on.. the head was inside the frame.. I welded it
ive wheeled it VERY hard.. and its held That's because it was probably a rivet originally. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
It would be AMC/Jeep engineering, as Chrysler only finished buying out AMC/Jeep around 1988ish. 
And that's just Gods way of punishing you for buying a Jeep with the wrong shaped headlights. I have 67 and a 75 CJ5 to help atone for my sins. I guess that'll do.
|
|
not to you hurt your chrysler hating feelings but gm and ford are the same exact way.
speaking from experience not my ass. like others have said probably due to the slight possibility the bolt could puncture the tank. sorry to burst your bubble but its not just Chrysler products |
|
Quoted:
dropping the tank shouldn't be that hard I've done it on my 90 wrangler a few times it's tedious but can be done. +1 Not that hard to drop a tank. Or at least loosen the straps some to give you enough play to get the bolts out. If you work on modern cars, get used to the idea of taking a bunch of stuff off to get to something. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
THIS is Chrysler's finest engineering: http://www.vipercrazy.com/hosting/kcobean/viper/newacr/IMG_0620.jpg If you are 5'6". Wellll.....I'm 6'4". Next? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
dropping the tank shouldn't be that hard I've done it on my 90 wrangler a few times it's tedious but can be done. +1 Not that hard to drop a tank. Or at least loosen the straps some to give you enough play to get the bolts out. If you work on modern cars, get used to the idea of taking a bunch of stuff off to get to something. 2000 Dodge Intrepid...book says to remove the windshield wiper shelf to replace the PCV valve and the inner tie rods...remove the wheel to pull the battery out (all you have to do is turn it all the way to the right)...and I have yet to figure out how you are supposed to get to the hose clamps on the bottom radiator hose. |
|
Quoted: not to you hurt your chrysler hating feelings but gm and ford are the same exact way. speaking from experience not my ass. like others have said probably due to the slight possibility the bolt could puncture the tank. sorry to burst your bubble but its not just Chrysler products Ah, another overly sensitive soul! If I hated Chrysler, why the hell would I own it in the first place? |