Soo transfercase was pretty much empty..

[candymancan]

When i got the wagoneer about 4 months ago and 2k miles ago i made it a priority to change or check the gluids.. but the 229 transfercase had odd bolts for the fill and drain. I didnt have the right size and no one here told me the size when i asked.. Eventually other repairs and other things in life happened and i forgot about the transfercase.

Well my moms trans output seal sprung a head leak had to drop the tc to fix,it.. and i drained her tc fluid it qas purple.black but it was done like 4-5 years ago.. decided to do my 249 as well it was purpleblack as well..


Anyway my point is i decided to do the 229 in my gw and as i opened the fill then drain plugs only maybe half a quart of purple black atf or whatever came out

Odd thing is the only thing that leaks is the shift lever seal on the transmission but i havent seen a leak on the transfercase.. there is a service record from 2010 in my glovebox of one of the previous owners having the rear output seal changed.. but no mention if they refilled or changed the fluid.

Jeep has only been driven like 8k miles between 2010 and now. I dont hear any weird noises so am i safe to assume im lucky and the tcase is okay ? Im a little worried with only so little coming out and this monster case taking 3 quarts to fill.. oh and 4wd does turn on and 4low works too. Drives like a tank in the parking lot in 4low so i know that works

[candymancan]

Soo if this helps.. i put the Jeep in 4wd.. put the transmission in neutral and chocked the wheels.. Jacked up a front wheel and put my torque wrench on a lug.. If i torque the wheel foward it moves at only 15-20 ftlbs.. If i torque the wheel backwords it moves around 35 ft lbs.

Is this bad ? Does it mean the viscous coupler is bad.. And if its bad.. will i still have 4wd ? Cept an open 4wd like a 242 transfercase ?

Hummm

[Tatsadasayago]

I recall the factory spec was closer to 85 FootPounds for the 229 VC.
I would imagine with the low fluid level that the VC was run dry and the clutch mating surfaces are ground up.

[SJTD]

Aint the VC a sealed part? Low fluid would only hurt everything else.

[candymancan]

well it needs the fluid for cooling purposes doesnt it.

Just kinda pisses me off it was like litterally half a quart if that, that came out and it was dark like used oil. I dont see any leaks with it filled up now.. so im curious how it got so low. I still suspect when that mechanic in 2010 replaced the tailcone seal he didnt actually refill or change the tc fluid.. smh

What about the torque test i did.. why am i getting 15ft lbs going foward with the wrench and 35 ft lbs going backwords. The service manual states minimum of 45lbs for proper vc operation so im assuming my VC is no good and i cannot find new ones anywhere online..

[rocklaurence]

Aint the VC a sealed part? Low fluid would only hurt everything else.

He's right.. I'd fill it with fluid and run it. Most likely it spent the whole time in 2wd drive. So, the problems [if any] would be the main bearings.

[Tatsadasayago]

I correct myself. The VC test with one wheel off the ground is in fact +45 Ft Lbs. The bench test torque is +25 Ft Lbs. The torque readings should be the same in either direction so yours is showing it is defective.
I was confusing the 229 VC with the QT differential...my bad.
Running with a low oil level in the 229 won't cause the VC to weaken from friction, but does cause higher temps in the upper shaft area which weakens the spider gear springs inside the VC.
At the dealership I replaced many New Process VCs on vehicles less than 6 months old on a regular basis and most of the time there was no good explanation as to why they got weak. I recall that the VC was redesigned at some point and failures became uncommon afterward.

btw: this used one is on ebay, but a bit spendy in my opinion.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/1919374484 ... noapp=true

[candymancan]

Id rather buy a viscous coupler from a 249 drill into it.. and drain its goop into mine which i believe is servicable from what i heard.. then buy someone used crap that probly doesnt work.

I assume i probly still habe 4wd just not very strong. I cant afford to mess with this viscous coupler nore will i risk buying someone trash that probly doesnt work and they are just trying to rip someone off..

And since there are no new ones.. i guess im kinda ina a pickle.. Thats fristrating.. i hate viscous couplers... i had to replace my 249s vc in my 5.9 zj like 6 years ago. Was stupid expensive.

I guess ill find out this winter if the 4wd works good or not lol.. smh.. just one more thing to put on my list of crap to fix

[Tatsadasayago]

You could always pin the VC...

[candymancan]

Qhat does that do ?

[Tatsadasayago]

Qhat does that do ?

It turns the VC into a locker of sorts.

[candymancan]

Yea so itd basically be like fulltime 4wd in the 242 on zjs without a viscous coupler ?

Or is this like parttime 4wd where you cant drive on the road.

Also would it be worth going to the jy to get a viscous coupler..

I know a 86 gw that has a full drivetrain.. and i assume an 86 has a np229

[Tatsadasayago]

Yeah, when you pin a 229 VC it becomes a full locker when 4WD is engaged. Think of it as a LincolnLocker/WeldedSpiders kinda thing.

When I four-wheel, I stay in 2-Hi till I can't move...then I engage 4WD and don't give a damn about a transfer case diff. Maybe you are the same?

[Stuka]

Yea so itd basically be like fulltime 4wd in the 242 on zjs without a viscous coupler ?

Or is this like parttime 4wd where you can drive on the road.

Also would it be worth going to the jy to get a viscous coupler..

I know a 86 gw that has a full drivetrain.. and i assume an 86 has a np229

It would become part time 4wd. The 242 has an open center differential (With the exception of the GM version).

Even with the measurement you gave, I don't see it outright failing anytime soon. But then I typically only put them in AWD if needed. I don't run them in AWD in dry conditions. You may have a bit less torque going to the front, but doubt you will notice it. And offroad you would always be using low range anyway which locks out the VC.

[candymancan]

So going to the JY to get that transfercase off the 86 wouldnt be worth it ? They are only $100, and i could just take it apart for the viscous coupler and probly get it for like $10 knowing this salvage yard i would just say its a gear for the differential or something which go for like $10.

Then i could bench test the VC i got and see if its any good.

I only use 4wd on my 242 in the 98 ZJ when its either raining or snowing. I dont go offroading. Same with the wagoneer, after i fixed all the holes in the floorboard and got most of the rust off underneeth when i drive it and its raining i just flip it in 4wd. I dont like driving rear wheel drive in the rain. I've slipped on the 98 ZJ when making right hand turns at stop lights. meaning 1 tire spun and the Jeep didnt move.

Thats kinda why i like my 249 in the 98 5.9 ZJ, its an All time 4wd case with a viscous coupler yes but its a locked all time case, meaning i dont have to flip it in 4 low to lock it. Its locked so 100% power doesnt go to just the front or rear when you have tire in the air. No need to go in 4 low on this case. I really think the 249 is a superior case to the 242, but alot of people dont like it for some reason. You deff have more traction on a 249 then a 242

And i assume the 229 is like the older 249's where 4hi isnt locked, and you have to go to low to lock the center diff.


Yes i was thinking the same, less torque going to the front, thats still a bummer and im still not sure why one way spins at 15-20 ft lbs, and the other way is 35ft lbs. Why is the test showing two diff results.

[Tatsadasayago]

The difference in torque readings is likely due to the ramps on one side of the spider cluster are worn more than the other. This is pure speculation on my part I admit.
If I recall correctly, when you do the torque test on the bench, turning the yoke counter clockwise from the output side gives you the forward/power-on torque reading. I can't say I've ever tested one in the reverse direction...
As Brandon said, the low readings won't really mess with you unless you are doing some fairly aggressive wheeling or put the thing in a ditch.

[candymancan]

What about driving in 2 feet of snow.. lol last year i drove in 2-3 feet on both stock zjs minus my nice a.t tires and didnt get stuck once.

Im hoping it snows like that again this year. I wanna drive the waggy in snow with my new cooper a.ts lol.

I think ill still go to the jy and either get that tcase or yhe vc in it.. assuming the 86 has a 229 in it

[Tatsadasayago]

Typically, snow bashing doesn't put an unequal load on one axle as opposed to the other unless one end has good traction. In a scenario where your rear tires are still in snow and the front gets a bite on pavement or even dry dirt, the bias will actually help you and keep the front tires from digging holes while the rears are transferring snow from ahead of the tires to behind.
Kinda like a 'Soft Touch' sorta thing.
In snow, momentum and tire speed trump traction for the most part. The same goes for wet/slick pavement...at least in the forward direction.

As far as the NP transfer cases go, at least you can read the red/silver tag easy enough to ID it.

[Tatsadasayago]

Speaking of torque to the axle:
Years ago my J2000 spit not one, but BOTH driveshafts within 20 feet on a rocky Montana trail.
I wanted to get the truck to the top of the hill so I could work on it so I had my friend run the brakes n steering while I cranked on the front pinion yoke with a 1/2" ratchet. The amount of effort required to wrench the pickup up the hill was waaaay less than I would have suspected with 3.54 gears on 31" tires.
It took about an hour of wrenching, scooting on my side and more wrenching, but I got the truck to the saddle about a 1/4 mile away without too much sweat.
That experience really changed my views on how much torque was really needed to wheel.

[candymancan]

Wow thats interesting lol