1985 Survivor ? Photos

[nograin]

I have been looking for period and survivor photos for the 1985 engine bay.
Some of you may recall this is not my first attempt to document as built engine bay details.

This is a Jeep that best I can tell was listed on ebay from Oklahoma City in 2020.
A Czeck website (robo-site?) has preserved the photos and description. Claimed to be only 26,000 miles, 3 owners.

Some items replaced. Anyone else think there may be more to the story?

[MysticRob]

Wow, that is nice.
I'm curious about that radiator. The radiator that mine came with was horribly leaky, and the overflow tube attached to the driver side of the filler neck. I figured that radiator was original and stock because it was in such bad shape and it made sense to have a shorter hose running to the expansion tank.
I then found a replacement radiator in the salvage yard with a 2000s date code that has the overflow tube attached to the passenger side like in the pics you provided, so I assume the radiator in the pics has been replaced too.

The pics do bring up a question for me though. I've seen so many different pics of so many different years, and it seems there's no rhyme or reason to the battery tray being angled toward the air cleaner or being straight front/back like on my 88.
I swear I've seen later models that were also angled, but maybe I was just high.
Was there a model year cutoff for when the battery tray angle was changed?

[nograin]

Radiator

I agree the radiator in the photo above may have been changed.
There are other photos with that angled tank top radiator but maybe it was just a common aftermarket replacement.


We also see it here in the '85 Barret jackson was selling, except the oveflow hose seems to pointed correctly.




The radiator in the '77 Jeep Brochure has a rounded top, like the one that was in my '85 when I bought it used.




This is BJ's replacment in my ' 85

[nograin]

Battery tray

The pics do bring up a question for me though. I've seen so many different pics of so many different years, and it seems there's no rhyme or reason to the battery tray being angled toward the air cleaner or being straight front/back like on my 88.
I swear I've seen later models that were also angled, but maybe I was just high.
Was there a model year cutoff for when the battery tray angle was changed?

I think it was Tim Reese who posted about that. IIRC the answer had to do with the engine option.
My '85 came with a v8 and the tray is angled
Tim's '77 came with a 6 and its squared
See post 7 http://www.ifsja.org/forums/vb/showthread.php?t=184188


http://www.ifsja.org/forums/vb/showthread.php?t=98610

[nograin]

My list of inconsistancies for a very low milage survivor.



Radiator has been changed.


Ignition Coil looks dark blue in photo, at least to me. Bosch replacements are that color.


Aftermarket front stabilizer shocks.


Hood

There's a few others I have questions about but don't know the original details well enough to say they are fishy.

[nograin]

Here's an '81 being parted out by a member here.
v-8 with A/C
It has that same radiator top tank and radiator overflow tothe right side with the hose making lop back to the overflow.

[jeepman42]

Nice pics. I need to work on pics on site!
My '85 SJ does not have hood ornament. Had a parts '86 that did. However , nothing says that Jeep didn't release some late '85s w ornament.
Pretty sure '86 had the 3 section wood trim vs the 1 front to rear on '85& earlier.
Also '86-91 had more wheel spokes than the 12 on '85&earlier
And grill different after '85 etc, etc
Fun- tell the difference game!

[MysticRob]

I think it was Tim Reese who posted about that. IIRC the answer had to do with the engine option.
My '85 came with a v8 and the tray is angled
Tim's '77 came with a 6 and its squared
See post 7 http://www.ifsja.org/forums/vb/showthread.php?t=184188


http://www.ifsja.org/forums/vb/showthread.php?t=98610

I should've clarified I was speaking more of the later model years like mine that came with the only available engine, the 360/5.9L. For instance, here's a URL for a Mecum GW with the battery tray angled:

https://www.mecum.com/lots/CH1022-52...p3ZfGjmttwu0Kw

Mine of course is not. Since they're both identical 88 model years, why the difference?

[tgreese]

I should've clarified I was speaking more of the later model years like mine that came with the only available engine, the 360/5.9L. For instance, here's a URL for a Mecum GW with the battery tray angled:

https://www.mecum.com/lots/CH1022-52...p3ZfGjmttwu0Kw

Mine of course is not. Since they're both identical 88 model years, why the difference?

The 258s have a battery tray that is perpendicular to the long axis of the Jeep. This is allowed because the six cylinder radiator is narrower and provides enough room between the radiator support and inner fender for the long axis of a type 24 battery.

There was a post on fsjnetwork that shows the later battery that is parallel to the long axis of the Jeep. https://www.fsjnetwork.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19337 My '82 for example has a battery tray that is mounted at an angle to the axes of the Jeep.

I would point out that the type-24 battery like pictured in the first post here comes perilously close to the hood brace, and can short out against it. If you have a V8 FSJ with the angled battery mount, suggest you look at hood brace clearance carefully with this in mind.

[MysticRob]

The 258s have a battery tray that is perpendicular to the long axis of the Jeep. This is allowed because the six cylinder radiator is narrower and provides enough room between the radiator support and inner fender for the long axis of a type 24 battery.

There was a post on fsjnetwork that shows the later battery that is parallel to the long axis of the Jeep. https://www.fsjnetwork.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19337 My '82 for example has a battery tray that is mounted at an angle to the axes of the Jeep.

I would point out that the type-24 battery like pictured in the first post here comes perilously close to the hood brace, and can short out against it. If you have a V8 FSJ with the angled battery mount, suggest you look at hood brace clearance carefully with this in mind.

While that may make sense for widely differing model years (i.e. pre/early-80s and post/late-80s), I'm still talking about the later model GWs with the only engine option being the 360, and how the battery tray can differ between angled and straight even within the same model year (in the case I just posted above, on two 88s).

I just find it odd that even within the same model year we see 2 different battery tray mounting positions. I know the tray on my 88 is absolutely stock, as there are no other mounting holes, no replacement sheet metal, or other giveaways regarding tray replacement, yet my previous post links to an example of what is supposedly a low mileage Mecum 88 with what can also be assumed to be an original angled battery tray.

[tgreese]

Just a comment - the '88-ish parts book is online at the Tom Collins site. It might show two different inner fenders and possibly a note. Plenty of precedent for a mid-88 change of something like that.

[MysticRob]

Just a comment - the '88-ish parts book is online at the Tom Collins site. It might show two different inner fenders and possibly a note. Plenty of precedent for a mid-88 change of something like that.

Great idea!
I totally forgot I downloaded the 87-90 parts catalog from Tom's site, and looking up the battery box shows part # 5501 9526 for 88-90, and 5501 4359 for 87, so I'm guessing that Mecum GW might be from an earlier production run that used a left over 87 battery tray.

[nograin]

That makes sense. Tony posted photos of a '90 and '91 here


My guess on the low milage GW in the opening post is that it was damaged. That's my guess as to why someone then replaced the hood with one from a later Wagoneer. F Whatever damaged the original hood also took out the original radiator. Further it had some front end issue shimmy or control issue that the bolt on dual shock setup tried to resolve. An '85 would have come with a steering damper (shock) in the same location. Maybe that too was broken and they went with a generic option for replacement?