# 1975 and earlier Jeeps,what to look for?



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

OK,car died and repair is about 5 grand....time to look for a pre smog 4x4 Jeep.Meaning 1975 and earlier in California. Tell me about engines,I like straight 6 or 4,mileage.Really would prefer no V shaped engines but tell me about those too in Jeeps.

You know,the whole story.Problem child Gremlins.ANYTHING.....Willeys,you name it!

Oh,landcruiser,FJ40 stories too.No Ford/chevy/dodge models.

Thanks!


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

The nice thing about Jeeps is you can rebuild them from the VIN tag out. The only thing I know about Jeeps (this morning  ) is the cj5 was kinda tippy on corners. Get the 6 if you want to tow anything but the 4 is fine if you just want to putter into town for groceries in bad weather. That said the 6 will get you home again too.


----------



## Esteban29304 (Apr 29, 2003)

Neither the 6 cylinder, or the 4 will get any mpg to brag about. The older 6 cylinder is a tough motor, though. Look out for rust , whining from transmission, transfer, rear end, blow-by [ smoking for where you add oil ] , etc. There are plenty of Jeep forums on the web to ask questions.


----------



## Tarheel (Jan 24, 2010)

Had the CJ5 with the 6. Tuff as nails, if you could get the wheels over it- it would go. These vehicles were very reasonably priced and very economical to work on 25 years ago. Good luck !


----------



## Ky-Jeeper (Sep 5, 2010)

The 258 straight six. There is a Chevy HEI inginition that replaces the junk one, which in turn makes the CJ really reliable. The 4-banger is way under power for highway use. Check with flashlight the very bottom of frame the entire length of Jeep for rust through. It's the number one deal breaker on CJ's.

Here you go. 

www.jeepsunlimited.com

Pm if any questions.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

I had a 77 CJ7 and it was the toughest vehicle I ever owned. It had the 258 six cylinder and it started like a charm in -20 degree weather. My brother and I replaced the body in my Dad's garage in one weekend, drove it in Friday night and drive it out Monday morning. We used a one piece fibreglass body that my Dad used to sell.

The bodies rust out pretty quickly, maybe not as quick in California. My frame finally rusted out just behind the rear wheels. You're going to get terrible mileage no matter what but the 258 will have more torque than you'll know what to do with. We beat the crap out of it, took it on motorcycle off road trails and went off roading every chance we got and it just kept going. It's been 20 years since I parted it out and I still miss it. I hope to build another one someday.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Lots of great advice and thanks for the link.Yup,Im reading tuff as nails too,what about axles,any problems/leaks common? How much benefit in real world ice/snow are the locker axles worth? Are rears at least posi,what about fronts?

What are you guys calling horrible mileage. Was surprised to hear so many good things on earlycj5.com forum on the 225 Buick engine,guess I shouldnt write that off hastily? So good to hear you all like that 258 motor too,sounds like just what i want.

Keep em coming,I really need the advice and its much appreciated!!


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

Actually, I can't remember the actual mileage being 20 years ago and all but I had the Quadratrac full time four wheel drive system and an automatic transmission and it sucked the gas up like there was no tomorrow. The system worked pretty good but I had a clunking when I went around corners sometimes. I was told it had to do with the clutches in the transfer case so I put in an additive which helped but I went through u-joints pretty regularly so you might want to stay away from that system.

I would think a standard tranny and unlocking front hubs would give you better mileage and less strain on the drive system.

Did I mention I miss my jeep...??:Bawling:


----------



## catahoula (Dec 14, 2005)

I used to have a 1972 FJ-55 Toyota Land-cruiser, the four door version of the FJ-40. It's the only vehicle I regret selling. I liked the extra carrying capacity and the fact that it had almost no plastic on it. The fuel mileage was pretty abysmal but the rig certainly had heart. Some people think the FJ series rigs are underpowered so they put V8s in them which is a shame, the metric Chevy straight six is all about low end torque. All the FJ series parts are interchangeable 2 door 4 door and trucks.
Don't let the "made in Japan" fool you, 1970s and earlier land-cruisers are built tough. You see a lot of the trucks in Central America, easy to work on for sure. 

I looked at the engine on a new Toyota forklift, it's a modern version of the FJ series engine. Industrial strength rigs, if it wasn't for the poor mileage I'd go out and find another one.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Ok, pre-1975. Think CJ7 was around and thats what you want unless you need super short wheelbase of a CJ5 for some reason. The 1971 and and back through the 60s were Kaiser Corporation. They offered the old Willys F-head 4 which you really dont want, its the flathead WWII engine only with a redesigned head for better breathing. It is NOT a hiway engine and wont last if you try to force it to max rpm very often. Really a tractor engine that should have come with a governor to keep rpm down. For 60s era Jeep with an OEM engine you want the Buick V6. Oh and in 60s you had the CJ5, but no CJ7, instead there was the Jeepster which is actually pretty nice vehicle, I've only seen them with the Buick V6, but think they offered the F-head 4. Somewhere in there think they offered a CJ6, longer version of CJ5, but kinda rare. Of course there were all kinds of kits to put just about any engine you can imagine in a Jeep, one of neatest was one to put a Ford 2.3 four cylinder in anything that came with the Willys flat head or F-head four. And of course anything with early Buick V6 meant that Buick V8 would bolt right in. Kaiser offered the Buick 350 V8 in the Wagoneer. Early Buick 350s had oiling problems. They would throw a rod at around 70k to 80k miles unless you went through bearings before that occured. Oddly I never heard of the Buick V6 having this problem though it was just V8 with couple cylinders lopped off. I've owned Buick V8s, never owned a Buick V6. Olds V8 was the bulletproof engine back then though it didnt get the gas mileage of the Buick V8. Buick, Olds, and Pontiac V8 all had same bolt pattern. Chevy had top two bolts on block different placement.

Back to the 70s and the AMC version of Jeep. AMC killed off the F-head 4 and offered 199, 232, 258 straight six. They ALL look very simular cause they are all basically same engine, just stroke and bore differences.. You want the 258. If you are geared right and you tune one right, a CJ can get around 18-20mpg on hiway. Most people stick huge knobbly tires on them and drive like a bat out of hades and wonder why they get 10mpg. These really were not good hiway vehicles to begin with, putting them on stilts doesnt help. And if you go V8 you really dont want the 304 V8. The 360 was actually pretty good. I've owned three of the big Wagoneers with them. Even with quadratrack and automatic, one of those I owned got honest 16mpg on hiway. The other two got like 14mpg, but back then I wasnt going to do whole lot just to get couple more mpg.

Saying all that, and even though you dont want to hear it, I'd take a stock 71 Ford Bronco with 200 straight six and 3 on tree any day over any Jeep. I used to own one until it rusted into oblivian and I sold the remains before making a move. But it had such better hiway manners than any CJ Jeep, early Scout, or other compact 4wd and got me 21mpg on hiway. I wouldnt want the earlier 170 straight six, nor the V8. Nor the automagic tranny. But you wont find a cheap early Bronco unless its a total basket case with rusted out body. People have bought up any with decent body, slapped some paint on them, stuck a V8 in them if they originally had a six and priced them to the moon.

Oh that brings up another consideration, these vehicles tended to have front drum brakes. Dont think the early Broncos had disk brakes until last couple years of their production in 76-77. Not sure when Jeep CJ started offering disks but assume simular time period. Course they all can all be converted, but more work. Front drum brakes if you arent aware really suck in modern traffic.


----------



## Curtis B (Aug 15, 2008)

Check the body mounts for rust also, that also is a common rust point. The floorpans also were one of the first to rust. Someone mentioned the quadratrac, I can't remember if it was put in pre 76', but if you find one they are a great transfercase. They do make an aftermarket selector that is operated by vacume, to turn the 4 wheel off (the quadratrac was full time 4-wheel), which saves a ton on front end parts and gas. The great thing about the older jeeps, is the amount of parts available. You can install just about any engine, trans, axle, and transfercase, and everything else, body, wiring etc. I can't talk much about the engines, since I usually put in V-8's. Another week point some say was the model 20 rear end, but I never did have a problem.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

More great comments,thank you. Problem with the American made around here is all you find is totally worn out junk....run em into the ground then junk em pretty much.At least with Jeep its possible to find some nice units with lots of rebuilding/restoration done on them.

Example,Mrs looked at bronco a bit back,all that was wrong with it was it leaked oil,engine was tired,needed a radiator,axles leaked and needed front end work. 4,500 bucks,no thanks.


----------



## Ky-Jeeper (Sep 5, 2010)

I wouldn't rule out 87-95 YJ Wranglers. Unlike CJ's, YJ's have gavinized bodys. 4.0 with ax15 is a good combo. Axles in all Jeeps are fine for street use and "light" off roading. Change all fluids in what ever you buy. If you find a CJ that gets 20mpg buy it.


My Tj has a full locker in the rear 44. It is a hand full on ice and snow slush. Trac-lok or Trutrack for highway use works well.


----------



## Qhorseman (Jul 9, 2010)

I have a 73 CJ5, its had an engine and tranny swap to a 4.3 chevy and a TH350 trans. Been a good combo for me. I threw the Fuel injection in the trash and switched it to a carb.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Ky-Jeeper said:


> I wouldn't rule out 87-95 YJ Wranglers. Unlike CJ's, YJ's have gavinized bodys. 4.0 with ax15 is a good combo. Axles in all Jeeps are fine for street use and "light" off roading. Change all fluids in what ever you buy. If you find a CJ that gets 20mpg buy it.
> 
> 
> My Tj has a full locker in the rear 44. It is a hand full on ice and snow slush. Trac-lok or Trutrack for highway use works well.


Must be smog exempt,hence 1975 or earlier.


----------



## Wis Bang 2 (Jan 12, 2010)

Thru College I dove a '62 Willys CJ5 that had a Kelly 'All Steel' cab & a Westin 6' hydraulic plow, the pump rode side saddle atop the generator & a solid rod protruded out under the dash on the other side of the central instrument housing.

Loaded for the semester, Easton to Scranton [around 75 miles], mostly uphill, I'd burn 3/4 of a 10 gal tank. Same load at the end of the semester going home used 1/4th tank.

All the road driving meant a few engine repairs over my 4 years. I had the F head 4cyl. The exhaust valves were in the block [like the flathead] and the intakes were in the head, the little rocker cover ran down one side of the head and the carb bolted directly onto the other...it had 14" long connecting rods so it made gobs of torque. The draw back was the three speed trans.

The drum brakes were all manually adjusted, almost needed to be done daily!

I only ever got it totally stuck once!

Loaded w/ 400 pounds of hot dogs I towed a damaged ford 8n w/ woods 3 point cutter out of the way at an event. That jeep did alot of stuff!


----------



## sandc (Apr 26, 2010)

Unfortunately the cj7 started in '76 or I would suggest that for the extra wheelbase and interior space. The thing to remember on a jeep is that almost everything is interchangeable. I would avoid the older buick engines solely based on the 258 parts being readily available everywhere like a small block chevy. Given your parameters, I would look for an early to mid 70's cj5. Mainly because I would want the open knuckle front axle for turning radius as well as dease of maintenance. If the price is right and you are mechanically inclined at all, you can pick up a stock set of axles from someone building a crawler for next to nothing. I would avoid an auto tranny just because a stick is less maintenance and less heat. Some of them came with the amc 20 for a rear axle. Very strong center section, but two piece outer axles. Easy swap.

Oh yeah, some of the early wags came with the 258 as well...

You can look at www.pirate4x4.com for lots of tech help and a large classifieds section. Be forewarned, that the language and attitudes can get annoying but there is a lot of tech on the site plus the classifieds might help you out.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Sand,I think you are spot on ,and I heard the same comment about Pirate elswhere,LOL!

Seems the 258 with t-18 should be the rig.Also finding they are kinda rare actually,esp in good shape.

I liked these 2,but the 9,500 is a bit out of range (my range that is)
http://fresno.craigslist.org/cto/2197518847.html

This looks real good,but a good 1000 miles away from me,too far to go looking but I think thats just what we need.
http://susanville.craigslist.org/rvs/2214417556.html

Finally the price is right but not the drivetrain I want,what do you folks think of it,its close by
http://inlandempire.craigslist.org/cto/2189970124.html


What say you folks


----------



## Ky-Jeeper (Sep 5, 2010)

Is the presmog preference strictly a cost issue? A t-18 tranny coupled with the Dana 300 transfer case is almost bullet proof.


mightybooboo said:


> Must be smog exempt,hence 1975 or earlier.


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

mightybooboo said:


> OK,car died and repair is about 5 grand....time to look for a pre smog 4x4 Jeep.Meaning 1975 and earlier in California. Tell me about engines,I like straight 6 or 4,mileage.Really would prefer no V shaped engines but tell me about those too in Jeeps.
> 
> You know,the whole story.Problem child Gremlins.ANYTHING.....Willeys,you name it!
> 
> ...


.....................Might also want to look into old International Scout , they came with a 304 , and a 394(?) V8's . They also came with 2-4 speed manual tranny's , A T18 and a T19 , both are tough , and have a granny low , the T19 is fully synchronized in all gears which means you don't have too come too a complete stop too go into granny low(1st gear) . 
...................The best thing you can do for an older jeep is too install a Ford 9 inch rear axle and a dana 44 heavy duty front axle off of a 1970's ford f250 for the front . Also , the Chevy SM 465 manual tranny is a big , tough 4 speed with a granny low , Unsynchronized ! I'd drop a chevy 350\SM 465 into a CJ6 and were it me . My 1986 CJ 6 had a 350\SM 465 and was conservatively rated at 450HP , .......it was Very quick ! 
....................The NP 435 (new process) 4speed is also an excellent 4 speed tranny and as strong as the T18 , T19 , and SM 465 , it came in both f250's and Dodges made in the late 1960s , up thru mid 1980's ! You can tell an NP 435 because it will have an Aluminumn Top cover where the shifter is attached . , fordy:cowboy:


----------



## Esteban29304 (Apr 29, 2003)

I retired from the Post Office & drove one of their Jeeps for many years. It had the 232" engine & was very reliable. When it was retired, it was the oldest one they had & still going. 1975 & retired in 2000. Do NOT confuse these with regular CJ5's though. They only had rear drive with positraction, but it would go well in the snow with chains. All the stopping & starting with my Jeep resulted in 4.5mpg .


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

mightybooboo said:


> Finally the price is right but not the drivetrain I want,what do you folks think of it,its close by
> http://inlandempire.craigslist.org/cto/2189970124.html
> 
> 
> What say you folks


Not hard to replace the 304 with a 258 when it wears out. Matter of fact kit to put a 4spd granny in front of a D20 not that expensive. I dont know how extreme Calif is on engines in older vehicles. I mean different engine of same vintage. I understand if you wanted to put some modern engine in, you would have to have all the electronics and smog stuff from donor vehicle and jump through hoops to be allowed to license it. But putting a pre-smog engine of different configuration in a pre-smog vehicle shouldnt be a problem legally?

Depends what you want to do with Jeep. Is it for off roading or ?? CJ5 just has too short wheelbase to be considered a regular use road vehicle, especially if you are wanting to take it at modern high speeds.

Ever consider the Jeepster/Commando type vehicle I mentioned. It was somewhere between CJ and Wagoneer. I've never driven or ridden in one, so cant tell you what they are like to live with. 

The early Scouts were light compact vehicle. Scout 800 or something like that from sixties, had a big slant 4cyl. Slower and not as good road manners as an early Bronco, but whole lot cheaper to buy used one at this point in time and better road manners than a CJ5. The later 70s era Scouts were much nicer to drive but also lot heavier. However the 70s era Scouts did offer range of engines. Still had the IHC big slant 4 as base engine. But they also offered the AMC 232/258 straight six as an option, as well as the usual IHC V8s. Were you paying attention, they offered the *AMC 258* as an option!!!! This is a good thing! And of course offered 4spd granny tranny as an option too. Oddly most 70s era Scouts came with 304/345 V8 and an automagic tranny. Thats the IHC 304, not the AMC 304. Can you say gas hog? The IHC V8 engines were truck engines really designed for medium duty trucks, and very heavy duty, but they did get pretty low mileage. They did offer a Nissan 6cyl diesel last two or three years they were made. Would that be smog exempt in Calif?


----------



## Curtis B (Aug 15, 2008)

The second one doesn't say what the trany or transfer case are. I would say the third (not knowing the 2nd's set up), but I would hate the three speed. I think you could easly find a swap for it in the future. The D20 and 44 rear are pretty stout, you definatly wouldn't have to worry about breaking them. For the record I would have to agree with HJ on the scout thing, they are almost indestructable, and way under appreciated.


----------



## crispin (Jun 30, 2010)

Can you tell me what broke on your current truck that will cost you $5,000 to repair?


----------



## alleyyooper (Apr 22, 2005)

Didn't like the traction locks on the short wheel based Broncos or Jeep CJ models whith there stiff suppention on the road. Hit a bump with one rear wheel and it would tend to pull you the way of the drive wheel still on the road.

 Al


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Good idea on the Scouts,will take a look.

The Jeep will drive up and down mtn,do snow and ice for a few miles,max at 55 MPH on a 5 mile stretch in flatlands,wont have to do freeways.Will drive on muddy dirt roads,nothing extreme,stuff My Dodge Diesel does and loves.

The engine swap no problem at all as long as vehicle is a 1975 frame or older,can put anything into it.Yup,smog is a MAJOR hassle,cant afford down time (or costs) while smog issues resolved,and old vehicle and smog means PROBLEMS,BTDT,NEVER going there again.Calif smog is TOUGH and standards always changing,getting TOUGHER as they are aging,that stinks!!!And after 5-7 years,I forget,its YEARLY! NO THANK YOU!And try finding smog parts,like my Dodge Motorhome,next to impossible and very pricey!I finally gave up on MH (which is their goal) and it was a super clean,nice rig.

If I had room to park another Diesel Truck,thats exactly were I would be going.

Its a Jetta tranny,2001,welcome to 5g.2500 tranny,plus converter and R&R labor,I cant do it myself.And at 135,000 miles,and 5-7500 bluebook value,and not a snow vehicle,and moving offgrid in future,it really is a losing proposition unfortunately.If I was to stay fair weather I might do an engine and tranny it as its super clean and very nice,its the GLX,but now seems situation has passed it by.Cant complain on Jetta though,It did almost daily trips from 1000 foot to 5000 foot and held up really well and reliably,I dont begrudge it a thing.

I can still do tranny/engine replacements on old vehicles,I cant on the new.No room,way they are built,older man,just cant do them now.

OH,and thanks for ALL the comments and brainstorming,keep em coming,anything you can think of I want to hear.


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

mightybooboo said:


> Good idea on the Scouts,will take a look.
> 
> The Jeep will drive up and down mtn,do snow and ice for a few miles,max at 55 MPH on a 5 mile stretch in flatlands,wont have to do freeways.
> 
> ...



......................The Cummins 4BTV is a perfect candidate too mount into a CJ7 . Some of the old bread type delivery trucks came with a 4 BTV turbo charged mated too a 4 speed Allison ! This would be an ideal match for a CJ7 as well . 30 MPG is a possibility if the 4BTV uses the old style injector pump pre computer ! , fordy


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

New diesel law here is exempt until 1998 models,1998 and newer are smog checked now.Which is why my truck is a 1997.

Another smog gem....they got the smog law passed under the provision that after 30 years a vehicle went exempt.Why I bought the 1977 motorhome,was only going to need 2 smog checks,2 years apart and go exempt.When the 30 year cutoff was actually reached they changed the law and 30 year old cutoff date no longer applies,then a few years later made it every year after 5-7 years,I forget.

So as it stands,NOW,its 1975 or earlier exempt.For now.Dirty so and so's!


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

fordy said:


> ......................The Cummins 4BTV is a perfect candidate too mount into a CJ7 . Some of the old bread type delivery trucks came with a 4 BTV turbo charged mated too a 4 speed Allison ! This would be an ideal match for a CJ7 as well . 30 MPG is a possibility if the 4BTV uses the old style injector pump pre computer ! , fordy


Yes that would be nice!

Remember though,I need this vehicle as of last week,we have to find one turn key ready to go. But that Cummins transplant,that is sweet indeed!


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Fordy,Look at that,a scout diesel,amazing!
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/cto/2234139716.html

You are right,Scout is certainly doable,only found one so far with 232 and a project,but If I can find a nice one,Yup,totally consider it,size is right too.

How about this,I could do that!
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/cto/2245798233.html


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

mightybooboo said:


> Fordy,Look at that,a scout diesel,amazing!
> http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/cto/2234139716.html
> 
> You are right,Scout is certainly doable,only found one so far with 232 and a project,but If I can find a nice one,Yup,totally consider it,size is right too.
> ...



................Very nice condition ! That said , a friend bought one used , lots of problems , expensice to work on and not Turbo charged so will be a dog in anything over about 3,000 MSL ! You can put a mild cam in the IH 304 and it will really run great , 304 IH engine 304 American motors engines are NOt the same animal ! , fordy:shrug:


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Well that Gold sr2 is interesting,very rare with only 500 made and quite collectible.If it has Powr-Lok limited slip differential axle(s) that sounds super,I need at least a limited slip to work for me on rear axle minimum.Also its within an inch of the jetta for length,width and wheelbase,so it would fit in my driveway.


----------



## maverickxxx (Jan 25, 2011)

ive got a 76 cj5 with the amc 304 its 3 speed its and v8 but gets better milage than anything i got now except with wide tires and narrow wheel base its all over rd. and i drove it once on highway and was tached out at 60-65. around town is great. and you can build an entire jeep from catlogs


----------



## sandc (Apr 26, 2010)

non selectable lockers are a pain in the snow. They kick in at teh worst moment and direct you towards whichever ditch is the worst. Lockers like the ox or ARB are better as you can pop them in only when needed.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Can say one thing....wanting one,and finding one,are VERY different things,Im getting nowhere fast!

Looks like Dana factory posi is also the way to go,have it in my truck and its a snow ice killer,its nice!


----------



## 65284 (Sep 17, 2003)

My first mail delivery vehicle was a a 77-78 era Scout, tough old truck. But, parts were a problem even back the mid 80s. I think IH must have bought parts from many different suppliers. 

Unless you had the build sheet for the vehicle, getting the correct part could be a headache. I found out the hard way that not all parts for a given year Scout were interchangeable, there may have been 2-3 different radiators, manifords, or almost anything else, for the same year and model.

That's the main reason I got rid of it and bought a Jeep.


----------



## PhilJohnson (Dec 24, 2006)

CJ's are fun toys but I wouldn't say they are too practical as far as a daily driver goes. Bad mileage, bucky ride, drafty. There used to be a lot of Scouts in my neck of the woods but Wisconsin road salt was not kind to them. In 1969 IH used the AMC 232 six as their base engine in the Scout. Being enclosed I would give a Scout the nod over a CJ. Bronco's are too tippy for my taste, Scouts have more stability. However if it were me I would be looking for a Jeep Cherokee, better mileage and highway manners over a CJ, still anvil simple, and short enough for the occasional off-highway exploration. I almost bought one for 50 bucks, 232 six, 3 speed manual. Plus I think they look better than a Scout or a Bronco.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

PhilJohnson said:


> CJ's are fun toys but I wouldn't say they are too practical as far as a daily driver goes. Bad mileage, bucky ride, drafty. There used to be a lot of Scouts in my neck of the woods but Wisconsin road salt was not kind to them. In 1969 IH used the AMC 232 six as their base engine in the Scout. Being enclosed I would give a Scout the nod over a CJ. Bronco's are too tippy for my taste, Scouts have more stability. However if it were me I would be looking for a Jeep Cherokee, better mileage and highway manners over a CJ, still anvil simple, and short enough for the occasional off-highway exploration. I almost bought one for 50 bucks, 232 six, 3 speed manual. Plus I think they look better than a Scout or a Bronco.


I like them, owned 3 over the years. However finding one with a six and a manual tranny is like the quest for the holly grail. Over the years I've seen exactly two with with a six and a three speed and one of those was a 1962 model in a junkyard with the short lived OHC six. Nearly all had V8 and a automatic and many came with quadratrack. Quadratrak not that bad until you had to go hunt up the special lube or replace a stretched chain in the transfer case. Not sure you can even get either chain or the lube anymore. It was sort of an AMC dealer only thing. Whether Chrysler-Jeep would still carry it for something that old, think pretty ifffy.

Cant find a six, the 360 V8 was best of the V8s ever offered in one. Anymore if I found one of these in great condition, either Cherokee Chief or the Grand Wagoneer, I'd look to put a Ford 300 six and a 4spd in it (or 5spd from a Ford 3/4 ton if I could manage it). No offense to AMC 258 which is a fine engine, but I like the 300 better.

Actually there were three Scouts, the early Scout 80, the Scout 800 you mention, and the Scout II in the 70s. ALL of them offered the IHC slant 4 cyl as the base engine. IHC sold an amazing number of the slant 4's considering how underpowered they were, but MOST Scouts where it was an option went out the door with a V8 and an automatic. Especially the Scout II, which was heavier vehicle much like the Cherokee Chief or Grand Wagoneer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Harvester_Scout

Edit: Two other bugaboos with the old Cherokee/Wagoneer is first the rear window. To open the rear door, you have to lower the rear window. Nearly ALL you find have a malfunctioning electric window. If you own one of these vehicles and ever see an old 60s model with manual roll up window, BUY THE WHOLE BACK DOOR, whatever it costs, and run like the wind. The other bugaboo was the 70s up models had the most convoluted gas filler tube you ever saw. They were a PAIN to get gas into if vehicle wasnt setting just right and if any part of emissions stuff wasnt working right. The 60s version was somewhat better, still crap design. My only real gripes. Thought overall it was a very nicely designed vehicle for that era, lot thought had gone into it. And it drove nice both on and off road. The quadratrak did sort of make the vehicle jitter and jutter if you were on glare ice. But probably be off in the ditch with most vehicles in those conditions anyway.


----------

