I really, really need to get off Facebook Marketplace. Buying cars is an addiction that, on Thursday, struck again in the form of a 1954 Willys CJ-3B — arguably the first “ugly Jeep” — that I simply could not resist even though I have way too many projects as-is. Here’s a look at my new flatfender Jeep, along with what it was like towing the thing in a 112 horsepower truck with a four-speed manual and insanely tall 2.73 gears.
OK, OK, so I didn’t really need the Willys I spotted whilst browsing Facebook Marketplace, but in my defense, I’ve wanted to own a CJ-3B for many years. It’s the first Jeep that the world pretty much unanimously decided was “ugly” (but charmingly so), with its hilariously tall grille meant to fill the space between the frame and the new-for-1953 high-hood needed to clear the new “F-Head” engine.
Honestly, the CJ-3B is a bit of an odd duck. We all are pretty familiar with the World War II Jeep; it and its CJ-2A and CJ-3A (all three shown below) successors have a lower hood than my 1954 CJ-3B because under their hoods were “L-Head” engines known famously as “Go-Devils.” The Go-Devil motor made only 60 horsepower, but thanks to a long stroke, it cranked out 105 lb-ft of torque.
Around 1950, the Go-Devil engine’s chief architect, Delmar “Barney” Roos, brought a new, more powerful motor into this world. Called the “Hurricane” or “F-Head,” the engine featured intake valves in the cylinder head, and exhaust valves in the engine block. The old Go-Devil had both sets of valves in the block. Here’s the L-head from the WW2 Jeep, as well as the CJ-2A and CJ-3A:
You can see that the cylinder head is really just a lid for the cylinders, as well as a place to thread in spark plugs:
And here you can see that the new Hurricane “F-Head” engine has only the exhaust valve in the block:
The intake valves (and still the spark plug holes) are in the head:
This basically allows air to enter and then exit the cylinders in a less tortuous path, meaning the engine “breathes” a bit better. I like to use the analogy of a syringe (but without a needle in it). If you pull the plunger back normally, the plunger (or piston) moves freely. But if you cover the nose of that syringe even part of the way, pulling that piston becomes difficult. Think of the new F-head as a less obstructed syringe-nose; it allows the piston to move with less obstruction, and the result is more power. 25 percent more, to be precise.
The actual figure only jumped from 60 to 75, but percentage-wise, that’s fantastic. If your V6 Toyota Camry were to get a 25 percent increase in power, the added horsepower would actually eclipse the total horsepower that the Willys F-head makes! (In other words, you’d gain more than 75 ponies). Torque also jumped from 105 to 114 lb-ft.
The new and revolutionary motor didn’t actually begin life in a civilian CJ; its first application in a convertible Jeep was in the new-for-1952 Willys M38A1, the very first “high-hood” “Universal Jeep”:
Some Jeep historian is going to have to explain this to me, because I don’t understand what happened next. Willys develops a brand new, more powerful engine and, to fit it, they design a beautiful vehicle with rounded fenders, a cool bulge in the center of the hood, and a less slab-sided profile. But instead of making this vehicle available to the public, they give the sexy Jeep to the military, and what do they build for civilians who want the new Hurricane motor? They take their CJ-3A and slap a tall hood on it, adapt a grille that reaches higher, raise the windshield, and make a few other adaptations that ultimately yield what many considered the ugliest Jeep of all time at that point:
I, actually, have always loved the wacky, lovable look of the The Last Flatfender, and I also love the vehicle’s historical significance. No, it wasn’t much of a wartime instrument like the World War II Jeep or even the M38A1 (the military version of the CJ-3B was the M606, but it wasn’t hugely popular), but in some ways the ‘3B brought Jeeps to more countries around the world than any Jeep up to that point. Obviously, the World War II Jeep created the brand and made its way all around the globe, but the CJ-3B was a true globetrotter that brought huge volumes of 4x4s to every corner of this planet.
Look at old Mahindras or Mitsubishi Jeeps, and you’ll see that those vehicles were able to build their names thanks to license-built CJ-3Bs. Motor Trend discusses this in its article about the first “ugly-Jeep”:
Licensed CJ-3Bs were built by Mitsubishi of Japan until 1998, and Mahindra of India was still building them in the ’00s, making the CJ-3B style the longest-running Jeep model of all time. The CJ-3B was a popular export-market Jeep, and militarized versions were exported as the M-606. You may think it’s ugly as sin, but the CJ-3B was a pivotal part of Jeep history.
Anyway, this one here was for sale near Pasadena for $7,000. I managed to get the price down to $5,900. It doesn’t run, it’s missing a rear bench, and the body appears to be a bit of a bastard-child of other Jeeps (the spare, for example, should be mounted of the rear quarter panel; that tailgate is likely from an M38 Willys — also, I’m fairly sure that’s a nazi jerry can on the back). But otherwise, the Jeep is in amazing shape. The body is rock-solid, the front seats and shifter and steering wheel all looks nice, and a number of the underbody components appear to have been refreshed recently based on their new paint.
You may notice in the photos above that there are four shifters. One is for the T90 three-speed manual transmission, one is for 2wd/4wd, one is for low range/high range, and the rear one pointing straight up and down? That’s a PTO drive.
The PTO can be used to power a number of implements mounted to either the front or the rear, but in my case, it’s just used to power a Sears winch mounted between the front bumper and grille.
To pick up the Jeep, I had to use my Jeep J10, since I have no other vehicle with towing capability. I snagged a U-Haul trailer from Van Nuys, then drove about 25 miles east on the “134” highway (which is incidentally the displacement on the Willys’ “F-Head” motor in cubic inches) until I reached the Jeep. Loading the Willys was easy, since it’s the seller’s driveway was a bit elevated above the street, meaning all I had to do was park the trailer on the street and extend the ramps onto the driveway, and then the path onto the U-Haul was largely flat. A bit of a shove with the seller’s help, and the relatively lightweight Willys was perched on the trailer, ready to head back west.
The drive from Pasadena to Van Nuys involves some long, steep grades. They’re not Rocky Mountain-esque, but they’re significant, and that’s a problem because the Jeep J10 can barely propel itself down the road, much less itself plus a 2,200 pound trailer and a 2,300 pound Jeep. Add a 300 pound axle in the bed and probably 200 pounds full of tires, and my Jeep was having to move 4,200 pounds worth of its own weight plus 4,500 pounds worth of stuff.
To give you an idea of why this is a problem: My Jeep J10 makes 112 horsepower. Yes, it also makes 210 lb-ft of torque, but it’s horsepower that gets you up a grade (though low-end torque lets you do it at reasonable RPMs). 112 horsepower moving 8,700 pounds is absurd; a tiny Hyundai Accent has more horsepower than that!
To go up a certain grade with a certain trailer at a certain speed in certain conditions requires a certain amount of horsepower. That horsepower figure is calculated via a process known in the industry as “gradeability.” It basically takes into account the steepness of the grade, the weight of the vehicle and trailer, and any friction working against the power of the engine — friction like aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance.
The friction factors are represented by what are called “coast down coefficients” or “ABC coefficients,” and to establish them for an unladen vehicle, you just drive the vehicle at a certain speed, and then you put the car in neutral and watch the velocity versus time curve. This will give you a good idea of how much friction acts against the car.
Anyway, the exact nature of the grade, the ABC coefficients of both the vehicle and trailer, environmental conditions, and more all go into establishing how much horsepower is required to ascend a grade with a certain load at a certain speed, and I can tell you straight up: Going up those Pasadena grades in my J10 at 70 mph with 4,500 pounds worth of junk requires more than 112 horsepower.
I know this because, in fourth gear, the Jeep wouldn’t accelerate at all, and if I did get the machine to 70 mph in fourth on a downgrade, the vehicle would decelerate once I hit an up-grade. The insanely tall 2.73 gearing meant that the engine was spinning really slowly when the vehicle was driving quickly, and at those low RPMs, the machine just wasn’t making nearly enough power to get the vehicle up the grade.
Downshifting into third brought the vehicle closer to its 112 HP @3200 peak at 70 mph, but even then there was just no way to sustain 70 mph.
I had to climb the grades at about 40 mph in third gear (which has a 1.46:1 gear ratio vs fourth gear’s 1:1). This required less horsepower than climbing the hill at 70mph, and luckily it brought the engine RPM close enough to the power peak; I did have to downshift into second (2.29:1) a few times when speed dropped below 30, and that wasn’t great. That AMC inline-six under the hood does not like to rev, and when it does, it sounds like an animal is dying. It screams!
I am a man with a lot of mechanical sympathy, so to hear that motor cry out for dear life was tough, especially since I’m fairly sure doing so exposed some kind of engine or transmission mount problem. Under heavy load, the Jeep made a weird grinding sound, almost as if the engine’s fan was rubbing against the shroud or something.
I held that shifter with a sweaty palm, feeling the vibrations through it, listening to that grinding noise append a screaming motor, and watching California traffic blast past me on the left as I slowly ascended the grade. I watched my temperature gauge like a hawk, but it held steady. I’d replaced my entire cooling system myself back in 2020, and I’d rebuilt the transmission and filled it with good, heavy-duty fluid. The engine oil I had changed a year prior, but I’d only driven about 1,000 miles. I knew the Jeep could take the abuse, but my god was it slow and violent. In some ways, that was a good thing, because the brakes are terrible and could really use a rebuild.
If you could only keep six of these, which would you keep?
-1985 Jeep J10
-1966 Ford Mustang
-1954 Willys CJ-3B
-1991 Jeep Wrangler YJ
-1994 Jeep ZJ 5spd
-1958 Nash Metropolitan
-2011 Nissan Leaf
-1942 WW2 Jeep (w/dead motor)
-2021 BMW i3S Galvanic Gold
-2014 BMW i3— David Tracy (@davidntracy) June 12, 2024
In the end, it was hot and stressful, but the ol’ machine dragged its grandpa from Pasadena to Van Nuys, where it now sits. Once I get it running, I’ll park it behind my BMW i3S in my Santa Monica garage. None of my other vehicles fit, so this CJ will give me a chance to have a fun weekend cruiser along with my excellent commuter.
You know, the place where you rented the trailer would have also rented you a truck that would have been more capable of pulling said trailer.
I’ve done more than enough sketchy towing to learn that spending the extra money on the rental truck is well worth it for avoiding the stress on your truck and on your soul.
That goes against his code built into the core. Cheap is the primary code there.
Way too cheap for that!
Not if you blew the motor or tranny in the J10 while overtaxing it.
You must not be aware of how difficult it is to kill a Jeep straight six. If it’s well maintained, you could beat the snot out of it for tens of thousands of miles without actually damaging it.
I see it as more “content for the website/gram!” type of recklessness than cheapness to a fault.
I don’t think so. For all his time as a writer and human being, he has shown this.
Yeah but where’s the thrill in that?
You know, the place where you rented the trailer would have also rented you a truck that would have been more capable of pulling said trailer.
I’ve done more than enough sketchy towing to learn that spending the extra money on the rental truck is well worth it for avoiding the stress on your truck and on your soul.
That goes against his code built into the core. Cheap is the primary code there.
Way too cheap for that!
Not if you blew the motor or tranny in the J10 while overtaxing it.
You must not be aware of how difficult it is to kill a Jeep straight six. If it’s well maintained, you could beat the snot out of it for tens of thousands of miles without actually damaging it.
I see it as more “content for the website/gram!” type of recklessness than cheapness to a fault.
I don’t think so. For all his time as a writer and human being, he has shown this.
Yeah but where’s the thrill in that?
Congratulations David! I’m surprised and not surprised at the same time. Another Jeep- awesome! Maybe the real DT is back? I enjoy reading about these adventures anyway
Oh, I never left!
Congratulations David! I’m surprised and not surprised at the same time. Another Jeep- awesome! Maybe the real DT is back? I enjoy reading about these adventures anyway
Oh, I never left!
I’ve towed loads like that with my 1990 Comanche. Obviously it has a lot more power with 181 hp out of the past of the Renix fuel injected 4.0L engines. I’ve more than happily let it sit somewhere around 4000rpm in 3rd or 2nd gear. Of course you are also very bogged down by that rear end ratio, the Comanche has the stock manual transmission equipped 3.07 gears which are still not amazing for towing.
Sometimes it is worth just taking the side roads and leave the highways for the modern powerful vehicles.
Taking back roads is great, and I love to, but it is simply not possible in a lot of circumstances.
I’ve towed loads like that with my 1990 Comanche. Obviously it has a lot more power with 181 hp out of the past of the Renix fuel injected 4.0L engines. I’ve more than happily let it sit somewhere around 4000rpm in 3rd or 2nd gear. Of course you are also very bogged down by that rear end ratio, the Comanche has the stock manual transmission equipped 3.07 gears which are still not amazing for towing.
Sometimes it is worth just taking the side roads and leave the highways for the modern powerful vehicles.
Taking back roads is great, and I love to, but it is simply not possible in a lot of circumstances.
I’m so happy this popped up, I lost track of Mr. Tracy and his Jeep tales after he left that other site.
Looks like things are going well, not pulling postal Jeeps out of the junk yard anymore!
That’s right! Clean machines!
I warned you before you moved that clean California cars would be dangerous for you.
‘Mint’ condition vehicles are everywhere.
I’m so happy this popped up, I lost track of Mr. Tracy and his Jeep tales after he left that other site.
Looks like things are going well, not pulling postal Jeeps out of the junk yard anymore!
That’s right! Clean machines!
I warned you before you moved that clean California cars would be dangerous for you.
‘Mint’ condition vehicles are everywhere.
Get rid of both BMW i3s, the Leaf, the Nash, and this “new” ugly old Jeep — they are easily the least interesting of the lot. Keep all the others and make them better. I’ve learned that focus on quality is more important than having a bunch of boring or broken things.
Definitely not ditching my beloved i3s or this incredible ‘3B, but the Nash and Leaf are oudahere!
I thought the Leaf was going to power the army jeep? What’s the plan with the army jeep then?
Oudahere unless I can find shop space for an EV conversion. I can’t run a fairly large car publication AND do an EV conversion by myself. I’ve now realized that.
This is the way.
Spoken like someone who has never driven an i3s…it’s a great car and not just DT enthusiasm.
I have driven an i3, it was boring, but of course this is just my subjective opinion. David did explicitly ask “which would you keep?”, so it’s not inappropriate to respond on which I would keep. Maybe it’s nicer if I instead say “it’s not for me”…? That’s fine too.
I guess the broader context is there have been literally dozens of articles about a BMW i3 in the last two years (see https://www.theautopian.com/?s=i3 ), and personally I very much miss reading about some of his more exciting projects and roadtrips featuring a wider variety of vehicles on this site.
I get it, but I don’t buy cars solely based on content. I buy cars I love!
As you should. All good. Like I said, just one reader’s opinion.
And I’m glad you took the time out of your day to share it. Thank you!
Get rid of both BMW i3s, the Leaf, the Nash, and this “new” ugly old Jeep — they are easily the least interesting of the lot. Keep all the others and make them better. I’ve learned that focus on quality is more important than having a bunch of boring or broken things.
Definitely not ditching my beloved i3s or this incredible ‘3B, but the Nash and Leaf are oudahere!
I thought the Leaf was going to power the army jeep? What’s the plan with the army jeep then?
Oudahere unless I can find shop space for an EV conversion. I can’t run a fairly large car publication AND do an EV conversion by myself. I’ve now realized that.
This is the way.
Spoken like someone who has never driven an i3s…it’s a great car and not just DT enthusiasm.
I have driven an i3, it was boring, but of course this is just my subjective opinion. David did explicitly ask “which would you keep?”, so it’s not inappropriate to respond on which I would keep. Maybe it’s nicer if I instead say “it’s not for me”…? That’s fine too.
I guess the broader context is there have been literally dozens of articles about a BMW i3 in the last two years (see https://www.theautopian.com/?s=i3 ), and personally I very much miss reading about some of his more exciting projects and roadtrips featuring a wider variety of vehicles on this site.
I get it, but I don’t buy cars solely based on content. I buy cars I love!
As you should. All good. Like I said, just one reader’s opinion.
And I’m glad you took the time out of your day to share it. Thank you!
Man is that your current fleet? I remember how proud we were of you when you got the Michigan fleet down to manageable numbers. But old habits die hard as I know!
Man is that your current fleet? I remember how proud we were of you when you got the Michigan fleet down to manageable numbers. But old habits die hard as I know!
If that jerry can is genuine you can probably sell it for enough to buy some tires.
That J10 really needs more power and lower gears. My 2002 F150 managed 60 on the hills with a 6000lb trailer. That was flooring it and getting 8 mpg but I also have a V8
If that jerry can is genuine you can probably sell it for enough to buy some tires.
That J10 really needs more power and lower gears. My 2002 F150 managed 60 on the hills with a 6000lb trailer. That was flooring it and getting 8 mpg but I also have a V8
2.72 gearing. Wow that’s tall. Pretty sure if you dyno’d that you would find you were only getting double digit power to the wheels, and that is just rough.
I feel your pain. At my elevation and through the hugely power sapping drivetrain I am getting somewhere between 130-140 HP to the wheels for my 5000+ Cruiser with a factory 212 HP (probably closer to 200 with accessories).
I remember taking a camping trip to Yellowstone near GCW (probably between 10,500 and 11,000 pounds) and yeah, not quick and I have 4.56 gears. I’ve done similar trips up over 9000 foot passes and it gets me there, but sometimes I’m down to 30-35 mph. This is the way for us low power fellas. Sit back, go slow, enjoy the drive.
On an unrelated note, can I make a recommendation? No more car buying until you finish some of the projects you already have on your plate. We want to see that ZJ holy grail live and wheel, and the J10 could be such a cool project.
The ZJ is my favorite, and yes, I too want to see it wheel!
The J10 is largely completed. Rebuilt transmission and carb, runs and drives like a champ. But yeah, you’re right!
2.72 gearing. Wow that’s tall. Pretty sure if you dyno’d that you would find you were only getting double digit power to the wheels, and that is just rough.
I feel your pain. At my elevation and through the hugely power sapping drivetrain I am getting somewhere between 130-140 HP to the wheels for my 5000+ Cruiser with a factory 212 HP (probably closer to 200 with accessories).
I remember taking a camping trip to Yellowstone near GCW (probably between 10,500 and 11,000 pounds) and yeah, not quick and I have 4.56 gears. I’ve done similar trips up over 9000 foot passes and it gets me there, but sometimes I’m down to 30-35 mph. This is the way for us low power fellas. Sit back, go slow, enjoy the drive.
On an unrelated note, can I make a recommendation? No more car buying until you finish some of the projects you already have on your plate. We want to see that ZJ holy grail live and wheel, and the J10 could be such a cool project.
The ZJ is my favorite, and yes, I too want to see it wheel!
The J10 is largely completed. Rebuilt transmission and carb, runs and drives like a champ. But yeah, you’re right!
What to keep? You get to keep 2 of the 5 Jeeps. We know you’re keeping the ZJ, so you get 1 of the remaining 4. Then, you get 1 BMW. The Leaf goes, obviously. This lets you keep the Mustang and the Nash, and you take your money from selling the other 5 and buy a truck that actually works well for doing truck stuff in 2024.
What to keep? You get to keep 2 of the 5 Jeeps. We know you’re keeping the ZJ, so you get 1 of the remaining 4. Then, you get 1 BMW. The Leaf goes, obviously. This lets you keep the Mustang and the Nash, and you take your money from selling the other 5 and buy a truck that actually works well for doing truck stuff in 2024.
Any reason to not put different gears on he axles?
That’s what I was wondering. I’d gamble that 3:55s would be a great overall ratio.
With a non-overdrive 4 speed, 29″ tires, and a very low rpm engine, a 3.55 gearing would result in an extremely low cruising speed. Impractically low for an LA freeway. In fact, a 2.73 is pretty much the only way to go 70mph on a vehicle like this.
3.54 would give you a speed of 73 at 3000 rpm. Which would be about perfect. 2.73 gears make his granny low transmission a normal 3 speed with an overdrive. Probably get better gas mileage, too, since you aren’t having to floor it just to move.
I think you are underestimating how loud and hot a Jeep 258 runs at a sustained 3000rpm. I wasn’t kidding when I said low rpm engine.
My 1995 f150 300ci, with an overdrive 5 speed and 3.55 gears, could only cruise at 65mph MAX because engine speeds above 2200rpm are simply unsustainable and inefficient on engines like these. 302 powered f150s with the same gearing are capable of 75+mph simply because of the higher powerband of the engine.
The Jeep/AMC six revs a little better than the Ford, but you don’t want to cruise above 2500ish. And that’s a maximum, it’s most happy and efficient at 2000-2200rpm. Aka where it is right now, the way it’s geared.
I agree. They HATE revving.
Isn’t average la freeway speed about 15 mph? I kid, but it sounds like a transmission upgrade along with regearing is the right answer.
I had a 1988 Dodge Dakota 4×4 with the 3.9 V-6 which was rated at 125 hp and 195 lb-ft or Torque. It had the A500 4 speed automatic (3 and overdrive) and 4:10 gears. It towed fine for me, but that was Florida.
It’ll be 31s. But yeah, I’m keeping the 2.73, and solving the problem with a 4.0.
190 horsepower baby!
Any reason to not put different gears on he axles?
That’s what I was wondering. I’d gamble that 3:55s would be a great overall ratio.
With a non-overdrive 4 speed, 29″ tires, and a very low rpm engine, a 3.55 gearing would result in an extremely low cruising speed. Impractically low for an LA freeway. In fact, a 2.73 is pretty much the only way to go 70mph on a vehicle like this.
3.54 would give you a speed of 73 at 3000 rpm. Which would be about perfect. 2.73 gears make his granny low transmission a normal 3 speed with an overdrive. Probably get better gas mileage, too, since you aren’t having to floor it just to move.
I think you are underestimating how loud and hot a Jeep 258 runs at a sustained 3000rpm. I wasn’t kidding when I said low rpm engine.
My 1995 f150 300ci, with an overdrive 5 speed and 3.55 gears, could only cruise at 65mph MAX because engine speeds above 2200rpm are simply unsustainable and inefficient on engines like these. 302 powered f150s with the same gearing are capable of 75+mph simply because of the higher powerband of the engine.
The Jeep/AMC six revs a little better than the Ford, but you don’t want to cruise above 2500ish. And that’s a maximum, it’s most happy and efficient at 2000-2200rpm. Aka where it is right now, the way it’s geared.
I agree. They HATE revving.
Isn’t average la freeway speed about 15 mph? I kid, but it sounds like a transmission upgrade along with regearing is the right answer.
I had a 1988 Dodge Dakota 4×4 with the 3.9 V-6 which was rated at 125 hp and 195 lb-ft or Torque. It had the A500 4 speed automatic (3 and overdrive) and 4:10 gears. It towed fine for me, but that was Florida.
It’ll be 31s. But yeah, I’m keeping the 2.73, and solving the problem with a 4.0.
190 horsepower baby!
I don’t generally hear good things about Edelbrock heads, but swapping theirs onto the J10 could both make for some good content and potentially get you a decent horsepower bump. Maybe they’d even give you one free.
Some people hot rod Jeep 258s, and in my opinion it is usually quite pointless. Motortrend had an old article about doing an upgraded valve job, full rebuild, cam swap, and Holley EFI upgrade on a 258 just to develop a screaming 170hp. If they had bought a 1991+ 4.0 from a junkyard for $500, which is a fairly simple swap, they would have had 190hp right out of the box.
Anyways, what a lot of folks do is put the head from a 4.0 on the older 258 engine, resulting in a 4.2L engine with a rather well flowing head, and the potential for 200+ HP.
I don’t generally hear good things about Edelbrock heads, but swapping theirs onto the J10 could both make for some good content and potentially get you a decent horsepower bump. Maybe they’d even give you one free.
Some people hot rod Jeep 258s, and in my opinion it is usually quite pointless. Motortrend had an old article about doing an upgraded valve job, full rebuild, cam swap, and Holley EFI upgrade on a 258 just to develop a screaming 170hp. If they had bought a 1991+ 4.0 from a junkyard for $500, which is a fairly simple swap, they would have had 190hp right out of the box.
Anyways, what a lot of folks do is put the head from a 4.0 on the older 258 engine, resulting in a 4.2L engine with a rather well flowing head, and the potential for 200+ HP.
I bet a 401 would have pulled that trailer right up the mountain.
I bet a 401 would have pulled that trailer right up the mountain.
We pulled a 2000lb TR6 filled with tools and parts on a 2000lb trailer across America with a 4 cylinder Mazda b2300 5-speed. As long as you have trailer brakes and aren’t going over mountains, tow ratings are somewhat meaningless.
https://imgur.com/gallery/mazda-b2300-tows-triumph-tr6-CQlJDm9
My dad and I towed a 1960 Chevy El Camino from Lubbock, TX to Oklahoma City using a 1980 Ford Pinto with a 2.3 4 cylinder and a 4-speed.