mentalbreakdown00

Most machine shops around my part want $600 plus to completely go through a 6 banger or par of V8 heads. So while I was building an engine and I had th option of an aluminum head that performs better for maybe $1G, I would spring for it

Jeepjunky

^^same, but i would only pay that if it was a lot better than stock, bigger valves with springs for $1200-1400, i would pay it

Hoooper

edelbrock offers v8 chevy aluminum heads for $500. Now, I understand that the Jeep 4.0L market <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< the v8 chevy market, but I would think that $700 would not be out of their range based on that number.

rudboy11

I think everyone would be interested. But it is a matter of "bang for the buck." As for the Hesco head, I don't really see the practicality of dropping in a $2,000 head, when I didn't even pay that much for the XJ in the first place. I also think that a lot of people just automatically do not give a head upgrade anything thought because of the price. I would be interested in any upgrade that's result was near even with price. But at 2k, it'd have to be amazing!

I'm interested in what the price of the head you're thinking about making would be??

DeftwillP

Edelbrock sells Chevy heads for that cheap because they sell a ton of them and the R&D costs have long since been recovered. Hesco is still probably recouping R&D costs for their jeep head. Not to say that it justifies a 2 grand price tag, but it is what it is. There's also a certain element of supply/demand embedded in that price as well I'm sure.

Jallen9

i'm planning on an aluminum head one of these days, but the $2k price tag is a lot. I know these things aren't cheap, but i am interested for sure, especially if it came as a heads and cam kit, or maybe h/c designed for a stroker or something like that.

N20jeep

The reason I dont see another company building an aluminum head in the 600 to 1000 range is that even though there may be alot of interest and alot of people saying "id buy it" the reality is most of those people will not buy it.

SW-OK-XJ

$1000 installed w Greater than 25HP gain, I'd be in

Jallen9

what I don't understand is why a single head is $2000, while you can get a head/cam set for a little bit for than that for an LS1. I mean, the LSx market is huge, bigger than the jeep 4.0L market, but the jeep market is still plenty big. the jeep 4.0 is a nearly-legendary engine. plenty of people out there are modding them. And not just the XJ crowd - which tends to be on the cheap side (hey, not an insult, most xj'ers just seem to try and get as much as they can out of their XJ and spend very little money, which is respectable), but the wrangler side. there are far more wranglers on the road than f-bodies. More 4.0's than LSx/vortecs? i dunno. probably close. maybe it's just because the LSx crowd is full of sports car people, who spend more money on their engine than the off road crowd does. We have to split our funds between expensive suspension stuff and engines, and some don't really care about making gobs of power.

N20jeep

The demand for aluminum 4.0 heads is to small to pay for the r&d and still make money witha low selling price

07Negative

They do killer work. I'll be dropping the $5K on one of their stroker motors when my motor goes.

jblack'00xj

Ditto for the cheaper than Hesco part.

Simply if it can out perform and is less expensive I bet money that it will rapidly grow in interest. The 4.0L is a widely used platform, with a cost effective alum. head everyone would be crazy not to jump on it. Noones open to spendind 1-2k on possible mild power gains when that kind of money can be put toward a more practical and useful upgrade.

my .02 cents

rudboy11

^^^exactly!

aaronsxj

Aluminum. Heads are junk be better off port polish bore and stroke cast iron oh and the can handle overheating. And higher. Pressure

5-90

I was part of the discussion that likely resulted in the Patriot/HESCO aluminum 6-242 head - it was on the old Yahoo! Strokers group (groups.yahoo.com/group/strokers) ca. FEB2002.

I'd compiled the information and discussion, and presented it to Russ Flagle at Indy Cylinder Heads later that year (I was visiting family at the time, in Lafayette, IN. About an hour away.)

Things I'd change from the original design (although I don't have as much data on the actual head as I'd like):

- Have iron as an option. Aluminum heads are nice, but iron heads have greater overall reliability. (Yes, you can run higher compression with aluminum, due to greater heat transfer. What most people don't realise is that you must run slightly increased compression to get similar performance - for that very reason.)
- Replaceable valve seats.
- Replaceable bronze valve stem guides.

I may have a couple of other "wishlist" points, but I don't recall them at this hour (0445PDT.)

For "clean sheet" work, let's throw in the following:
- Allow for solenoid-driven valves, as being refined by Robert Bosch AG
- Allow for DFI (Direct Fuel Injection,) which Bosch AG is also working on.

The larger pushrod bores (to allow tappet replacement without removing the head) was done, the sealing rail for the valve cover was raised (eliminating the need for a spacer to run rollerised rocker arms,) and I think the combustion chamber is machined on all heads from a given blank (which is also a good idea - this allows for radiusing and blending, which reduces heat risers and reduces preignition potential.) The individually-machined combustion chambers also make it easier to select compression ratio (after knowing everything else) and allow for conversion to a "big valve" head (as in the SBChevvy 2.02/1.60 setup. A pentroof setup, with proper piston design, will allow for even larger valves and greater airflow.)

I'd prefer to stay away from overhead cam and multivalve setups, simply because I want to keep moving parts to a minimum. (Ideally, I'd even consider a Coates Spherical Rotary Valve head to be superior to even a pentroof poppet valve head, q.v.) However, even a CSRV head would require modifications to the timing setup, but I think it would be a bit simpler than going with an OHC setup (SOHC or DOHC,) and the use of timing belts should be avoided in all cases where long-term reliability is desired. Belts are for accessories and pants.

As long as I'm looking at a clean sheet of C-size, let's give some attention to the engine block:

- Allow for an electrically-driven water pump
- Relocate the alternator (in all cases) to the top of the engine bay. Allow provision for multiple alternators, just in case.
- Reconfigure to allow use of a COTS roller-foot tappet setup (requires issuance of camshaft blanks) or to run cam-in-block timing or idler-based timing to the cylinder head (for CSRV or OHC, if the latter is desired.)

How's that? Feel free to ask if you want more ideas...