My Kinda Jeep
CF Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,968
Likes: 0
From: Salt Lake City, UT
Year: 2000
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L
coming in late I know... but why not do a direct port system and have a nozzle for each cylinder, making it have equal amounts of n20 for each cylinder. you already have the manifold off just drill and tap the runners for nozzles. It will also help with puddling in the intake and blowing off the manifold lol
also just to finish off the N20-SC-Turbo vs MPG topic. the turbo wins hands down. then n20 and then SC. the turbo uses waste to create power, N20 you have to add fuel/nitrogen for power, Super charge you waste fuel and power to create power making it the lest efficient. just food for thought...
but either way its a cool concept, but i am interested to see how much another throttle body really helps...
also just to finish off the N20-SC-Turbo vs MPG topic. the turbo wins hands down. then n20 and then SC. the turbo uses waste to create power, N20 you have to add fuel/nitrogen for power, Super charge you waste fuel and power to create power making it the lest efficient. just food for thought...
but either way its a cool concept, but i am interested to see how much another throttle body really helps...
Thread Starter
CF Veteran

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,000
Likes: 3
From: West By God Virginia
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee (XJ)
Engine: 99 4.0
[QUOTE=Gorillaxj;but why not do a direct port system and have a nozzle for each cylinder, making it have equal amounts of n20 for each cylinder.
also just to finish off the N20-SC-Turbo vs MPG topic. [/QUOTE]
1st I havent decided what Im going to do n20 wise, It will probably be a very small shot so like 6 seperate 10hp jets? sure but will it be that much better than a single 75? prolly not worth it.
and it was never a sc vs tc vs n20 vs MPG it was VS $
the TC lost early due to all new manifolds needing to be made along with a turbo, wastegates, and air cooling. plus I TCs never show a net gain in MPGs in the 4.0 application. at least none that I have seen documented. yes Im a turbo guy, and its always my first choice, but for a cheap DD jeep, I dont think it fits the bill
so it was SC vs N20 vs $ the mpgs only come in due to their direct effect on money.
the SC would be much cheaper than a TC build in this case, I can pick up a m90 SC and not have much else in over head. along with being simpler in the engine bay and cooler underhood. the n20 wins over all because I MAY be able to pull it off without a full aftermarket tuning system and nets higher MPGs and will not be as hard on my internals keeping overall cost much lower. and even if I have to get a tuning system I dont have to get it all at once. right now I can run the jeep NA with no problems, then put the n20 on when money allows.
also just to finish off the N20-SC-Turbo vs MPG topic. [/QUOTE]
1st I havent decided what Im going to do n20 wise, It will probably be a very small shot so like 6 seperate 10hp jets? sure but will it be that much better than a single 75? prolly not worth it.
and it was never a sc vs tc vs n20 vs MPG it was VS $
the TC lost early due to all new manifolds needing to be made along with a turbo, wastegates, and air cooling. plus I TCs never show a net gain in MPGs in the 4.0 application. at least none that I have seen documented. yes Im a turbo guy, and its always my first choice, but for a cheap DD jeep, I dont think it fits the bill
so it was SC vs N20 vs $ the mpgs only come in due to their direct effect on money.
the SC would be much cheaper than a TC build in this case, I can pick up a m90 SC and not have much else in over head. along with being simpler in the engine bay and cooler underhood. the n20 wins over all because I MAY be able to pull it off without a full aftermarket tuning system and nets higher MPGs and will not be as hard on my internals keeping overall cost much lower. and even if I have to get a tuning system I dont have to get it all at once. right now I can run the jeep NA with no problems, then put the n20 on when money allows.
Thread Starter
CF Veteran

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,000
Likes: 3
From: West By God Virginia
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee (XJ)
Engine: 99 4.0
they actually are not. they are being kept stock to help try and maintain some streetability. the 5 stock TBs will out flow the head anyway. they are not the bottle neck.
Honorary Moderator
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 8,135
Likes: 16
From: Gilbert AZ/Las Cruces NM
Year: 1996
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 upgraded
What do you have planned for bracing now that you removed all of the support from the intake and added more weight to the end of it
Thread Starter
CF Veteran

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,000
Likes: 3
From: West By God Virginia
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee (XJ)
Engine: 99 4.0
6 1/4 inch thick cast aluminum tubes.
the intake should be plenty strong. it was ran before with the webbing, and by romoving the webbing I just removed some weight. some sheet aluminum isnt all that heavy and it will be fine. i have seen 4.0s lifted by the intake mani.
the intake should be plenty strong. it was ran before with the webbing, and by romoving the webbing I just removed some weight. some sheet aluminum isnt all that heavy and it will be fine. i have seen 4.0s lifted by the intake mani.
Thread Starter
CF Veteran

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,000
Likes: 3
From: West By God Virginia
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee (XJ)
Engine: 99 4.0
Finally got the parts jeep out!!! they are both being pulled to a local shop tomorrow and the swap will begin!
any advice/info on 242vs231? I have both a higher mile 231 and a lower mile 242. IDK which to use.
any advice/info on 242vs231? I have both a higher mile 231 and a lower mile 242. IDK which to use.


