Was behind an xj coming home from work today an it had the 4.0 badge an then another with 4.0 high output what's the differences??

 

just what they called it for different years.

After the renix era of XJs they redesigned the head to put out more power, hence, "high output."

 

The difference is like 5 hp and no extra torque. Huzzah for cheesy ad campaigns!

 

87 Renix- 173HP/220TQ
88-90 Renix-177HP/224TQ
91-99 HO- 190HP/225TQ
2000+ HO- 193HP-231TQ

It is worth noting that the Renix made both of those at lower RPMs than the HO. Also worth noting the HO was more efficient and gained a couple MPGs.

some other XJ motors-
2.8 V6- 115HP/145 TQ
2.5 turbo diesel- 114HP/221 TQ
2.5L I4(Renix era)- 121HP/141 TQ
2.5L I4 (Chrysler)- 130HP/149 TQ

 

Thank you guys for the info an I didn't know these came with anything other than a straight 6 that's pretty cool did they release the turbo diesel version in the us??

 

85-87 a 2.1L turbo diesel was released in North America. (didn't put it on my list) I'm not sure if the 2.5L ever was but I don't think so.

 

Interesting that the 2.8l v6 makes less power than the 2.5l 4 bangers

 

Probably why it was hated so much haha.

 

Here ya go.

HO myth buster


Renix in 90 made 182 HP. HO in 91 made 190 HP. That's 8 HP difference.

HO only made more HP than Renix at higher RPMs and not a bit more torque. HO had 58 mm throttle body versus a 52 mm throttle body on a Renix and also had a better design header. See where I'm going with this?

The whole 8HP was not mostly from the head, but from the bigger TB and better exhaust manifold.

Put a 60mm TB from www.strokedjeep.com on your present head, eliminate the "crush" in your headpipe with proper re-routing, and go for it.

HO stands for Highly Overrated.
__________________

 

Ive had a couple of both and definitely prefer the HO. Part of that Is I hate the vacuum system but the HOs have always felt quicker. Cruiser obviously likes the Renix era

Heres my question that ive never really been able to find an answer too.... Are those RWHP or straight off the engine?

Just curious as my stroker made 272HP/334TQ on an engine dyno with stock components but I'm sure the RWHP even with all the aftermarket I did is much less.

 

Nvm... I found my answer- lol Straight off the engine is significantly less than 190.

https://www.cherokeeforum.com/f67/dyno-results-178788/

 

Chrysler called it the "High Output" just so they could put a shiny new badge on the back of the tailgate and use it as a marketing ploy. Same engine, small mods to breathing system.

 

Egotistical Chrysler engineers insisting on making some change so they could act like they improved it. Yep.

 

The 1992 Mustang with the 302 was rated at 205 horsepower. So an inline six putting out 190 in 1992 was pretty darn good.

 

Agree. Had a 95 GTS before I took over the 97 XJ. Very similar feel performance wise stock and part of the reason it was an easy transition for me.