CF Veteran
I'm sorry but whats the point of sup-ing up a 50 yr old motor design with aluminum heads and custom timing things? If someone was serious about getting major performance out of their jeep then why spend $$$ on a 4.0 when you can swap in v8. I just dont see the point of spending so much money on performance when the entire design of the engine is dated and no long in use (for a good reason).
Member
You say that until you go and actually transplant a new motor and tranny. Things start to get complicated & the parts list starts to grow. For those looking for mild to moderate gains stroking and building what they already have is a lot more cost effective. And some people just enjoy the return of building a motor themselves
MJ>XJ
Quote:
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...
Havent seen u here in a while boss... Glad to see your still around spittin out knowledge!Originally Posted by 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...
Member
Quote:
because a whole lot of people still like and still use the 4.0Originally Posted by TheJerm
I'm sorry but whats the point of sup-ing up a 50 yr old motor design with aluminum heads and custom timing things? If someone was serious about getting major performance out of their jeep then why spend $$$ on a 4.0 when you can swap in v8. I just dont see the point of spending so much money on performance when the entire design of the engine is dated and no long in use (for a good reason).
CF Veteran
Quote:
I have a v8 in my other car to build up. What's the fun in just throwing a v8 in when you can build power on the original platform. Anyone can throw a bigger engine in. Imo trying to get power outta the one you got is more fun and more interesting. Popping the hood to see a 350- wow popping the hood the see a 550hp turbo charged stroker 4.0- HOLY ****!!!!Originally Posted by TheJerm
I'm sorry but whats the point of sup-ing up a 50 yr old motor design with aluminum heads and custom timing things? If someone was serious about getting major performance out of their jeep then why spend $$$ on a 4.0 when you can swap in v8. I just dont see the point of spending so much money on performance when the entire design of the engine is dated and no long in use (for a good reason).
CF Veteran
Quote:
I get daily digests from the group when there's activity, but most of it has moved over to www.jeepstrokers.com, and I check in there at least once a day. The old Yahoo! mailing list has seriously declined as a result.Originally Posted by huntingman2706217
Havent seen u here in a while boss... Glad to see your still around spittin out knowledge!
Places you can find me:
- www.naxja.org
- www.jeepforum.com
- www.cherokeeforum.com
- www.cherokeetalk.com
- www.jeepstrokers.com
- www.cherokeetech.com
- www.jeepsunlimited.com (just got started back up there...)
All under the moniker "5-90". I'm not very active on Pirates of the Rubicon, but some of my posts can be found there as well. I also run:
groups.yahoo.com/group/RENIXPower (a RENIX "brain trust," if you will)
groups.yahoo.com/group/JeepPower (a "steering committee" for my books. If I'm writing them for you, I want to know what you'd like to read in them...)
Both of those under my proper name.
I also need to get more active on Bulltear (AMC fori,) IFSJA, and NAGCA - I'll work those into the rotation if and when (got a fair bit going on. I do believe I'm registered on all of them - also under "5-90." Easier on me that way.)
Don't worry - I plan to be around helping people as long as booze and breath flow through my body!
CF Veteran
Quote:
"Because I can."Originally Posted by TheJerm
I'm sorry but whats the point of sup-ing up a 50 yr old motor design with aluminum heads and custom timing things? If someone was serious about getting major performance out of their jeep then why spend $$$ on a 4.0 when you can swap in v8. I just dont see the point of spending so much money on performance when the entire design of the engine is dated and no long in use (for a good reason).
"Because it's there."
Take your pick. Also, it should be borne in mind that anything that has been designed by man can be improved by man - and some of us task ourselves with finding those improvements.
Swapping in a V8 has been done to death - both GM (small block and big block) and Ford (the 302 is most common.) I'd like to see something like the LA488 V10 swapped in - but who wants to tackle that?
And, some of us are purists - we want to improve the original equipment, not alter the powertrain wholesale (else I'd do something like drop in a GM 6.0L V8 and 6L80E slushbox with associated transfer case.)
What can be done? That's what we're trying to find out.
Besides, look how much is done to the Small Block Chevrolet and the Ford Windsor V8 - both of those designs are older than the AMC "Modern Era" six...
CF Veteran
Quote:
"Because I can."
"Because it's there."
Take your pick. Also, it should be borne in mind that anything that has been designed by man can be improved by man - and some of us task ourselves with finding those improvements.
Swapping in a V8 has been done to death - both GM (small block and big block) and Ford (the 302 is most common.) I'd like to see something like the LA488 V10 swapped in - but who wants to tackle that?
And, some of us are purists - we want to improve the original equipment, not alter the powertrain wholesale (else I'd do something like drop in a GM 6.0L V8 and 6L80E slushbox with associated transfer case.)
What can be done? That's what we're trying to find out.
Besides, look how much is done to the Small Block Chevrolet and the Ford Windsor V8 - both of those designs are older than the AMC "Modern Era" six...
X2 purist. I like to keep everything working and the same engine and trans God intended with this baby. The 35 can go cause its crap but the 4.0 and aw4 are works of art.Originally Posted by 5-90
"Because I can."
"Because it's there."
Take your pick. Also, it should be borne in mind that anything that has been designed by man can be improved by man - and some of us task ourselves with finding those improvements.
Swapping in a V8 has been done to death - both GM (small block and big block) and Ford (the 302 is most common.) I'd like to see something like the LA488 V10 swapped in - but who wants to tackle that?
And, some of us are purists - we want to improve the original equipment, not alter the powertrain wholesale (else I'd do something like drop in a GM 6.0L V8 and 6L80E slushbox with associated transfer case.)
What can be done? That's what we're trying to find out.
Besides, look how much is done to the Small Block Chevrolet and the Ford Windsor V8 - both of those designs are older than the AMC "Modern Era" six...
MJ>XJ
Quote:
"Because it's there."
Take your pick. Also, it should be borne in mind that anything that has been designed by man can be improved by man - and some of us task ourselves with finding those improvements.
Swapping in a V8 has been done to death - both GM (small block and big block) and Ford (the 302 is most common.) I'd like to see something like the LA488 V10 swapped in - but who wants to tackle that?
And, some of us are purists - we want to improve the original equipment, not alter the powertrain wholesale (else I'd do something like drop in a GM 6.0L V8 and 6L80E slushbox with associated transfer case.)
What can be done? That's what we're trying to find out.
Besides, look how much is done to the Small Block Chevrolet and the Ford Windsor V8 - both of those designs are older than the AMC "Modern Era" six...
ive got a 6.0 running 327 horse at the 33's in my z71 1500 (nonHD) and this is what i was actually thinking about sticking in my new comanche... although i gotta sell the Z first... lol... that or bringing back the idea of 6.2/6.5 diesel like for my last project however ive seen a couple do this now so may not... havent seen a 6.0 yet though! good to see ya around man... sounds like your keepin busy so ill let ya at it!Originally Posted by 5-90
"Because I can.""Because it's there."
Take your pick. Also, it should be borne in mind that anything that has been designed by man can be improved by man - and some of us task ourselves with finding those improvements.
Swapping in a V8 has been done to death - both GM (small block and big block) and Ford (the 302 is most common.) I'd like to see something like the LA488 V10 swapped in - but who wants to tackle that?
And, some of us are purists - we want to improve the original equipment, not alter the powertrain wholesale (else I'd do something like drop in a GM 6.0L V8 and 6L80E slushbox with associated transfer case.)
What can be done? That's what we're trying to find out.
Besides, look how much is done to the Small Block Chevrolet and the Ford Windsor V8 - both of those designs are older than the AMC "Modern Era" six...
CF Veteran
2k for a head is a staight-up raping of my hard earned money. Just because my truck only has one head is no reason to jam it in my ****. For 2k it better come with a roller timeing setupna matching cam and intake manifold.
Id rather have the iron head anyway. Alum may be better at disapating heat, but iron is betterfor any kind of boost. These motors are desighned to Run hot. Alum is good. But even 1000 - 1200 is highway robery. Its only 1 head. Then u have to make sure the head is matched to the manifold and cam and pistons. So they will be a limiting factor. I wish someone would make an iron upgrade. That would be plenty. Jmo.
Id rather have the iron head anyway. Alum may be better at disapating heat, but iron is betterfor any kind of boost. These motors are desighned to Run hot. Alum is good. But even 1000 - 1200 is highway robery. Its only 1 head. Then u have to make sure the head is matched to the manifold and cam and pistons. So they will be a limiting factor. I wish someone would make an iron upgrade. That would be plenty. Jmo.
CF Veteran
Quote:
They do. Google Alabama head.Originally Posted by OEJ
I wish someone would make an iron upgrade. That would be plenty. Jmo.
Registered Users
Honestly these 4.0s have tons of room to upgrade!
Theres so many different aproaches! Theres a few turbo guys running around, there is or was a production supercharger kit, theres strokers from 4.5-5.0L long or short rod, or a spruced up stocker!.
I don't see the gains of adding the aluminum head for reasons stated:
1: you need to run higher compression to see the same gains you would if you have a iron head.
2: cost, aluminum isn't cheap
3: reliability factor..I'm not if any Hesco heads have had any screw ups but most of these 4.0's are tried and true and you know what your getting when you buy one!
I personally plan to rebuild my Renix era, use the same Renix head and all!
.60 over bottom end so it unshrouds the valves..this will give a more efficient burn, thus giving you improved performance, possibly higher mileage, better emmisions.
Ported & gasket matched/stepped head. This speaks for itself..the stepped part means the intake manifold port should be slightly smaller than the intake head port so theres no lips or ridges, but not enough of a lip to make a difference either!
Probably a Comp 201, SBC valves, mopar springs ect.
I'm not sure how much powerwise it would have but I know it'll suit my needs and haul ***! If I don't like the power output, then that old 4.2L will get tore down and a long rod stroker will be built!
Theres so many different aproaches! Theres a few turbo guys running around, there is or was a production supercharger kit, theres strokers from 4.5-5.0L long or short rod, or a spruced up stocker!.
I don't see the gains of adding the aluminum head for reasons stated:
1: you need to run higher compression to see the same gains you would if you have a iron head.
2: cost, aluminum isn't cheap
3: reliability factor..I'm not if any Hesco heads have had any screw ups but most of these 4.0's are tried and true and you know what your getting when you buy one!
I personally plan to rebuild my Renix era, use the same Renix head and all!
.60 over bottom end so it unshrouds the valves..this will give a more efficient burn, thus giving you improved performance, possibly higher mileage, better emmisions.
Ported & gasket matched/stepped head. This speaks for itself..the stepped part means the intake manifold port should be slightly smaller than the intake head port so theres no lips or ridges, but not enough of a lip to make a difference either!
Probably a Comp 201, SBC valves, mopar springs ect.
I'm not sure how much powerwise it would have but I know it'll suit my needs and haul ***! If I don't like the power output, then that old 4.2L will get tore down and a long rod stroker will be built!