|
Re: 4.0 history
Who was talking about the four cylinder?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Lee Ayrton wrote: > > If you Google on this you'll find that it is widely believed by posters > that the 4.0L/242ci is simply an updated 258ci and that the 2.5L I4 was > simply a 258 with 2 cylinders lopped off. > > But many sites that bothered to look things up claim that the 2.5L was > pretty much designed from the ground up and that the 4.0L is mostly > based upon the engineering for the 2.5L engine, although obviously some > 258ci parts will fit (or, /mostly/ fit in the case of heads) on the 4.0L > block. See: > > <URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html> > > The 258ci was, of course, simply a stroked 232 block (anyone want a free > 232 engine? Come and get it). See: > > <URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc258.html> > <URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc232.html> > > Ah! This sounds like what I remember reading, but the link is down > right now. Google Cache has it at: > > <URL:http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:W0M1PjKmYKMJ:wagoneers.com/XJ/tech/xjmtr.html> > > Or Google the phrase _"closer relation was the fuel injected I-4"_ |
Re: 4.0 history
Historical perspective. The OP asked about the history of the 4.0L and thought that it had been designed on a "fresh sheet of paper". I was trying to cover all the bases and show that the 2.5L was the one designed from the ground up and the 4.0L was based on that engineering work. And that neither is very close kin to the 232/258. L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote: > Who was talking about the four cylinder? > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Lee Ayrton wrote: > >>If you Google on this you'll find that it is widely believed by posters >>that the 4.0L/242ci is simply an updated 258ci and that the 2.5L I4 was >>simply a 258 with 2 cylinders lopped off. >> >>But many sites that bothered to look things up claim that the 2.5L was >>pretty much designed from the ground up and that the 4.0L is mostly >>based upon the engineering for the 2.5L engine, although obviously some >>258ci parts will fit (or, /mostly/ fit in the case of heads) on the 4.0L >>block. See: >> >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html> >> >>The 258ci was, of course, simply a stroked 232 block (anyone want a free >>232 engine? Come and get it). See: >> >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc258.html> >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc232.html> >> >>Ah! This sounds like what I remember reading, but the link is down >>right now. Google Cache has it at: >> >><URL:http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:W0M1PjKmYKMJ:wagoneers.com/XJ/tech/xjmtr.html> >> >>Or Google the phrase _"closer relation was the fuel injected I-4"_ |
Re: 4.0 history
Historical perspective. The OP asked about the history of the 4.0L and thought that it had been designed on a "fresh sheet of paper". I was trying to cover all the bases and show that the 2.5L was the one designed from the ground up and the 4.0L was based on that engineering work. And that neither is very close kin to the 232/258. L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote: > Who was talking about the four cylinder? > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Lee Ayrton wrote: > >>If you Google on this you'll find that it is widely believed by posters >>that the 4.0L/242ci is simply an updated 258ci and that the 2.5L I4 was >>simply a 258 with 2 cylinders lopped off. >> >>But many sites that bothered to look things up claim that the 2.5L was >>pretty much designed from the ground up and that the 4.0L is mostly >>based upon the engineering for the 2.5L engine, although obviously some >>258ci parts will fit (or, /mostly/ fit in the case of heads) on the 4.0L >>block. See: >> >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html> >> >>The 258ci was, of course, simply a stroked 232 block (anyone want a free >>232 engine? Come and get it). See: >> >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc258.html> >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc232.html> >> >>Ah! This sounds like what I remember reading, but the link is down >>right now. Google Cache has it at: >> >><URL:http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:W0M1PjKmYKMJ:wagoneers.com/XJ/tech/xjmtr.html> >> >>Or Google the phrase _"closer relation was the fuel injected I-4"_ |
Re: 4.0 history
Historical perspective. The OP asked about the history of the 4.0L and thought that it had been designed on a "fresh sheet of paper". I was trying to cover all the bases and show that the 2.5L was the one designed from the ground up and the 4.0L was based on that engineering work. And that neither is very close kin to the 232/258. L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote: > Who was talking about the four cylinder? > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Lee Ayrton wrote: > >>If you Google on this you'll find that it is widely believed by posters >>that the 4.0L/242ci is simply an updated 258ci and that the 2.5L I4 was >>simply a 258 with 2 cylinders lopped off. >> >>But many sites that bothered to look things up claim that the 2.5L was >>pretty much designed from the ground up and that the 4.0L is mostly >>based upon the engineering for the 2.5L engine, although obviously some >>258ci parts will fit (or, /mostly/ fit in the case of heads) on the 4.0L >>block. See: >> >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html> >> >>The 258ci was, of course, simply a stroked 232 block (anyone want a free >>232 engine? Come and get it). See: >> >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc258.html> >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc232.html> >> >>Ah! This sounds like what I remember reading, but the link is down >>right now. Google Cache has it at: >> >><URL:http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:W0M1PjKmYKMJ:wagoneers.com/XJ/tech/xjmtr.html> >> >>Or Google the phrase _"closer relation was the fuel injected I-4"_ |
Re: 4.0 history
Close enough that the crank can be swapped over making the 4.0 a
stroker.... Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's Lee Ayrton wrote: > > Historical perspective. The OP asked about the history of the 4.0L and > thought that it had been designed on a "fresh sheet of paper". I was > trying to cover all the bases and show that the 2.5L was the one > designed from the ground up and the 4.0L was based on that engineering > work. And that neither is very close kin to the 232/258. > > L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote: > > Who was talking about the four cylinder? > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > > > Lee Ayrton wrote: > > > >>If you Google on this you'll find that it is widely believed by posters > >>that the 4.0L/242ci is simply an updated 258ci and that the 2.5L I4 was > >>simply a 258 with 2 cylinders lopped off. > >> > >>But many sites that bothered to look things up claim that the 2.5L was > >>pretty much designed from the ground up and that the 4.0L is mostly > >>based upon the engineering for the 2.5L engine, although obviously some > >>258ci parts will fit (or, /mostly/ fit in the case of heads) on the 4.0L > >>block. See: > >> > >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html> > >> > >>The 258ci was, of course, simply a stroked 232 block (anyone want a free > >>232 engine? Come and get it). See: > >> > >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc258.html> > >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc232.html> > >> > >>Ah! This sounds like what I remember reading, but the link is down > >>right now. Google Cache has it at: > >> > >><URL:http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:W0M1PjKmYKMJ:wagoneers.com/XJ/tech/xjmtr.html> > >> > >>Or Google the phrase _"closer relation was the fuel injected I-4"_ |
Re: 4.0 history
Close enough that the crank can be swapped over making the 4.0 a
stroker.... Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's Lee Ayrton wrote: > > Historical perspective. The OP asked about the history of the 4.0L and > thought that it had been designed on a "fresh sheet of paper". I was > trying to cover all the bases and show that the 2.5L was the one > designed from the ground up and the 4.0L was based on that engineering > work. And that neither is very close kin to the 232/258. > > L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote: > > Who was talking about the four cylinder? > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > > > Lee Ayrton wrote: > > > >>If you Google on this you'll find that it is widely believed by posters > >>that the 4.0L/242ci is simply an updated 258ci and that the 2.5L I4 was > >>simply a 258 with 2 cylinders lopped off. > >> > >>But many sites that bothered to look things up claim that the 2.5L was > >>pretty much designed from the ground up and that the 4.0L is mostly > >>based upon the engineering for the 2.5L engine, although obviously some > >>258ci parts will fit (or, /mostly/ fit in the case of heads) on the 4.0L > >>block. See: > >> > >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html> > >> > >>The 258ci was, of course, simply a stroked 232 block (anyone want a free > >>232 engine? Come and get it). See: > >> > >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc258.html> > >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc232.html> > >> > >>Ah! This sounds like what I remember reading, but the link is down > >>right now. Google Cache has it at: > >> > >><URL:http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:W0M1PjKmYKMJ:wagoneers.com/XJ/tech/xjmtr.html> > >> > >>Or Google the phrase _"closer relation was the fuel injected I-4"_ |
Re: 4.0 history
Close enough that the crank can be swapped over making the 4.0 a
stroker.... Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's Lee Ayrton wrote: > > Historical perspective. The OP asked about the history of the 4.0L and > thought that it had been designed on a "fresh sheet of paper". I was > trying to cover all the bases and show that the 2.5L was the one > designed from the ground up and the 4.0L was based on that engineering > work. And that neither is very close kin to the 232/258. > > L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote: > > Who was talking about the four cylinder? > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > > > Lee Ayrton wrote: > > > >>If you Google on this you'll find that it is widely believed by posters > >>that the 4.0L/242ci is simply an updated 258ci and that the 2.5L I4 was > >>simply a 258 with 2 cylinders lopped off. > >> > >>But many sites that bothered to look things up claim that the 2.5L was > >>pretty much designed from the ground up and that the 4.0L is mostly > >>based upon the engineering for the 2.5L engine, although obviously some > >>258ci parts will fit (or, /mostly/ fit in the case of heads) on the 4.0L > >>block. See: > >> > >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html> > >> > >>The 258ci was, of course, simply a stroked 232 block (anyone want a free > >>232 engine? Come and get it). See: > >> > >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc258.html> > >><URL:http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc232.html> > >> > >>Ah! This sounds like what I remember reading, but the link is down > >>right now. Google Cache has it at: > >> > >><URL:http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:W0M1PjKmYKMJ:wagoneers.com/XJ/tech/xjmtr.html> > >> > >>Or Google the phrase _"closer relation was the fuel injected I-4"_ |
Re: 4.0 history
http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Lee Ayrton wrote: > > Historical perspective. The OP asked about the history of the 4.0L and > thought that it had been designed on a "fresh sheet of paper". I was > trying to cover all the bases and show that the 2.5L was the one > designed from the ground up and the 4.0L was based on that engineering > work. And that neither is very close kin to the 232/258. |
Re: 4.0 history
http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Lee Ayrton wrote: > > Historical perspective. The OP asked about the history of the 4.0L and > thought that it had been designed on a "fresh sheet of paper". I was > trying to cover all the bases and show that the 2.5L was the one > designed from the ground up and the 4.0L was based on that engineering > work. And that neither is very close kin to the 232/258. |
Re: 4.0 history
http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Lee Ayrton wrote: > > Historical perspective. The OP asked about the history of the 4.0L and > thought that it had been designed on a "fresh sheet of paper". I was > trying to cover all the bases and show that the 2.5L was the one > designed from the ground up and the 4.0L was based on that engineering > work. And that neither is very close kin to the 232/258. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:30 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands