|
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:36:43 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
<beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following: >Unless you are mudding, or doing other stuff where the gas pedal is mashed >into the floorboards, THERE IS NO ADVANTAGE TO A V8, indeed the V8 can be an >huge disadvantage. > I'm not arguing that point. I was just wondering out loud what kind of power a 304 could make with the modifications listed. I'm not trying to start/continue a holy war about which engine is best. > > > >"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:cqrtovkso7eprgj4l7ttqceiqptpfl07k4@4ax.com.. . >> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier" >> <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following: >> >> >> > >> >1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 >_ever_ >> >did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was >> >down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) >joshua. >> >the numbers are clear >http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm >> >2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's. >> >> *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-) >> No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but >> probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going >> to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and >> I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud >> how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a >> good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less >> restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before >> doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a >> good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above? >> >> >> -- >> Travis >> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html >> The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it. >> :wq! -- Travis http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it. :wq! |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:36:43 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
<beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following: >Unless you are mudding, or doing other stuff where the gas pedal is mashed >into the floorboards, THERE IS NO ADVANTAGE TO A V8, indeed the V8 can be an >huge disadvantage. > I'm not arguing that point. I was just wondering out loud what kind of power a 304 could make with the modifications listed. I'm not trying to start/continue a holy war about which engine is best. > > > >"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:cqrtovkso7eprgj4l7ttqceiqptpfl07k4@4ax.com.. . >> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier" >> <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following: >> >> >> > >> >1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 >_ever_ >> >did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was >> >down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) >joshua. >> >the numbers are clear >http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm >> >2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's. >> >> *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-) >> No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but >> probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going >> to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and >> I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud >> how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a >> good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less >> restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before >> doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a >> good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above? >> >> >> -- >> Travis >> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html >> The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it. >> :wq! -- Travis http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it. :wq! |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:36:43 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
<beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following: >Unless you are mudding, or doing other stuff where the gas pedal is mashed >into the floorboards, THERE IS NO ADVANTAGE TO A V8, indeed the V8 can be an >huge disadvantage. > I'm not arguing that point. I was just wondering out loud what kind of power a 304 could make with the modifications listed. I'm not trying to start/continue a holy war about which engine is best. > > > >"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:cqrtovkso7eprgj4l7ttqceiqptpfl07k4@4ax.com.. . >> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier" >> <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following: >> >> >> > >> >1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 >_ever_ >> >did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was >> >down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) >joshua. >> >the numbers are clear >http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm >> >2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's. >> >> *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-) >> No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but >> probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going >> to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and >> I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud >> how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a >> good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less >> restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before >> doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a >> good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above? >> >> >> -- >> Travis >> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html >> The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it. >> :wq! -- Travis http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it. :wq! |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count: http://www.olive-drab.com/idphoto/id_photos_m151.php3 and: http://www.off-road.com/~early/m151.html God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ twaldron wrote: > > AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! > > Not one fiber of truth in that whole statement. > > ..and this has to do with offroading HOW?????? > > V8s are NOT a huge improvement over the I6 offroad, sorry. New paint?? > Oh, come on! > > Um, sorry. No CJ, YJ nor TJ has ever had IFS. IFS can ONLY be found on > the Liberty which is not necessarily an "offroad" vehicle. At any rate, > it's not the subject of the thread. ABS is an option and airbags only go > off at higher speeds than are found offroad. > > I suggest you go back to the Crayola box and leave mommie's computer alone. > > -- > __________________________________________________ _________ > tw > 03 TJ Rubicon > 01 XJ Sport > > There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." > -- Dave Barry > > http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html > (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email) > __________________________________________________ _________ |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count: http://www.olive-drab.com/idphoto/id_photos_m151.php3 and: http://www.off-road.com/~early/m151.html God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ twaldron wrote: > > AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! > > Not one fiber of truth in that whole statement. > > ..and this has to do with offroading HOW?????? > > V8s are NOT a huge improvement over the I6 offroad, sorry. New paint?? > Oh, come on! > > Um, sorry. No CJ, YJ nor TJ has ever had IFS. IFS can ONLY be found on > the Liberty which is not necessarily an "offroad" vehicle. At any rate, > it's not the subject of the thread. ABS is an option and airbags only go > off at higher speeds than are found offroad. > > I suggest you go back to the Crayola box and leave mommie's computer alone. > > -- > __________________________________________________ _________ > tw > 03 TJ Rubicon > 01 XJ Sport > > There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." > -- Dave Barry > > http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html > (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email) > __________________________________________________ _________ |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count: http://www.olive-drab.com/idphoto/id_photos_m151.php3 and: http://www.off-road.com/~early/m151.html God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ twaldron wrote: > > AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! > > Not one fiber of truth in that whole statement. > > ..and this has to do with offroading HOW?????? > > V8s are NOT a huge improvement over the I6 offroad, sorry. New paint?? > Oh, come on! > > Um, sorry. No CJ, YJ nor TJ has ever had IFS. IFS can ONLY be found on > the Liberty which is not necessarily an "offroad" vehicle. At any rate, > it's not the subject of the thread. ABS is an option and airbags only go > off at higher speeds than are found offroad. > > I suggest you go back to the Crayola box and leave mommie's computer alone. > > -- > __________________________________________________ _________ > tw > 03 TJ Rubicon > 01 XJ Sport > > There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." > -- Dave Barry > > http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html > (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email) > __________________________________________________ _________ |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
Why would you want a 150hp V8 that weighs something like 300 lbs, when you
can have a 147 hp that weighs in at half that? I just do not get your infatuation with the big old V8 motors used in a Jeep, the newer, lighter, and smaller motors today produce more power, and the torque is just off of idle where you want it for offroading, instead of half way up the RPM scale where you seldom venture into. Don't get me wrong, there are great places to have a V8 motor, but Real Jeeps don't need one. Put a V8 in my Mustang or Camaro where I can open it up and use the power, but get the damn thing out of my Jeep where all I want is to crawl over rocks about the sixe of my Mustang of Camaro. Now that I have said that, the 5.9L V8 from a Durango sounds kinda cool in a TJ ... "travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:cqrtovkso7eprgj4l7ttqceiqptpfl07k4@4ax.com... > On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier" > <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following: > > > > > >1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 _ever_ > >did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was > >down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) joshua. > >the numbers are clear http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm > >2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's. > > *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-) > No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but > probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going > to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and > I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud > how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a > good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less > restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before > doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a > good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above? > > > -- > Travis > http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html > The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it. > :wq! |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
Why would you want a 150hp V8 that weighs something like 300 lbs, when you
can have a 147 hp that weighs in at half that? I just do not get your infatuation with the big old V8 motors used in a Jeep, the newer, lighter, and smaller motors today produce more power, and the torque is just off of idle where you want it for offroading, instead of half way up the RPM scale where you seldom venture into. Don't get me wrong, there are great places to have a V8 motor, but Real Jeeps don't need one. Put a V8 in my Mustang or Camaro where I can open it up and use the power, but get the damn thing out of my Jeep where all I want is to crawl over rocks about the sixe of my Mustang of Camaro. Now that I have said that, the 5.9L V8 from a Durango sounds kinda cool in a TJ ... "travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:cqrtovkso7eprgj4l7ttqceiqptpfl07k4@4ax.com... > On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier" > <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following: > > > > > >1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 _ever_ > >did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was > >down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) joshua. > >the numbers are clear http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm > >2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's. > > *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-) > No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but > probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going > to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and > I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud > how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a > good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less > restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before > doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a > good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above? > > > -- > Travis > http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html > The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it. > :wq! |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
Why would you want a 150hp V8 that weighs something like 300 lbs, when you
can have a 147 hp that weighs in at half that? I just do not get your infatuation with the big old V8 motors used in a Jeep, the newer, lighter, and smaller motors today produce more power, and the torque is just off of idle where you want it for offroading, instead of half way up the RPM scale where you seldom venture into. Don't get me wrong, there are great places to have a V8 motor, but Real Jeeps don't need one. Put a V8 in my Mustang or Camaro where I can open it up and use the power, but get the damn thing out of my Jeep where all I want is to crawl over rocks about the sixe of my Mustang of Camaro. Now that I have said that, the 5.9L V8 from a Durango sounds kinda cool in a TJ ... "travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:cqrtovkso7eprgj4l7ttqceiqptpfl07k4@4ax.com... > On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier" > <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following: > > > > > >1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 _ever_ > >did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was > >down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) joshua. > >the numbers are clear http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm > >2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's. > > *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-) > No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but > probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going > to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and > I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud > how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a > good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less > restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before > doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a > good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above? > > > -- > Travis > http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html > The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it. > :wq! |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
Uh, yeah Joshie. I'm going to continue your moronic "diatribe". Uh huh.
Good luck on the trails, Gomer. Twit. Joshua Nelson wrote: >>AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! > > > Another quality, mature response from twaldron. > > >>>1) CJs are easier to work on and modify than YJs, YJs are easier to >>>work on and modify than TJs. (Putting anything larger than 35s on a >>>TJ is a real nightmare of a project!) >> >>Not one fiber of truth in that whole statement. >> > > > Yes, it's actually 100% true. > > >>>2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt >> >>..and this has to do with offroading HOW?????? > > > > Cheaper to inspect license, easier to maintain & lower vehicle weight > due to no need to keep all emissions equipment, and about a dozen > other reasons, take your pick. > > > >> >>>3) The older the jeep, the lower the resale value, which is nice for >>>a trail rig that is going to see a lot of use and abuse. Most people >>>I see in factory fresh TJs, unless they are rich, are too concerned >>>about scratching their paint to follow where the well-worn CJs can go. >>> >>>4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer >>>made, such as 8-cyl engines >> >>V8s are NOT a huge improvement over the I6 offroad, sorry. > > > Of couse they are.... please defend your ridiculous assertion. You > can start by explaining why so many folks on this newsgroup have > upgraded to 8-cylinders or why it is such a popular/sought after mod > if it is no better than an I6. I am sure we would all love to be > enlightened by your expertise in this area, and we will all feel quite > silly for getting 8s when we should have checked with you first and > got a 6. (Would a 4-cylinder be even better, in your humble opinion?) > > > >>New paint?? >>Oh, come on! >> > > > YOU come on. That's just common sense and everyone knows it. When > you see someone with those magnetic armor things, or avoiding trails > because of risk of body damage or paint scratches, 99% of the time it > is a late model rig. > > > >>>5) Newer vehicles are loaded up with highway safety crap that is at >>>best marginal off-road, at worst a major hindrance. To name a few: >>>Airbags, ABS, IFS. >> > >>Um, sorry. No CJ, YJ nor TJ has ever had IFS. IFS can ONLY be found on >>the Liberty which is not necessarily an "offroad" vehicle. At any rate, >>it's not the subject of the thread. ABS is an option and airbags only go >>off at higher speeds than are found offroad. > > > Ahem. Libertys are jeeps. My original post referred to the entire > line of jeeps, old to new. It seems you are so eager to pick a fight > that you're not even reading the actual messages before you leap into > a childish diatribe. Stop it, you're embarassing yourself. > > >>I suggest you go back to the Crayola box and leave mommie's computer alone. >> > > > Again, another mature and productive statement which enhances the > quality of this newsgroup... -- __________________________________________________ _________ tw 03 TJ Rubicon 01 XJ Sport There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." -- Dave Barry http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email) __________________________________________________ _________ |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:45 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands