|
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
> 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... |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
> 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... |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
> 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... |
Re: Military Jeeps...(was 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????)
I want one of those Harley-Davidsons.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ twaldron wrote: > > The crated Jeeps, or "Jeeps in a barrel" for "as low as $50" is an old > urban legend. I'd love to hear from one person who's purchased one. Now, > if you're talking about a legitimate military auction where surplus is > sold, your friend is not intimating that whole actual SWB Jeeps are > still available is he? Do tell. > __________________________________________________ _________ > 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: Military Jeeps...(was 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????)
I want one of those Harley-Davidsons.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ twaldron wrote: > > The crated Jeeps, or "Jeeps in a barrel" for "as low as $50" is an old > urban legend. I'd love to hear from one person who's purchased one. Now, > if you're talking about a legitimate military auction where surplus is > sold, your friend is not intimating that whole actual SWB Jeeps are > still available is he? Do tell. > __________________________________________________ _________ > 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: Military Jeeps...(was 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????)
I want one of those Harley-Davidsons.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ twaldron wrote: > > The crated Jeeps, or "Jeeps in a barrel" for "as low as $50" is an old > urban legend. I'd love to hear from one person who's purchased one. Now, > if you're talking about a legitimate military auction where surplus is > sold, your friend is not intimating that whole actual SWB Jeeps are > still available is he? Do tell. > __________________________________________________ _________ > 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?????????
In article <b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.com >, spam_box@ev1.net
(Joshua Nelson) writes: >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!) > Oh? How do you know? Didn't you buy your "CJ" already set up for trails? So how do you know if it's "easier" to modify? Have you put 35's on your TJ? What if you don't want to modify it, after all you were talking about stock, unmodified vehicles. >2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt And this has to do with off-roading in what way? > >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. That's up to the individual, isn't it, not you? I guess you weren't too concerned about scratching your TJ when you couldn't get it unstuck with your ATV winch. Are you still grounded? > >4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer >made, such as 8-cyl engines Again, what does that have to do with off-roading? Why is an older, carbeurated V8 "better" than the modern 4.0L I-6 > >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. 1. Have you heard of any instance where an airbag has gone off inadvertantly when off-roading? I though not. 2. ABS is an option and it is easily defeatable, not a "major hindrance." 3. Which TJ model has IFS? Where do you come up with this dreck? You been dipping into Bill's Vicodin? * * * Matt Macchiarolo www.townpeddler.com www.wolverine4wd.org http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
In article <b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.com >, spam_box@ev1.net
(Joshua Nelson) writes: >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!) > Oh? How do you know? Didn't you buy your "CJ" already set up for trails? So how do you know if it's "easier" to modify? Have you put 35's on your TJ? What if you don't want to modify it, after all you were talking about stock, unmodified vehicles. >2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt And this has to do with off-roading in what way? > >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. That's up to the individual, isn't it, not you? I guess you weren't too concerned about scratching your TJ when you couldn't get it unstuck with your ATV winch. Are you still grounded? > >4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer >made, such as 8-cyl engines Again, what does that have to do with off-roading? Why is an older, carbeurated V8 "better" than the modern 4.0L I-6 > >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. 1. Have you heard of any instance where an airbag has gone off inadvertantly when off-roading? I though not. 2. ABS is an option and it is easily defeatable, not a "major hindrance." 3. Which TJ model has IFS? Where do you come up with this dreck? You been dipping into Bill's Vicodin? * * * Matt Macchiarolo www.townpeddler.com www.wolverine4wd.org http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
In article <b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.com >, spam_box@ev1.net
(Joshua Nelson) writes: >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!) > Oh? How do you know? Didn't you buy your "CJ" already set up for trails? So how do you know if it's "easier" to modify? Have you put 35's on your TJ? What if you don't want to modify it, after all you were talking about stock, unmodified vehicles. >2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt And this has to do with off-roading in what way? > >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. That's up to the individual, isn't it, not you? I guess you weren't too concerned about scratching your TJ when you couldn't get it unstuck with your ATV winch. Are you still grounded? > >4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer >made, such as 8-cyl engines Again, what does that have to do with off-roading? Why is an older, carbeurated V8 "better" than the modern 4.0L I-6 > >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. 1. Have you heard of any instance where an airbag has gone off inadvertantly when off-roading? I though not. 2. ABS is an option and it is easily defeatable, not a "major hindrance." 3. Which TJ model has IFS? Where do you come up with this dreck? You been dipping into Bill's Vicodin? * * * Matt Macchiarolo www.townpeddler.com www.wolverine4wd.org http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.c om... > > > Generally, when talking about stock unmodified jeeps, the earlier the > > > production year, the more suitable for off-roading. > > > > please explain. > 1) CJs are easier to work on and modify than YJs "easier" is relative, and "modify" is insignificant here since your original argument is "stock unmodified jeeps". even still, you statement is incorrect. there is no major difference in working/modifying either. >YJs are easier to > work on and modify than TJs. i disagree. the tj has only gotten easier to work on over time (dropping the distributor, dropping the cam position sensor, better components such as the 3550, etc). i would much rather pull a code and replace a sensor than attempt to diagnose a carter thats acting up. > (Putting anything larger than 35s on a > TJ is a real nightmare of a project!) aside from being irrelevant (your statement was "stock unmodified jeeps") id say putting tires larger than 35's on _any_ swb jeep is a large project. todays long arm lifts have come a long way and i dare say i could install one with equal time/tools/ease as doing an SOA + lift or SUA + lift on a leaf sprung variant. > 2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt older as in pre 75, but what does that have to do with offroad capability? > 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. but owner reluctance has nothing to do with offroad capability. > 4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer > made, such as 8-cyl engines id love to have a v8 engine for that deep throaty growl coming over a set of flowmasters......but that has absolutely nothing to do with offroad capability. > 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. airbags arent a problem off road, abs is optional, and IFS isnt available any tj yet (look at the subject line). youre misguided here a bit joshua, and ive a feeling many others will tell you the same thing only in harsher terms. what type of jeep do you own anyway? -- Nathan W. Collier http://7SlotGrille.com |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.c om... > > > Generally, when talking about stock unmodified jeeps, the earlier the > > > production year, the more suitable for off-roading. > > > > please explain. > 1) CJs are easier to work on and modify than YJs "easier" is relative, and "modify" is insignificant here since your original argument is "stock unmodified jeeps". even still, you statement is incorrect. there is no major difference in working/modifying either. >YJs are easier to > work on and modify than TJs. i disagree. the tj has only gotten easier to work on over time (dropping the distributor, dropping the cam position sensor, better components such as the 3550, etc). i would much rather pull a code and replace a sensor than attempt to diagnose a carter thats acting up. > (Putting anything larger than 35s on a > TJ is a real nightmare of a project!) aside from being irrelevant (your statement was "stock unmodified jeeps") id say putting tires larger than 35's on _any_ swb jeep is a large project. todays long arm lifts have come a long way and i dare say i could install one with equal time/tools/ease as doing an SOA + lift or SUA + lift on a leaf sprung variant. > 2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt older as in pre 75, but what does that have to do with offroad capability? > 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. but owner reluctance has nothing to do with offroad capability. > 4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer > made, such as 8-cyl engines id love to have a v8 engine for that deep throaty growl coming over a set of flowmasters......but that has absolutely nothing to do with offroad capability. > 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. airbags arent a problem off road, abs is optional, and IFS isnt available any tj yet (look at the subject line). youre misguided here a bit joshua, and ive a feeling many others will tell you the same thing only in harsher terms. what type of jeep do you own anyway? -- Nathan W. Collier http://7SlotGrille.com |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.c om... > > > Generally, when talking about stock unmodified jeeps, the earlier the > > > production year, the more suitable for off-roading. > > > > please explain. > 1) CJs are easier to work on and modify than YJs "easier" is relative, and "modify" is insignificant here since your original argument is "stock unmodified jeeps". even still, you statement is incorrect. there is no major difference in working/modifying either. >YJs are easier to > work on and modify than TJs. i disagree. the tj has only gotten easier to work on over time (dropping the distributor, dropping the cam position sensor, better components such as the 3550, etc). i would much rather pull a code and replace a sensor than attempt to diagnose a carter thats acting up. > (Putting anything larger than 35s on a > TJ is a real nightmare of a project!) aside from being irrelevant (your statement was "stock unmodified jeeps") id say putting tires larger than 35's on _any_ swb jeep is a large project. todays long arm lifts have come a long way and i dare say i could install one with equal time/tools/ease as doing an SOA + lift or SUA + lift on a leaf sprung variant. > 2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt older as in pre 75, but what does that have to do with offroad capability? > 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. but owner reluctance has nothing to do with offroad capability. > 4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer > made, such as 8-cyl engines id love to have a v8 engine for that deep throaty growl coming over a set of flowmasters......but that has absolutely nothing to do with offroad capability. > 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. airbags arent a problem off road, abs is optional, and IFS isnt available any tj yet (look at the subject line). youre misguided here a bit joshua, and ive a feeling many others will tell you the same thing only in harsher terms. what type of jeep do you own anyway? -- Nathan W. Collier http://7SlotGrille.com |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0310161028.3698d9b6@posting.google.c om... > > 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. youre off base here joshua. you are basing your statement on _stock_ vehicles as prefaced in your original statement. for starters: 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. typically theyre swapping in 230hp 5.0's and 300hp 350's. 3) even with the 350, there is no real advantage off road. in fact, the 4.0 produces 85% of its total available torque AT IDLE which is in many cases superior to the v8's at the same rpm. the advantage to the v8 is on the highway, in the mud (where upper rpms count), and maybe in being able to use a higher gear off road but thats not from the stock 304 that youre comparing here. > 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. again, driver reluctance has nothing to do with off road capability. > Libertys are jeeps. says who? :-) youll get it......it just takes awhile. -- Nathan W. Collier http://7SlotGrille.com |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0310161028.3698d9b6@posting.google.c om... > > 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. youre off base here joshua. you are basing your statement on _stock_ vehicles as prefaced in your original statement. for starters: 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. typically theyre swapping in 230hp 5.0's and 300hp 350's. 3) even with the 350, there is no real advantage off road. in fact, the 4.0 produces 85% of its total available torque AT IDLE which is in many cases superior to the v8's at the same rpm. the advantage to the v8 is on the highway, in the mud (where upper rpms count), and maybe in being able to use a higher gear off road but thats not from the stock 304 that youre comparing here. > 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. again, driver reluctance has nothing to do with off road capability. > Libertys are jeeps. says who? :-) youll get it......it just takes awhile. -- Nathan W. Collier http://7SlotGrille.com |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0310161028.3698d9b6@posting.google.c om... > > 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. youre off base here joshua. you are basing your statement on _stock_ vehicles as prefaced in your original statement. for starters: 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. typically theyre swapping in 230hp 5.0's and 300hp 350's. 3) even with the 350, there is no real advantage off road. in fact, the 4.0 produces 85% of its total available torque AT IDLE which is in many cases superior to the v8's at the same rpm. the advantage to the v8 is on the highway, in the mud (where upper rpms count), and maybe in being able to use a higher gear off road but thats not from the stock 304 that youre comparing here. > 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. again, driver reluctance has nothing to do with off road capability. > Libertys are jeeps. says who? :-) youll get it......it just takes awhile. -- Nathan W. Collier http://7SlotGrille.com |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message news:b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.c om... > > > Generally, when talking about stock unmodified jeeps, the earlier the > > > production year, the more suitable for off-roading. > > > > please explain. > > Well, just to name a few, off the top of my head: > > 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!) > Putting anything larger than 35 on a CJ, YJ, or TJ is lunacy for most people. The Jeeps that carry larger tires are hardly even recognizable as ever being a Jeep. It is actually much easier to do this sort of mod on the new vehicles than the older ones, ESPECIALLY if one must use off-the-shelf parts because they do not have the specialized fabrication skills to make this kind of thing work. > 2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt > While this is true, the vehicle must be over 30 years old to enjoy such an exemption. Coupling this with the desire to add 35" tires, then the fabrication skills of the project manager must be greater, or the checkbook must be heavier. > 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. > While this is true, you live a very protected life. There are many TJs on the trail with nary a straight panel on them. > 4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer > made, such as 8-cyl engines > Big whoop. If one is inclined to put 35" tires on a TJ, he is able to drop a V8 under the hood. The new models have WAY more accessories available than the older CJs have. > 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. AIRBAGS Not a problem for offroading. They don't deploy at offroading speeds, and if they do, you probably need them. They can be defeated by pulling two fuses. ABS Not a problem for offroading. They can be defeated by pulling a fuse. ABS offers huge advantages while on the street where even offroaders tend to travel on occasion. The owner of a TJ can pull the fuse and leave it out, or he can pull it then put it back in. A really inventive YJ owner, one that can actually get 35s to work, and the V8 to fit, might even put in a switch to turn the ABS system off and on. IFS This is a horrible option for an offroad vehicle. Thank God, TJs don't have this yet, and therefore IFS isn't a consideration for this particular buyer. MY HUMBLE OBSERVATION For a 16 year old kid, you sure have alot to say about stuff you haven't got a clue about. |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message news:b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.c om... > > > Generally, when talking about stock unmodified jeeps, the earlier the > > > production year, the more suitable for off-roading. > > > > please explain. > > Well, just to name a few, off the top of my head: > > 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!) > Putting anything larger than 35 on a CJ, YJ, or TJ is lunacy for most people. The Jeeps that carry larger tires are hardly even recognizable as ever being a Jeep. It is actually much easier to do this sort of mod on the new vehicles than the older ones, ESPECIALLY if one must use off-the-shelf parts because they do not have the specialized fabrication skills to make this kind of thing work. > 2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt > While this is true, the vehicle must be over 30 years old to enjoy such an exemption. Coupling this with the desire to add 35" tires, then the fabrication skills of the project manager must be greater, or the checkbook must be heavier. > 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. > While this is true, you live a very protected life. There are many TJs on the trail with nary a straight panel on them. > 4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer > made, such as 8-cyl engines > Big whoop. If one is inclined to put 35" tires on a TJ, he is able to drop a V8 under the hood. The new models have WAY more accessories available than the older CJs have. > 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. AIRBAGS Not a problem for offroading. They don't deploy at offroading speeds, and if they do, you probably need them. They can be defeated by pulling two fuses. ABS Not a problem for offroading. They can be defeated by pulling a fuse. ABS offers huge advantages while on the street where even offroaders tend to travel on occasion. The owner of a TJ can pull the fuse and leave it out, or he can pull it then put it back in. A really inventive YJ owner, one that can actually get 35s to work, and the V8 to fit, might even put in a switch to turn the ABS system off and on. IFS This is a horrible option for an offroad vehicle. Thank God, TJs don't have this yet, and therefore IFS isn't a consideration for this particular buyer. MY HUMBLE OBSERVATION For a 16 year old kid, you sure have alot to say about stuff you haven't got a clue about. |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message news:b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.c om... > > > Generally, when talking about stock unmodified jeeps, the earlier the > > > production year, the more suitable for off-roading. > > > > please explain. > > Well, just to name a few, off the top of my head: > > 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!) > Putting anything larger than 35 on a CJ, YJ, or TJ is lunacy for most people. The Jeeps that carry larger tires are hardly even recognizable as ever being a Jeep. It is actually much easier to do this sort of mod on the new vehicles than the older ones, ESPECIALLY if one must use off-the-shelf parts because they do not have the specialized fabrication skills to make this kind of thing work. > 2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt > While this is true, the vehicle must be over 30 years old to enjoy such an exemption. Coupling this with the desire to add 35" tires, then the fabrication skills of the project manager must be greater, or the checkbook must be heavier. > 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. > While this is true, you live a very protected life. There are many TJs on the trail with nary a straight panel on them. > 4) Older vehicles have some nice options available that are no longer > made, such as 8-cyl engines > Big whoop. If one is inclined to put 35" tires on a TJ, he is able to drop a V8 under the hood. The new models have WAY more accessories available than the older CJs have. > 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. AIRBAGS Not a problem for offroading. They don't deploy at offroading speeds, and if they do, you probably need them. They can be defeated by pulling two fuses. ABS Not a problem for offroading. They can be defeated by pulling a fuse. ABS offers huge advantages while on the street where even offroaders tend to travel on occasion. The owner of a TJ can pull the fuse and leave it out, or he can pull it then put it back in. A really inventive YJ owner, one that can actually get 35s to work, and the V8 to fit, might even put in a switch to turn the ABS system off and on. IFS This is a horrible option for an offroad vehicle. Thank God, TJs don't have this yet, and therefore IFS isn't a consideration for this particular buyer. MY HUMBLE OBSERVATION For a 16 year old kid, you sure have alot to say about stuff you haven't got a clue about. |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
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?????????
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?????????
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?????????
"TJim" <jim@ranlet.nospam.com> wrote in message news:ydGdnRV5tepQJhOiRVn-gw@comcast.com... > Comments below... > > -- > Jim > > "Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message > news:b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.c om... > > > > Generally, when talking about stock unmodified jeeps, the earlier the > > > > production year, the more suitable for off-roading. > > > > > > please explain. > > > > Well, just to name a few, off the top of my head: > > I'm not sure that's where these came from: Son of a Bitch! Coffee in my keyboard, again. Thanks alot, Jim. |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"TJim" <jim@ranlet.nospam.com> wrote in message news:ydGdnRV5tepQJhOiRVn-gw@comcast.com... > Comments below... > > -- > Jim > > "Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message > news:b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.c om... > > > > Generally, when talking about stock unmodified jeeps, the earlier the > > > > production year, the more suitable for off-roading. > > > > > > please explain. > > > > Well, just to name a few, off the top of my head: > > I'm not sure that's where these came from: Son of a Bitch! Coffee in my keyboard, again. Thanks alot, Jim. |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
"TJim" <jim@ranlet.nospam.com> wrote in message news:ydGdnRV5tepQJhOiRVn-gw@comcast.com... > Comments below... > > -- > Jim > > "Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message > news:b102b6e4.0310160610.1c931a23@posting.google.c om... > > > > Generally, when talking about stock unmodified jeeps, the earlier the > > > > production year, the more suitable for off-roading. > > > > > > please explain. > > > > Well, just to name a few, off the top of my head: > > I'm not sure that's where these came from: Son of a Bitch! Coffee in my keyboard, again. Thanks alot, Jim. |
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
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. "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?????????
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. "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?????????
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. "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?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:22:06 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
<beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following: > >Putting anything larger than 35 on a CJ, YJ, or TJ is lunacy for most >people. The Jeeps that carry larger tires are hardly even recognizable as >ever being a Jeep. OK, this is beginning to sink in for me. :-) I don't even have a Jeep yet but was initially thinking of 37" tires. I think I should get real. If I got a Jeep with Dana 30 front, Dana 20 xfer case, and AMC 20 rear-end (I hear that's not a great one) does that sound like it would be crazy to put 35" tires on that kind of driveline? I plan on taking my Jeep offroading 3-4 times a month. I swear I'm not arguing. I'm just asking because I have no idea. >> 2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt >> >While this is true, the vehicle must be over 30 years old to enjoy such an >exemption. I think that depends on your state laws. In North Carolina they only do emissions tests on vehicles less than 25 years old: (see #2 FAQ) http://www.dmv.dot.state.nc.us/enfor...tions/faq.html Here's the quote if you don't wanna bother with the website: What vehicles are required to be emissions tested? Effective July 1, 2002, all 1996 and newer gasoline-powered vehicles registered in an emissions county are required to receive the On Board Diagnostics(OBD II) emissions test. Additionally, through December 31, 2005, all gasoline-powered vehicles less than 25 years old, up to and including model year 1995, registered in one of the original nine emissions counties, (WAKE, FORSYTH, GUILFORD, DURHAM, GASTON, CABARRUS, MECKLENBURG, ORANGE, or UNION), will require an exhaust (tailpipe) emissions test. -- 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 12:22:06 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
<beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following: > >Putting anything larger than 35 on a CJ, YJ, or TJ is lunacy for most >people. The Jeeps that carry larger tires are hardly even recognizable as >ever being a Jeep. OK, this is beginning to sink in for me. :-) I don't even have a Jeep yet but was initially thinking of 37" tires. I think I should get real. If I got a Jeep with Dana 30 front, Dana 20 xfer case, and AMC 20 rear-end (I hear that's not a great one) does that sound like it would be crazy to put 35" tires on that kind of driveline? I plan on taking my Jeep offroading 3-4 times a month. I swear I'm not arguing. I'm just asking because I have no idea. >> 2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt >> >While this is true, the vehicle must be over 30 years old to enjoy such an >exemption. I think that depends on your state laws. In North Carolina they only do emissions tests on vehicles less than 25 years old: (see #2 FAQ) http://www.dmv.dot.state.nc.us/enfor...tions/faq.html Here's the quote if you don't wanna bother with the website: What vehicles are required to be emissions tested? Effective July 1, 2002, all 1996 and newer gasoline-powered vehicles registered in an emissions county are required to receive the On Board Diagnostics(OBD II) emissions test. Additionally, through December 31, 2005, all gasoline-powered vehicles less than 25 years old, up to and including model year 1995, registered in one of the original nine emissions counties, (WAKE, FORSYTH, GUILFORD, DURHAM, GASTON, CABARRUS, MECKLENBURG, ORANGE, or UNION), will require an exhaust (tailpipe) emissions test. -- 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 12:22:06 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
<beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following: > >Putting anything larger than 35 on a CJ, YJ, or TJ is lunacy for most >people. The Jeeps that carry larger tires are hardly even recognizable as >ever being a Jeep. OK, this is beginning to sink in for me. :-) I don't even have a Jeep yet but was initially thinking of 37" tires. I think I should get real. If I got a Jeep with Dana 30 front, Dana 20 xfer case, and AMC 20 rear-end (I hear that's not a great one) does that sound like it would be crazy to put 35" tires on that kind of driveline? I plan on taking my Jeep offroading 3-4 times a month. I swear I'm not arguing. I'm just asking because I have no idea. >> 2) Older vehicles are emissions exempt >> >While this is true, the vehicle must be over 30 years old to enjoy such an >exemption. I think that depends on your state laws. In North Carolina they only do emissions tests on vehicles less than 25 years old: (see #2 FAQ) http://www.dmv.dot.state.nc.us/enfor...tions/faq.html Here's the quote if you don't wanna bother with the website: What vehicles are required to be emissions tested? Effective July 1, 2002, all 1996 and newer gasoline-powered vehicles registered in an emissions county are required to receive the On Board Diagnostics(OBD II) emissions test. Additionally, through December 31, 2005, all gasoline-powered vehicles less than 25 years old, up to and including model year 1995, registered in one of the original nine emissions counties, (WAKE, FORSYTH, GUILFORD, DURHAM, GASTON, CABARRUS, MECKLENBURG, ORANGE, or UNION), will require an exhaust (tailpipe) emissions test. -- 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?????????
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 01:04 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands