Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

Choose the V8, unless it really is the 304".
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

travis wrote:
>
> I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
> have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
> factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
> good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
> capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
> old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
> I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
> options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
>
> --
> 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?????????
 

Choose the V8, unless it really is the 304".
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

travis wrote:
>
> I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
> have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
> factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
> good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
> capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
> old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
> I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
> options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
>
> --
> 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 14:28:56 -0700, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@cox.net> shared the following:

> I think it would be vary hard to find a classic 304", more than
>likely they've bin replaced by an earlier high compression 360" or maybe
>the 401", 400 horsepower that are still plentiful in the bone yards:
>http://www.----------.com/amchpchart.jpg

Really? That would be a good thing... I think... Right? The CJ5 I'm
about to go look at Saturday supposedly has a 304 in it but if it has
a more powerful, larger motor then I can't see myself getting very
upset about it. Is there something I should be worried about with a
360 or 401? That url you list above... I don't see any 401 on it.
But I like the looks of that 1970 390 with 340 hp and 430 lb-ft of
torque. WOW!

> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:--------------------
>
>travis wrote:
>>
>> *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 14:28:56 -0700, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@cox.net> shared the following:

> I think it would be vary hard to find a classic 304", more than
>likely they've bin replaced by an earlier high compression 360" or maybe
>the 401", 400 horsepower that are still plentiful in the bone yards:
>http://www.----------.com/amchpchart.jpg

Really? That would be a good thing... I think... Right? The CJ5 I'm
about to go look at Saturday supposedly has a 304 in it but if it has
a more powerful, larger motor then I can't see myself getting very
upset about it. Is there something I should be worried about with a
360 or 401? That url you list above... I don't see any 401 on it.
But I like the looks of that 1970 390 with 340 hp and 430 lb-ft of
torque. WOW!

> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:--------------------
>
>travis wrote:
>>
>> *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 14:28:56 -0700, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@cox.net> shared the following:

> I think it would be vary hard to find a classic 304", more than
>likely they've bin replaced by an earlier high compression 360" or maybe
>the 401", 400 horsepower that are still plentiful in the bone yards:
>http://www.----------.com/amchpchart.jpg

Really? That would be a good thing... I think... Right? The CJ5 I'm
about to go look at Saturday supposedly has a 304 in it but if it has
a more powerful, larger motor then I can't see myself getting very
upset about it. Is there something I should be worried about with a
360 or 401? That url you list above... I don't see any 401 on it.
But I like the looks of that 1970 390 with 340 hp and 430 lb-ft of
torque. WOW!

> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:--------------------
>
>travis wrote:
>>
>> *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?????????
 

travis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:41:44 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> <beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
> >
> >>
> >> I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
> >> have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
> >> factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
> >> good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
> >> capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
> >> old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
> >> I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
> >> options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The I6 in the year models you are looking at is a 4.2L.
>
> I realize that. It puts out less power than the 304 available in the
> same model year. Someone else mentioned the 4.0 liter, that's why I
> brought it up again. Because it *does* put out more power than the
> old 304s, but it's not an option that was available on the old CJs
> that I'm looking at. If it *was* available on them then I'd probably
> go with one of them rather than the V8. "More power is good" is just
> my personal opinion.
>
> --

That 4.2 carb engine in the CJ's can be easily tweaked for some nice
power. It is a stronger low end torque engine than the new de-stroked
4.0 version and will still haul butt on the highway.

Not much can be done to the fuel injected 4.0 for any radical power
boost, but a carb engine can be 'played with', with effect.

I can crest sand pit walls under good torque at 4 or 500 rpm in 3rd low,
get too steep and it will just dig in my 33" muds rather than stall and
my 4th will bury the spedo on the highway, forget 5th.

I am running the stock Carter BBD carb with no computer controls. I
only have a hot coil and a straight pipe with a Dynomax high flow
muffler on for mods.

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

travis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:41:44 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> <beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
> >
> >>
> >> I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
> >> have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
> >> factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
> >> good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
> >> capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
> >> old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
> >> I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
> >> options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The I6 in the year models you are looking at is a 4.2L.
>
> I realize that. It puts out less power than the 304 available in the
> same model year. Someone else mentioned the 4.0 liter, that's why I
> brought it up again. Because it *does* put out more power than the
> old 304s, but it's not an option that was available on the old CJs
> that I'm looking at. If it *was* available on them then I'd probably
> go with one of them rather than the V8. "More power is good" is just
> my personal opinion.
>
> --

That 4.2 carb engine in the CJ's can be easily tweaked for some nice
power. It is a stronger low end torque engine than the new de-stroked
4.0 version and will still haul butt on the highway.

Not much can be done to the fuel injected 4.0 for any radical power
boost, but a carb engine can be 'played with', with effect.

I can crest sand pit walls under good torque at 4 or 500 rpm in 3rd low,
get too steep and it will just dig in my 33" muds rather than stall and
my 4th will bury the spedo on the highway, forget 5th.

I am running the stock Carter BBD carb with no computer controls. I
only have a hot coil and a straight pipe with a Dynomax high flow
muffler on for mods.

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

travis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:41:44 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> <beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
> >
> >>
> >> I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
> >> have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
> >> factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
> >> good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
> >> capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
> >> old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
> >> I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
> >> options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The I6 in the year models you are looking at is a 4.2L.
>
> I realize that. It puts out less power than the 304 available in the
> same model year. Someone else mentioned the 4.0 liter, that's why I
> brought it up again. Because it *does* put out more power than the
> old 304s, but it's not an option that was available on the old CJs
> that I'm looking at. If it *was* available on them then I'd probably
> go with one of them rather than the V8. "More power is good" is just
> my personal opinion.
>
> --

That 4.2 carb engine in the CJ's can be easily tweaked for some nice
power. It is a stronger low end torque engine than the new de-stroked
4.0 version and will still haul butt on the highway.

Not much can be done to the fuel injected 4.0 for any radical power
boost, but a carb engine can be 'played with', with effect.

I can crest sand pit walls under good torque at 4 or 500 rpm in 3rd low,
get too steep and it will just dig in my 33" muds rather than stall and
my 4th will bury the spedo on the highway, forget 5th.

I am running the stock Carter BBD carb with no computer controls. I
only have a hot coil and a straight pipe with a Dynomax high flow
muffler on for mods.

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

It's on the Javelin page.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

travis wrote:
>
> Really? That would be a good thing... I think... Right? The CJ5 I'm
> about to go look at Saturday supposedly has a 304 in it but if it has
> a more powerful, larger motor then I can't see myself getting very
> upset about it. Is there something I should be worried about with a
> 360 or 401? That url you list above... I don't see any 401 on it.
> But I like the looks of that 1970 390 with 340 hp and 430 lb-ft of
> torque. WOW!
> --
> 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?????????
 

It's on the Javelin page.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

travis wrote:
>
> Really? That would be a good thing... I think... Right? The CJ5 I'm
> about to go look at Saturday supposedly has a 304 in it but if it has
> a more powerful, larger motor then I can't see myself getting very
> upset about it. Is there something I should be worried about with a
> 360 or 401? That url you list above... I don't see any 401 on it.
> But I like the looks of that 1970 390 with 340 hp and 430 lb-ft of
> torque. WOW!
> --
> 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?????????
 

It's on the Javelin page.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

travis wrote:
>
> Really? That would be a good thing... I think... Right? The CJ5 I'm
> about to go look at Saturday supposedly has a 304 in it but if it has
> a more powerful, larger motor then I can't see myself getting very
> upset about it. Is there something I should be worried about with a
> 360 or 401? That url you list above... I don't see any 401 on it.
> But I like the looks of that 1970 390 with 340 hp and 430 lb-ft of
> torque. WOW!
> --
> 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 16 Oct 2003 20:50:09 GMT, mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon (Matt
Macchiarolo) shared the following:

>In article <p60uovo4aj3ac3vfbbmsasbfqt0ivm2op0@4ax.com>, travis
><travist34removethis@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
>>I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet
>
>There's a good reason for that, they weren't available in CJ's. The 4.0 is the
>4.2 successor.
>* * *

Yeah........ I know that and already said that earlier. That is
exactly my point. The engines that ARE available in the older CJs
that I'm looking at are typically the 4.2 and the V8. The V8 puts out
more power than the 4.2 if both are in stock trim. That is one of the
reasons I prefer the V8. Again I say *if* the 4.0 was in the older
CJs that I'm looking at then I'd strongly consider them over the V8
but they are not... That's why I said I hadn't seen any. Someone has
probably gotten their hands on a newer 4.0 and put it in an older CJ
but I haven't seen one yet. MOST of the older CJs I look at DO have
the I6 instead of the V8. I said I hadn't seen any 4.0 engines and
that "There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs I'm
looking at" because I realized the 4.0 engines were not options in the
older CJs. I feel like I'm saying the same thing over and over but
I've said it a few times in other posts already and for some reason
I'm getting the impression that I'm not being clear since people
continue to tell me the 4.0 was not available in older CJs.


--
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 16 Oct 2003 20:50:09 GMT, mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon (Matt
Macchiarolo) shared the following:

>In article <p60uovo4aj3ac3vfbbmsasbfqt0ivm2op0@4ax.com>, travis
><travist34removethis@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
>>I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet
>
>There's a good reason for that, they weren't available in CJ's. The 4.0 is the
>4.2 successor.
>* * *

Yeah........ I know that and already said that earlier. That is
exactly my point. The engines that ARE available in the older CJs
that I'm looking at are typically the 4.2 and the V8. The V8 puts out
more power than the 4.2 if both are in stock trim. That is one of the
reasons I prefer the V8. Again I say *if* the 4.0 was in the older
CJs that I'm looking at then I'd strongly consider them over the V8
but they are not... That's why I said I hadn't seen any. Someone has
probably gotten their hands on a newer 4.0 and put it in an older CJ
but I haven't seen one yet. MOST of the older CJs I look at DO have
the I6 instead of the V8. I said I hadn't seen any 4.0 engines and
that "There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs I'm
looking at" because I realized the 4.0 engines were not options in the
older CJs. I feel like I'm saying the same thing over and over but
I've said it a few times in other posts already and for some reason
I'm getting the impression that I'm not being clear since people
continue to tell me the 4.0 was not available in older CJs.


--
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 16 Oct 2003 20:50:09 GMT, mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon (Matt
Macchiarolo) shared the following:

>In article <p60uovo4aj3ac3vfbbmsasbfqt0ivm2op0@4ax.com>, travis
><travist34removethis@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
>>I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet
>
>There's a good reason for that, they weren't available in CJ's. The 4.0 is the
>4.2 successor.
>* * *

Yeah........ I know that and already said that earlier. That is
exactly my point. The engines that ARE available in the older CJs
that I'm looking at are typically the 4.2 and the V8. The V8 puts out
more power than the 4.2 if both are in stock trim. That is one of the
reasons I prefer the V8. Again I say *if* the 4.0 was in the older
CJs that I'm looking at then I'd strongly consider them over the V8
but they are not... That's why I said I hadn't seen any. Someone has
probably gotten their hands on a newer 4.0 and put it in an older CJ
but I haven't seen one yet. MOST of the older CJs I look at DO have
the I6 instead of the V8. I said I hadn't seen any 4.0 engines and
that "There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs I'm
looking at" because I realized the 4.0 engines were not options in the
older CJs. I feel like I'm saying the same thing over and over but
I've said it a few times in other posts already and for some reason
I'm getting the impression that I'm not being clear since people
continue to tell me the 4.0 was not available in older CJs.


--
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?????????
 

Yes, like Ford also built Bantams design. It was designed by Ford
and later built by Kaiser, AM
General Corporation, and GM: http://www.m38a1.ca/m151.html and:
http://www.film.queensu.ca/CJ3B/Poster/M151.html for a couple.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I was under the impression Ford designed and built those.
> * * *
> Matt Macchiarolo
> www.townpeddler.com
> www.wolverine4wd.org
> http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

Yes, like Ford also built Bantams design. It was designed by Ford
and later built by Kaiser, AM
General Corporation, and GM: http://www.m38a1.ca/m151.html and:
http://www.film.queensu.ca/CJ3B/Poster/M151.html for a couple.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I was under the impression Ford designed and built those.
> * * *
> Matt Macchiarolo
> www.townpeddler.com
> www.wolverine4wd.org
> http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

Yes, like Ford also built Bantams design. It was designed by Ford
and later built by Kaiser, AM
General Corporation, and GM: http://www.m38a1.ca/m151.html and:
http://www.film.queensu.ca/CJ3B/Poster/M151.html for a couple.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I was under the impression Ford designed and built those.
> * * *
> Matt Macchiarolo
> www.townpeddler.com
> www.wolverine4wd.org
> http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

Ditto.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

travis wrote:
>
> Mental note to self: Try to not piss off Nathan.
>
> --
> 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?????????
 

Ditto.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

travis wrote:
>
> Mental note to self: Try to not piss off Nathan.
>
> --
> 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?????????
 

Ditto.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

travis wrote:
>
> Mental note to self: Try to not piss off Nathan.
>
> --
> 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?????????
 

"Matt Macchiarolo" <mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon> wrote in message
news:20031016165009.12501.00003250@mb-m04.aol.com...
> It was dismissed.

to date it has been dismissed three different times and d/c attorneys have
not ruled out trying again.


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"Matt Macchiarolo" <mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon> wrote in message
news:20031016165009.12501.00003250@mb-m04.aol.com...
> It was dismissed.

to date it has been dismissed three different times and d/c attorneys have
not ruled out trying again.


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"Matt Macchiarolo" <mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon> wrote in message
news:20031016165009.12501.00003250@mb-m04.aol.com...
> It was dismissed.

to date it has been dismissed three different times and d/c attorneys have
not ruled out trying again.


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8m9uov0n8rjlnes8pj8dgb97ad8c5gfhbp@4ax.com...
> I'm getting the impression that I'm not being clear since people
> continue to tell me the 4.0 was not available in older CJs.

4.0 in a cj? the 4.0 was not available in the cj.


:-)

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8m9uov0n8rjlnes8pj8dgb97ad8c5gfhbp@4ax.com...
> I'm getting the impression that I'm not being clear since people
> continue to tell me the 4.0 was not available in older CJs.

4.0 in a cj? the 4.0 was not available in the cj.


:-)

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8m9uov0n8rjlnes8pj8dgb97ad8c5gfhbp@4ax.com...
> I'm getting the impression that I'm not being clear since people
> continue to tell me the 4.0 was not available in older CJs.

4.0 in a cj? the 4.0 was not available in the cj.


:-)

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8m9uov0n8rjlnes8pj8dgb97ad8c5gfhbp@4ax.com...
> I said I hadn't seen any 4.0 engines

another option is to pick up one with the 4.2. put a complete 4.0 head on
top of it with the entire injection system from a late model tj and youll
have one hell of a combination, + an additional 40+ hp boost.


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8m9uov0n8rjlnes8pj8dgb97ad8c5gfhbp@4ax.com...
> I said I hadn't seen any 4.0 engines

another option is to pick up one with the 4.2. put a complete 4.0 head on
top of it with the entire injection system from a late model tj and youll
have one hell of a combination, + an additional 40+ hp boost.


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8m9uov0n8rjlnes8pj8dgb97ad8c5gfhbp@4ax.com...
> I said I hadn't seen any 4.0 engines

another option is to pick up one with the 4.2. put a complete 4.0 head on
top of it with the entire injection system from a late model tj and youll
have one hell of a combination, + an additional 40+ hp boost.


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3F8F28B6.5E463A9E@cox.net...
> Ditto.

ha! ive seen your guns bill. youre one of the few people with more
firepower than i keep on hand. :-)


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3F8F28B6.5E463A9E@cox.net...
> Ditto.

ha! ive seen your guns bill. youre one of the few people with more
firepower than i keep on hand. :-)


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3F8F28B6.5E463A9E@cox.net...
> Ditto.

ha! ive seen your guns bill. youre one of the few people with more
firepower than i keep on hand. :-)


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 01:18:08 GMT, "Nathan Collier"
<JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following:

>"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:8m9uov0n8rjlnes8pj8dgb97ad8c5gfhbp@4ax.com.. .
>> I'm getting the impression that I'm not being clear since people
>> continue to tell me the 4.0 was not available in older CJs.
>
>4.0 in a cj? the 4.0 was not available in the cj.
>
>
>:-)

Really? Damn, I gotta start reading some Jeep literature. :-)



--
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 Fri, 17 Oct 2003 01:18:08 GMT, "Nathan Collier"
<JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following:

>"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:8m9uov0n8rjlnes8pj8dgb97ad8c5gfhbp@4ax.com.. .
>> I'm getting the impression that I'm not being clear since people
>> continue to tell me the 4.0 was not available in older CJs.
>
>4.0 in a cj? the 4.0 was not available in the cj.
>
>
>:-)

Really? Damn, I gotta start reading some Jeep literature. :-)



--
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 Fri, 17 Oct 2003 01:18:08 GMT, "Nathan Collier"
<JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following:

>"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:8m9uov0n8rjlnes8pj8dgb97ad8c5gfhbp@4ax.com.. .
>> I'm getting the impression that I'm not being clear since people
>> continue to tell me the 4.0 was not available in older CJs.
>
>4.0 in a cj? the 4.0 was not available in the cj.
>
>
>:-)

Really? Damn, I gotta start reading some Jeep literature. :-)



--
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?????????
 

Thanks for all the replys.....i had no idea i would get this much
input....it looks like the 6 will be the trail to go.....now on to saving
money and day dreaming about my TJ to be!

"Nathan Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:aJojb.8245$SE3.3459@twister.southeast.rr.com. ..
> "GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:Uuojb.32214$uz1.51877@news1.mts.net...
> > Which one would ya like Nate!
>
> your expressed opinion on 4 vs. 6 in a post that i can link to.
>
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>
>

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

Thanks for all the replys.....i had no idea i would get this much
input....it looks like the 6 will be the trail to go.....now on to saving
money and day dreaming about my TJ to be!

"Nathan Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:aJojb.8245$SE3.3459@twister.southeast.rr.com. ..
> "GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:Uuojb.32214$uz1.51877@news1.mts.net...
> > Which one would ya like Nate!
>
> your expressed opinion on 4 vs. 6 in a post that i can link to.
>
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>
>

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

Thanks for all the replys.....i had no idea i would get this much
input....it looks like the 6 will be the trail to go.....now on to saving
money and day dreaming about my TJ to be!

"Nathan Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:aJojb.8245$SE3.3459@twister.southeast.rr.com. ..
> "GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:Uuojb.32214$uz1.51877@news1.mts.net...
> > Which one would ya like Nate!
>
> your expressed opinion on 4 vs. 6 in a post that i can link to.
>
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>
>

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

Nathan Collier wrote:

>"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>news:Uuojb.32214$uz1.51877@news1.mts.net...
>
>
>>Which one would ya like Nate!
>>
>>
>
>your expressed opinion on 4 vs. 6 in a post that i can link to.
>

Ya got mail buddy!

Mike

Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
 

Nathan Collier wrote:

>"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>news:Uuojb.32214$uz1.51877@news1.mts.net...
>
>
>>Which one would ya like Nate!
>>
>>
>
>your expressed opinion on 4 vs. 6 in a post that i can link to.
>

Ya got mail buddy!

Mike