Highcountry

I wasn't aware that the 4.0 head was an improvement, what did they
change? I definitely don't want to go the V8 route, even if I did it
would have to be an AMC. I had a new CJ in 1976 with the 304
completely stock and it was TOO powerful. Any time you punched the
throttle in 1st gear you had both rear tires spinning instantly! I
am more into gobs of low end slow torque and even carbureted my 258 is
great at that. It has 3.31 gears, Manual Transmission and 30"
tires. On level roads I can have it Idling in High gear and apply
full throttle without any jerking or pinging, it just begins
accelerating and builds speed.

The major reason I would like the Injection on my 258 is that I plan
on taking it to the Rockies and spend some time at 10,000 to 12,000
feet which tends to cause an over rich mixture in a carburetor set up
for 300 feet like mine! I doubt I would need to change heads, since
my engine runs perfectly.

Thank you so much for offering to help, and I WILL take you up on it
when the time comes.

Thanks, Bruce

Highcountry

I wasn't aware that the 4.0 head was an improvement, what did they
change? I definitely don't want to go the V8 route, even if I did it
would have to be an AMC. I had a new CJ in 1976 with the 304
completely stock and it was TOO powerful. Any time you punched the
throttle in 1st gear you had both rear tires spinning instantly! I
am more into gobs of low end slow torque and even carbureted my 258 is
great at that. It has 3.31 gears, Manual Transmission and 30"
tires. On level roads I can have it Idling in High gear and apply
full throttle without any jerking or pinging, it just begins
accelerating and builds speed.

The major reason I would like the Injection on my 258 is that I plan
on taking it to the Rockies and spend some time at 10,000 to 12,000
feet which tends to cause an over rich mixture in a carburetor set up
for 300 feet like mine! I doubt I would need to change heads, since
my engine runs perfectly.

Thank you so much for offering to help, and I WILL take you up on it
when the time comes.

Thanks, Bruce

Highcountry

I wasn't aware that the 4.0 head was an improvement, what did they
change? I definitely don't want to go the V8 route, even if I did it
would have to be an AMC. I had a new CJ in 1976 with the 304
completely stock and it was TOO powerful. Any time you punched the
throttle in 1st gear you had both rear tires spinning instantly! I
am more into gobs of low end slow torque and even carbureted my 258 is
great at that. It has 3.31 gears, Manual Transmission and 30"
tires. On level roads I can have it Idling in High gear and apply
full throttle without any jerking or pinging, it just begins
accelerating and builds speed.

The major reason I would like the Injection on my 258 is that I plan
on taking it to the Rockies and spend some time at 10,000 to 12,000
feet which tends to cause an over rich mixture in a carburetor set up
for 300 feet like mine! I doubt I would need to change heads, since
my engine runs perfectly.

Thank you so much for offering to help, and I WILL take you up on it
when the time comes.

Thanks, Bruce

Mike Romain

If you are still running stock, there is a wire you ground for high
altitude mix control. It comes out of the loom near the dipstick.

I personally can't imagine me 'trusting' gobs of glue to hold my coolant
inside my engine like you have to do on the 4.0 head. The water
passages in the rear don't match up and overhang the block so all these
holes have to be gobbed up with glue or something....

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

Highcountry wrote:
> I wasn't aware that the 4.0 head was an improvement, what did they
> change? I definitely don't want to go the V8 route, even if I did it
> would have to be an AMC. I had a new CJ in 1976 with the 304
> completely stock and it was TOO powerful. Any time you punched the
> throttle in 1st gear you had both rear tires spinning instantly! I
> am more into gobs of low end slow torque and even carbureted my 258 is
> great at that. It has 3.31 gears, Manual Transmission and 30"
> tires. On level roads I can have it Idling in High gear and apply
> full throttle without any jerking or pinging, it just begins
> accelerating and builds speed.
>
> The major reason I would like the Injection on my 258 is that I plan
> on taking it to the Rockies and spend some time at 10,000 to 12,000
> feet which tends to cause an over rich mixture in a carburetor set up
> for 300 feet like mine! I doubt I would need to change heads, since
> my engine runs perfectly.
>
> Thank you so much for offering to help, and I WILL take you up on it
> when the time comes.
>
> Thanks, Bruce
>

Mike Romain

If you are still running stock, there is a wire you ground for high
altitude mix control. It comes out of the loom near the dipstick.

I personally can't imagine me 'trusting' gobs of glue to hold my coolant
inside my engine like you have to do on the 4.0 head. The water
passages in the rear don't match up and overhang the block so all these
holes have to be gobbed up with glue or something....

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

Highcountry wrote:
> I wasn't aware that the 4.0 head was an improvement, what did they
> change? I definitely don't want to go the V8 route, even if I did it
> would have to be an AMC. I had a new CJ in 1976 with the 304
> completely stock and it was TOO powerful. Any time you punched the
> throttle in 1st gear you had both rear tires spinning instantly! I
> am more into gobs of low end slow torque and even carbureted my 258 is
> great at that. It has 3.31 gears, Manual Transmission and 30"
> tires. On level roads I can have it Idling in High gear and apply
> full throttle without any jerking or pinging, it just begins
> accelerating and builds speed.
>
> The major reason I would like the Injection on my 258 is that I plan
> on taking it to the Rockies and spend some time at 10,000 to 12,000
> feet which tends to cause an over rich mixture in a carburetor set up
> for 300 feet like mine! I doubt I would need to change heads, since
> my engine runs perfectly.
>
> Thank you so much for offering to help, and I WILL take you up on it
> when the time comes.
>
> Thanks, Bruce
>

Mike Romain

If you are still running stock, there is a wire you ground for high
altitude mix control. It comes out of the loom near the dipstick.

I personally can't imagine me 'trusting' gobs of glue to hold my coolant
inside my engine like you have to do on the 4.0 head. The water
passages in the rear don't match up and overhang the block so all these
holes have to be gobbed up with glue or something....

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

Highcountry wrote:
> I wasn't aware that the 4.0 head was an improvement, what did they
> change? I definitely don't want to go the V8 route, even if I did it
> would have to be an AMC. I had a new CJ in 1976 with the 304
> completely stock and it was TOO powerful. Any time you punched the
> throttle in 1st gear you had both rear tires spinning instantly! I
> am more into gobs of low end slow torque and even carbureted my 258 is
> great at that. It has 3.31 gears, Manual Transmission and 30"
> tires. On level roads I can have it Idling in High gear and apply
> full throttle without any jerking or pinging, it just begins
> accelerating and builds speed.
>
> The major reason I would like the Injection on my 258 is that I plan
> on taking it to the Rockies and spend some time at 10,000 to 12,000
> feet which tends to cause an over rich mixture in a carburetor set up
> for 300 feet like mine! I doubt I would need to change heads, since
> my engine runs perfectly.
>
> Thank you so much for offering to help, and I WILL take you up on it
> when the time comes.
>
> Thanks, Bruce
>

Mike Romain

If you are still running stock, there is a wire you ground for high
altitude mix control. It comes out of the loom near the dipstick.

I personally can't imagine me 'trusting' gobs of glue to hold my coolant
inside my engine like you have to do on the 4.0 head. The water
passages in the rear don't match up and overhang the block so all these
holes have to be gobbed up with glue or something....

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

Highcountry wrote:
> I wasn't aware that the 4.0 head was an improvement, what did they
> change? I definitely don't want to go the V8 route, even if I did it
> would have to be an AMC. I had a new CJ in 1976 with the 304
> completely stock and it was TOO powerful. Any time you punched the
> throttle in 1st gear you had both rear tires spinning instantly! I
> am more into gobs of low end slow torque and even carbureted my 258 is
> great at that. It has 3.31 gears, Manual Transmission and 30"
> tires. On level roads I can have it Idling in High gear and apply
> full throttle without any jerking or pinging, it just begins
> accelerating and builds speed.
>
> The major reason I would like the Injection on my 258 is that I plan
> on taking it to the Rockies and spend some time at 10,000 to 12,000
> feet which tends to cause an over rich mixture in a carburetor set up
> for 300 feet like mine! I doubt I would need to change heads, since
> my engine runs perfectly.
>
> Thank you so much for offering to help, and I WILL take you up on it
> when the time comes.
>
> Thanks, Bruce
>

Highcountry

That sounds scary! Well, I must get to work so check your responses
tomorrow.

Thanks again, Bruce

Highcountry

That sounds scary! Well, I must get to work so check your responses
tomorrow.

Thanks again, Bruce

Highcountry

That sounds scary! Well, I must get to work so check your responses
tomorrow.

Thanks again, Bruce