Mike Romain

I am thinking the guts of the 258 into the 4.0 block making it something
like a 4.7 'stroker'. :-)

It would be worth it to just swap the short block for the OP then eh.
Keep the head and intakes and swap from there down. Even if the head
needed a valve job, that isn't much.

Mike

Will Honea wrote:
>
> The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> the '88 head on a 258 block...
>
> On Fri, 20 May 2005 12:49:20 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> > Ahh ok, good to know, thanks. I knew the ports were different but
> > didn't know the headers were. So only the short block will swap then.
> >
> > Man I got this 258 with a new crank sitting in my garage and an 88 4.0
> > getting tired..... Stroker, mmmmm......
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Will Honea wrote:
> > >
> > > The intake and exhaust aren't the same. The 92 used the HO head and
> > > the mainfold/headers won't match up. Just looking at my 88 next to
> > > the son's 91, nearly everything else will swap. I looked at this idea
> > > a couple of years ago and decided that the only really easy way was to
> > > swap heads onto the good block.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:15:12 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > The engines are the same basically so you could just swap over the
> > > > electronic parts to the 89.....
> > > >
> > > > I would just swap over the 'engine' and leave the intake and exhaust
> > > > headers including the fuel rail, distributor and parts and alternator
> > > > from the 92 in there.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > >
> > > > chevycruser_03 wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I need a '92 engine for my '92 cherokee. The one I have is '89 engine and
> > > > > does not mach up with the computer system. '89 has a new crank sensor
> > >
> > > --
> > > Will Honea
>
> --
> Will Honea

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Hi Will,
Can you tell me if the '88 frog injection looks like it fits the
regular 258" head where intake, and larger exhaust ports and manifolds
are in align?
http://web.archive.org/web/200210011...inder_head.jpg
Rather staggered like the 4.0L:
http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/en...adconv/146.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Will Honea wrote:
>
> The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> the '88 head on a 258 block...

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Hi Will,
Can you tell me if the '88 frog injection looks like it fits the
regular 258" head where intake, and larger exhaust ports and manifolds
are in align?
http://web.archive.org/web/200210011...inder_head.jpg
Rather staggered like the 4.0L:
http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/en...adconv/146.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Will Honea wrote:
>
> The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> the '88 head on a 258 block...

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Hi Will,
Can you tell me if the '88 frog injection looks like it fits the
regular 258" head where intake, and larger exhaust ports and manifolds
are in align?
http://web.archive.org/web/200210011...inder_head.jpg
Rather staggered like the 4.0L:
http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/en...adconv/146.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Will Honea wrote:
>
> The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> the '88 head on a 258 block...

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Hi Will,
Can you tell me if the '88 frog injection looks like it fits the
regular 258" head where intake, and larger exhaust ports and manifolds
are in align?
http://web.archive.org/web/200210011...inder_head.jpg
Rather staggered like the 4.0L:
http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/en...adconv/146.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Will Honea wrote:
>
> The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> the '88 head on a 258 block...

Will Honea

Old gray matter getting confused, sorry. Are you talking about your
setup or what? I don't remember what the bore on the 258 is. Is the
displacement difference only in the longer stroke of the 258 or does
it have a different bore than the 4.0?

For the OP, he would want the '92 head/intake/exhaust plus sensors on
the 88 block - with the '92 computer.

For your glass-tub and the engine from the XJ, you would need the
matching computer also. Better check me on this, but somewhere in the
back of my head ISTR a discussion a long while back about also needing
a different injector with the stroker. Seems like it was off a
Mustang or some such to get a higher fuel flow capacity.

On Sat, 21 May 2005 00:18:39 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> I am thinking the guts of the 258 into the 4.0 block making it something
> like a 4.7 'stroker'. :-)
>
> It would be worth it to just swap the short block for the OP then eh.
> Keep the head and intakes and swap from there down. Even if the head
> needed a valve job, that isn't much.
>
> Mike
>
> Will Honea wrote:
> >
> > The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> > nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> > of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> > the '88 head on a 258 block...
> >
> > On Fri, 20 May 2005 12:49:20 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Ahh ok, good to know, thanks. I knew the ports were different but
> > > didn't know the headers were. So only the short block will swap then.
> > >
> > > Man I got this 258 with a new crank sitting in my garage and an 88 4.0
> > > getting tired..... Stroker, mmmmm......
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > Will Honea wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The intake and exhaust aren't the same. The 92 used the HO head and
> > > > the mainfold/headers won't match up. Just looking at my 88 next to
> > > > the son's 91, nearly everything else will swap. I looked at this idea
> > > > a couple of years ago and decided that the only really easy way was to
> > > > swap heads onto the good block.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:15:12 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The engines are the same basically so you could just swap over the
> > > > > electronic parts to the 89.....
> > > > >
> > > > > I would just swap over the 'engine' and leave the intake and exhaust
> > > > > headers including the fuel rail, distributor and parts and alternator
> > > > > from the 92 in there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > > >
> > > > > chevycruser_03 wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I need a '92 engine for my '92 cherokee. The one I have is '89 engine and
> > > > > > does not mach up with the computer system. '89 has a new crank sensor
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Will Honea
> >
> > --
> > Will Honea


--
Will Honea

Will Honea

Old gray matter getting confused, sorry. Are you talking about your
setup or what? I don't remember what the bore on the 258 is. Is the
displacement difference only in the longer stroke of the 258 or does
it have a different bore than the 4.0?

For the OP, he would want the '92 head/intake/exhaust plus sensors on
the 88 block - with the '92 computer.

For your glass-tub and the engine from the XJ, you would need the
matching computer also. Better check me on this, but somewhere in the
back of my head ISTR a discussion a long while back about also needing
a different injector with the stroker. Seems like it was off a
Mustang or some such to get a higher fuel flow capacity.

On Sat, 21 May 2005 00:18:39 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> I am thinking the guts of the 258 into the 4.0 block making it something
> like a 4.7 'stroker'. :-)
>
> It would be worth it to just swap the short block for the OP then eh.
> Keep the head and intakes and swap from there down. Even if the head
> needed a valve job, that isn't much.
>
> Mike
>
> Will Honea wrote:
> >
> > The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> > nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> > of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> > the '88 head on a 258 block...
> >
> > On Fri, 20 May 2005 12:49:20 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Ahh ok, good to know, thanks. I knew the ports were different but
> > > didn't know the headers were. So only the short block will swap then.
> > >
> > > Man I got this 258 with a new crank sitting in my garage and an 88 4.0
> > > getting tired..... Stroker, mmmmm......
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > Will Honea wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The intake and exhaust aren't the same. The 92 used the HO head and
> > > > the mainfold/headers won't match up. Just looking at my 88 next to
> > > > the son's 91, nearly everything else will swap. I looked at this idea
> > > > a couple of years ago and decided that the only really easy way was to
> > > > swap heads onto the good block.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:15:12 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The engines are the same basically so you could just swap over the
> > > > > electronic parts to the 89.....
> > > > >
> > > > > I would just swap over the 'engine' and leave the intake and exhaust
> > > > > headers including the fuel rail, distributor and parts and alternator
> > > > > from the 92 in there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > > >
> > > > > chevycruser_03 wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I need a '92 engine for my '92 cherokee. The one I have is '89 engine and
> > > > > > does not mach up with the computer system. '89 has a new crank sensor
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Will Honea
> >
> > --
> > Will Honea


--
Will Honea

Will Honea

Old gray matter getting confused, sorry. Are you talking about your
setup or what? I don't remember what the bore on the 258 is. Is the
displacement difference only in the longer stroke of the 258 or does
it have a different bore than the 4.0?

For the OP, he would want the '92 head/intake/exhaust plus sensors on
the 88 block - with the '92 computer.

For your glass-tub and the engine from the XJ, you would need the
matching computer also. Better check me on this, but somewhere in the
back of my head ISTR a discussion a long while back about also needing
a different injector with the stroker. Seems like it was off a
Mustang or some such to get a higher fuel flow capacity.

On Sat, 21 May 2005 00:18:39 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> I am thinking the guts of the 258 into the 4.0 block making it something
> like a 4.7 'stroker'. :-)
>
> It would be worth it to just swap the short block for the OP then eh.
> Keep the head and intakes and swap from there down. Even if the head
> needed a valve job, that isn't much.
>
> Mike
>
> Will Honea wrote:
> >
> > The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> > nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> > of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> > the '88 head on a 258 block...
> >
> > On Fri, 20 May 2005 12:49:20 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Ahh ok, good to know, thanks. I knew the ports were different but
> > > didn't know the headers were. So only the short block will swap then.
> > >
> > > Man I got this 258 with a new crank sitting in my garage and an 88 4.0
> > > getting tired..... Stroker, mmmmm......
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > Will Honea wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The intake and exhaust aren't the same. The 92 used the HO head and
> > > > the mainfold/headers won't match up. Just looking at my 88 next to
> > > > the son's 91, nearly everything else will swap. I looked at this idea
> > > > a couple of years ago and decided that the only really easy way was to
> > > > swap heads onto the good block.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:15:12 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The engines are the same basically so you could just swap over the
> > > > > electronic parts to the 89.....
> > > > >
> > > > > I would just swap over the 'engine' and leave the intake and exhaust
> > > > > headers including the fuel rail, distributor and parts and alternator
> > > > > from the 92 in there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > > >
> > > > > chevycruser_03 wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I need a '92 engine for my '92 cherokee. The one I have is '89 engine and
> > > > > > does not mach up with the computer system. '89 has a new crank sensor
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Will Honea
> >
> > --
> > Will Honea


--
Will Honea

Will Honea

Old gray matter getting confused, sorry. Are you talking about your
setup or what? I don't remember what the bore on the 258 is. Is the
displacement difference only in the longer stroke of the 258 or does
it have a different bore than the 4.0?

For the OP, he would want the '92 head/intake/exhaust plus sensors on
the 88 block - with the '92 computer.

For your glass-tub and the engine from the XJ, you would need the
matching computer also. Better check me on this, but somewhere in the
back of my head ISTR a discussion a long while back about also needing
a different injector with the stroker. Seems like it was off a
Mustang or some such to get a higher fuel flow capacity.

On Sat, 21 May 2005 00:18:39 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> I am thinking the guts of the 258 into the 4.0 block making it something
> like a 4.7 'stroker'. :-)
>
> It would be worth it to just swap the short block for the OP then eh.
> Keep the head and intakes and swap from there down. Even if the head
> needed a valve job, that isn't much.
>
> Mike
>
> Will Honea wrote:
> >
> > The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> > nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> > of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> > the '88 head on a 258 block...
> >
> > On Fri, 20 May 2005 12:49:20 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Ahh ok, good to know, thanks. I knew the ports were different but
> > > didn't know the headers were. So only the short block will swap then.
> > >
> > > Man I got this 258 with a new crank sitting in my garage and an 88 4.0
> > > getting tired..... Stroker, mmmmm......
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > Will Honea wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The intake and exhaust aren't the same. The 92 used the HO head and
> > > > the mainfold/headers won't match up. Just looking at my 88 next to
> > > > the son's 91, nearly everything else will swap. I looked at this idea
> > > > a couple of years ago and decided that the only really easy way was to
> > > > swap heads onto the good block.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:15:12 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The engines are the same basically so you could just swap over the
> > > > > electronic parts to the 89.....
> > > > >
> > > > > I would just swap over the 'engine' and leave the intake and exhaust
> > > > > headers including the fuel rail, distributor and parts and alternator
> > > > > from the 92 in there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > > >
> > > > > chevycruser_03 wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I need a '92 engine for my '92 cherokee. The one I have is '89 engine and
> > > > > > does not mach up with the computer system. '89 has a new crank sensor
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Will Honea
> >
> > --
> > Will Honea


--
Will Honea

Will Honea

Sure can't, Bill. I've never laid a 258 head alongside a 4.0 head.
You can see the difference between the 88 and the newer HO with the
vehicles sitting side-by-side but I've never looked at 258 that way.
When I was looking, I had a line on a wrecked 91 XJ with under 45k on
the clock but I was too new at this to really realize the power
difference and figured it was more work than it was worth to swap
stuff around. Looking back...


On Sat, 21 May 2005 02:35:13 UTC L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:

> Hi Will,
> Can you tell me if the '88 frog injection looks like it fits the
> regular 258" head where intake, and larger exhaust ports and manifolds
> are in align?
> http://web.archive.org/web/200210011...inder_head.jpg
> Rather staggered like the 4.0L:
> http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/en...adconv/146.jpg
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Will Honea wrote:
> >
> > The HO intake manifold is a whole lot nicer. The flow geometry is
> > nice and symetrical. Between that and the port angles they got a bunch
> > of ponies to add to the 4.0. Not that I would sneer at the umph of
> > the '88 head on a 258 block...


--
Will Honea