reconair

Super motor -- My 91 Wrangler just turned 256,000mi on it's 4.0L. It leaks
more oil than it burns.

Scott
"sam owens" <sam@sam.com> wrote in message
news:b8chg2dv33m86vgs5906lg47rboov21gri@4ax.com...
>I was talking with a guy at the collision shop in Ingalls and he was
> tellin' me that the engine that is in my 98 Cherokee Sport was among
> the best engines ever designed and has been around in various
> iterations since the 60's. He lamented that Chrysler decided not to
> produce that engine any longer and feels that it is a mistake. I asked
> him how many miles might I expect to get if I take care od business
> and he felt 250,000 wasn't out of line. I have 138,000 now.
>
> Any opinions on wither of these statements?
>
> Sam

reconair

Super motor -- My 91 Wrangler just turned 256,000mi on it's 4.0L. It leaks
more oil than it burns.

Scott
"sam owens" <sam@sam.com> wrote in message
news:b8chg2dv33m86vgs5906lg47rboov21gri@4ax.com...
>I was talking with a guy at the collision shop in Ingalls and he was
> tellin' me that the engine that is in my 98 Cherokee Sport was among
> the best engines ever designed and has been around in various
> iterations since the 60's. He lamented that Chrysler decided not to
> produce that engine any longer and feels that it is a mistake. I asked
> him how many miles might I expect to get if I take care od business
> and he felt 250,000 wasn't out of line. I have 138,000 now.
>
> Any opinions on wither of these statements?
>
> Sam

Bret Ludwig

DougW wrote:
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> > Agreed on all counts. I think D-C's decision to discontinue the 4.0L
> > inline six was mainly because since they discontinued the Cherokee,
> > it only was produced for one vehicle, the Wrangler, and they
> > perferred to have an engine that was produced for other vehicles as
> > well for economy of production. The '07 Wrangler has a V6 that is
> > also used in Chrysler minivans (although with a different driveline
> > layout). It is not the same engine as found in the Liberty.
>
> From what I understand the decision was based on the production molds
> and equipment simply getting worn out and that retooling was too
> expensive. Of course that could be pure bull..

Tooling isn't the cost of an engine design it was even 20 years ago.
You design an engine in 3D CAD and produce patterns and core boxes very
cheaply, relatively speaking. Iron castings are produced in sand, or
smaller ones by investment casting. Permanent molds are limited to
materials such as aluminum. The bottom line is the old pushrod engine
is considered a throwback by the engineers.
>
> The I6 is a nice engine to be sure, but there are better engines out
> there now with more power and less of the balance issues the I6 has.

The inline 6 is the most perfectly balanced engine there is except for
the V12. Almost every over the road truck in the US today has a I6
engine.

I would have rather they used a four cylinder version of the Hemi as
the base engine (one bank, same head) and either the MBZ diesel V6 or
the Magnum V6 as upgrades. What do I know?

Bret Ludwig

DougW wrote:
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> > Agreed on all counts. I think D-C's decision to discontinue the 4.0L
> > inline six was mainly because since they discontinued the Cherokee,
> > it only was produced for one vehicle, the Wrangler, and they
> > perferred to have an engine that was produced for other vehicles as
> > well for economy of production. The '07 Wrangler has a V6 that is
> > also used in Chrysler minivans (although with a different driveline
> > layout). It is not the same engine as found in the Liberty.
>
> From what I understand the decision was based on the production molds
> and equipment simply getting worn out and that retooling was too
> expensive. Of course that could be pure bull..

Tooling isn't the cost of an engine design it was even 20 years ago.
You design an engine in 3D CAD and produce patterns and core boxes very
cheaply, relatively speaking. Iron castings are produced in sand, or
smaller ones by investment casting. Permanent molds are limited to
materials such as aluminum. The bottom line is the old pushrod engine
is considered a throwback by the engineers.
>
> The I6 is a nice engine to be sure, but there are better engines out
> there now with more power and less of the balance issues the I6 has.

The inline 6 is the most perfectly balanced engine there is except for
the V12. Almost every over the road truck in the US today has a I6
engine.

I would have rather they used a four cylinder version of the Hemi as
the base engine (one bank, same head) and either the MBZ diesel V6 or
the Magnum V6 as upgrades. What do I know?

Bret Ludwig

DougW wrote:
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> > Agreed on all counts. I think D-C's decision to discontinue the 4.0L
> > inline six was mainly because since they discontinued the Cherokee,
> > it only was produced for one vehicle, the Wrangler, and they
> > perferred to have an engine that was produced for other vehicles as
> > well for economy of production. The '07 Wrangler has a V6 that is
> > also used in Chrysler minivans (although with a different driveline
> > layout). It is not the same engine as found in the Liberty.
>
> From what I understand the decision was based on the production molds
> and equipment simply getting worn out and that retooling was too
> expensive. Of course that could be pure bull..

Tooling isn't the cost of an engine design it was even 20 years ago.
You design an engine in 3D CAD and produce patterns and core boxes very
cheaply, relatively speaking. Iron castings are produced in sand, or
smaller ones by investment casting. Permanent molds are limited to
materials such as aluminum. The bottom line is the old pushrod engine
is considered a throwback by the engineers.
>
> The I6 is a nice engine to be sure, but there are better engines out
> there now with more power and less of the balance issues the I6 has.

The inline 6 is the most perfectly balanced engine there is except for
the V12. Almost every over the road truck in the US today has a I6
engine.

I would have rather they used a four cylinder version of the Hemi as
the base engine (one bank, same head) and either the MBZ diesel V6 or
the Magnum V6 as upgrades. What do I know?

Bob Casanova

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 22:34:06 -0500, the following appeared
in rec.autos.makers.jeep+******, posted by "DougW"
<post.replies@invalid.address>:

<snip>

>The I6 is a nice engine to be sure, but there are better engines out
>there now with more power and less of the balance issues the I6 has.

What balance issues? An properly designed inline 6 has
perfect primary and secondary balance; a V6 needs a
counterbalance shaft to correct the inherent secondary
imbalance. The only issue I know of with an inline 6 is the
possibility of crankshaft twist due to the increased length.
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless

Bob Casanova

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 22:34:06 -0500, the following appeared
in rec.autos.makers.jeep+******, posted by "DougW"
<post.replies@invalid.address>:

<snip>

>The I6 is a nice engine to be sure, but there are better engines out
>there now with more power and less of the balance issues the I6 has.

What balance issues? An properly designed inline 6 has
perfect primary and secondary balance; a V6 needs a
counterbalance shaft to correct the inherent secondary
imbalance. The only issue I know of with an inline 6 is the
possibility of crankshaft twist due to the increased length.
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless

Bob Casanova

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 22:34:06 -0500, the following appeared
in rec.autos.makers.jeep+******, posted by "DougW"
<post.replies@invalid.address>:

<snip>

>The I6 is a nice engine to be sure, but there are better engines out
>there now with more power and less of the balance issues the I6 has.

What balance issues? An properly designed inline 6 has
perfect primary and secondary balance; a V6 needs a
counterbalance shaft to correct the inherent secondary
imbalance. The only issue I know of with an inline 6 is the
possibility of crankshaft twist due to the increased length.
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless

sam owens

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 20:36:20 -0500, sam owens <sam@sam.com> wrote:

I felt that the guy was truthin' it cause he wasn't selling me
anything. Thanks for the replies and knowledge.

I drove my Jeep from Michigan's UP to San Fran and put on >5.5k It was
cool. I kept my speed at 60 mph 95% of the time and I almost never let
it accelerate from cruise going up a mountain at that speed.

I wondered frequently how fast I'd be going at the chosen power I gave
the engine if I hadn't been hauling the trailer and my 700 lb + bike.

I saw many dead cars along the high Nevada desert and I didn't want to
be one of them and I wasn't.

Check put my rig here:

http://www.coyoterock.net/pix/wyoming%20or%20utah.jpg

sam owens

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 20:36:20 -0500, sam owens <sam@sam.com> wrote:

I felt that the guy was truthin' it cause he wasn't selling me
anything. Thanks for the replies and knowledge.

I drove my Jeep from Michigan's UP to San Fran and put on >5.5k It was
cool. I kept my speed at 60 mph 95% of the time and I almost never let
it accelerate from cruise going up a mountain at that speed.

I wondered frequently how fast I'd be going at the chosen power I gave
the engine if I hadn't been hauling the trailer and my 700 lb + bike.

I saw many dead cars along the high Nevada desert and I didn't want to
be one of them and I wasn't.

Check put my rig here:

http://www.coyoterock.net/pix/wyoming%20or%20utah.jpg