Oh yeah, some place in the post he tried bypassing the snorkel, using a
conical K&N. There was a HP loss, a pre-detination (ping/knock) gain and an
overall loss in performance.

There is something to be said for the cool unrestricted air a snorkel on a
TJ gives.

--James

"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:d5Usc.21402$7y5.12374@fed1read03...
> (This is from the last page of the post)
>
> http://www.toughstuffproducts.com/Daless2/donehp.jpg
> HP:
> 124.3 stock
> 212.5 SC'd
> Curves together: http://www.toughstuffproducts.com/Daless2/hpsc.jpg
>
>
> http://www.toughstuffproducts.com/Daless2/donetq.jpg
> Torque:
> 163.2 stock
> 271.9 SC'd
> Curves together: http://www.toughstuffproducts.com/Daless2/tqsc.jpg
>
> MPG almost unchanged.
>
> --James
>
> PS - I would take the torque, but I am not sure I would spend that kind of
> money on it.
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:40B403A3.84218D4C@***.net...
> > 129 HP Stock and with the supercharger:
> > http://jeepsunlimited.com/forums/sho...hreadid=511089
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
>
>

 

so if we assume a 20% loss at the drivetrain...his HP comes out to be...
124.9/.8=156.13 HP
close enough to 160 HP right?

"c" <c@me.org> wrote in message
news:jUMsc.21102$zn.19115@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Bill,
>
> They probably didn't get the engine to its peak power RPM. Remember, the
4.0
> head makes peak power at about 4000 RPM. The head doesn't know what engine
> it is sitting on top of. If the engines are approximately the same size,
the
> bore and stroke don't have much effect on the peak power RPM. A long
stroke,
> small bore engine should make more low RPM torque than a short stroke, big
> bore engine. Also, porting a head will almost always move the power band
up.
>
> To explain this to some degree, a cylinder head port by design has a
"sweet
> spot" where it best fills and empties the cylinder. This is basically
where
> your power peak will be. This also works in conjustion with the intake,
> camshaft and exhaust. This is why it is important to match all of the
> components so that they all, by design, produce their peak power at about
> the same RPM. In your case, the head is probably helping a little in the
> lower RPM and will show more improvement as the RPM gets closer to 4000.
>
> As far as the dyno test, if they used a chassis dyno and read the power at
> the rear wheels, then it is rear wheel horsepower. This number is
generally
> about 20-30% lower than the flywheel rating due to friction losses in the
> trans, transfer case, and axle. An automatic trans will usually show more
> power loss than a standard because of the toque convertor and more
friction
> loss internally.
>
> Did they give you a copy of the dyno sheet? If so, look at the number in
the
> BSFC (Brake specific fuel comsumption) column. This will give a good idea
as
> to where the fuel mixture is. The number should be around 0.5 or a bit
> higher for the correct fuel mixture. This basically means that it is using
> .5 pounds of fuel per horsepower per hour. If the number is too high, it
> shows an inefficient engine. This would have also been a good time for you
> to play with your timing to optimize it. Normally, the timing that shows
the
> best power on the dyno will be 2-4 degrees higher than what you should run
> because of temperature, barometric pressure, and load changes in real
world
> driving.
>
> Chris
>
> "William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
> news:2hhi42Fco2thU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > The 4.2/4.0 mod should add about 40 horse power due to the porting on
the
> > 4.0L head.
> >
> > I'm not sure how the dyno test works but I think it's at the wheels.
> >
> > Looks like they cut it off at about 3350 rpm.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> > "Tim Vice" <timothy.vice@washburn.edu> wrote in message
> > news:36Msc.67492$iy5.64474@okepread05...
> > > Is the horsepower that you are getting at the wheels, or at the crank?
> > >
> > > What is the difference in the heads to create more horsepower, or have
> you
> > > done some other things?
> > >
> > > At what RPM was the highest horsepower created?
> > >
> > > Just some questions because I'm looking into stroking my 4.0
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> > >
> > > "William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
> > > news:2hhg59Fd4rv0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > > 4.2 block / 4.0 Head.
> > > >
> > > > Results: 124.9 Horsepower. I should have about 160, yes?
> > > >
> > > > Air/Fuel ratio came back a tad lean if anything.
> > > >
> > > > Engine has about 60 miles on it.
> > > >
> > > > Mechanic told me there's nothing wrong with the injectors.
> > > >
> > > > Bill
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

 

so if we assume a 20% loss at the drivetrain...his HP comes out to be...
124.9/.8=156.13 HP
close enough to 160 HP right?

"c" <c@me.org> wrote in message
news:jUMsc.21102$zn.19115@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Bill,
>
> They probably didn't get the engine to its peak power RPM. Remember, the
4.0
> head makes peak power at about 4000 RPM. The head doesn't know what engine
> it is sitting on top of. If the engines are approximately the same size,
the
> bore and stroke don't have much effect on the peak power RPM. A long
stroke,
> small bore engine should make more low RPM torque than a short stroke, big
> bore engine. Also, porting a head will almost always move the power band
up.
>
> To explain this to some degree, a cylinder head port by design has a
"sweet
> spot" where it best fills and empties the cylinder. This is basically
where
> your power peak will be. This also works in conjustion with the intake,
> camshaft and exhaust. This is why it is important to match all of the
> components so that they all, by design, produce their peak power at about
> the same RPM. In your case, the head is probably helping a little in the
> lower RPM and will show more improvement as the RPM gets closer to 4000.
>
> As far as the dyno test, if they used a chassis dyno and read the power at
> the rear wheels, then it is rear wheel horsepower. This number is
generally
> about 20-30% lower than the flywheel rating due to friction losses in the
> trans, transfer case, and axle. An automatic trans will usually show more
> power loss than a standard because of the toque convertor and more
friction
> loss internally.
>
> Did they give you a copy of the dyno sheet? If so, look at the number in
the
> BSFC (Brake specific fuel comsumption) column. This will give a good idea
as
> to where the fuel mixture is. The number should be around 0.5 or a bit
> higher for the correct fuel mixture. This basically means that it is using
> .5 pounds of fuel per horsepower per hour. If the number is too high, it
> shows an inefficient engine. This would have also been a good time for you
> to play with your timing to optimize it. Normally, the timing that shows
the
> best power on the dyno will be 2-4 degrees higher than what you should run
> because of temperature, barometric pressure, and load changes in real
world
> driving.
>
> Chris
>
> "William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
> news:2hhi42Fco2thU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > The 4.2/4.0 mod should add about 40 horse power due to the porting on
the
> > 4.0L head.
> >
> > I'm not sure how the dyno test works but I think it's at the wheels.
> >
> > Looks like they cut it off at about 3350 rpm.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> > "Tim Vice" <timothy.vice@washburn.edu> wrote in message
> > news:36Msc.67492$iy5.64474@okepread05...
> > > Is the horsepower that you are getting at the wheels, or at the crank?
> > >
> > > What is the difference in the heads to create more horsepower, or have
> you
> > > done some other things?
> > >
> > > At what RPM was the highest horsepower created?
> > >
> > > Just some questions because I'm looking into stroking my 4.0
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> > >
> > > "William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
> > > news:2hhg59Fd4rv0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > > 4.2 block / 4.0 Head.
> > > >
> > > > Results: 124.9 Horsepower. I should have about 160, yes?
> > > >
> > > > Air/Fuel ratio came back a tad lean if anything.
> > > >
> > > > Engine has about 60 miles on it.
> > > >
> > > > Mechanic told me there's nothing wrong with the injectors.
> > > >
> > > > Bill
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

 

so if we assume a 20% loss at the drivetrain...his HP comes out to be...
124.9/.8=156.13 HP
close enough to 160 HP right?

"c" <c@me.org> wrote in message
news:jUMsc.21102$zn.19115@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Bill,
>
> They probably didn't get the engine to its peak power RPM. Remember, the
4.0
> head makes peak power at about 4000 RPM. The head doesn't know what engine
> it is sitting on top of. If the engines are approximately the same size,
the
> bore and stroke don't have much effect on the peak power RPM. A long
stroke,
> small bore engine should make more low RPM torque than a short stroke, big
> bore engine. Also, porting a head will almost always move the power band
up.
>
> To explain this to some degree, a cylinder head port by design has a
"sweet
> spot" where it best fills and empties the cylinder. This is basically
where
> your power peak will be. This also works in conjustion with the intake,
> camshaft and exhaust. This is why it is important to match all of the
> components so that they all, by design, produce their peak power at about
> the same RPM. In your case, the head is probably helping a little in the
> lower RPM and will show more improvement as the RPM gets closer to 4000.
>
> As far as the dyno test, if they used a chassis dyno and read the power at
> the rear wheels, then it is rear wheel horsepower. This number is
generally
> about 20-30% lower than the flywheel rating due to friction losses in the
> trans, transfer case, and axle. An automatic trans will usually show more
> power loss than a standard because of the toque convertor and more
friction
> loss internally.
>
> Did they give you a copy of the dyno sheet? If so, look at the number in
the
> BSFC (Brake specific fuel comsumption) column. This will give a good idea
as
> to where the fuel mixture is. The number should be around 0.5 or a bit
> higher for the correct fuel mixture. This basically means that it is using
> .5 pounds of fuel per horsepower per hour. If the number is too high, it
> shows an inefficient engine. This would have also been a good time for you
> to play with your timing to optimize it. Normally, the timing that shows
the
> best power on the dyno will be 2-4 degrees higher than what you should run
> because of temperature, barometric pressure, and load changes in real
world
> driving.
>
> Chris
>
> "William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
> news:2hhi42Fco2thU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > The 4.2/4.0 mod should add about 40 horse power due to the porting on
the
> > 4.0L head.
> >
> > I'm not sure how the dyno test works but I think it's at the wheels.
> >
> > Looks like they cut it off at about 3350 rpm.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> > "Tim Vice" <timothy.vice@washburn.edu> wrote in message
> > news:36Msc.67492$iy5.64474@okepread05...
> > > Is the horsepower that you are getting at the wheels, or at the crank?
> > >
> > > What is the difference in the heads to create more horsepower, or have
> you
> > > done some other things?
> > >
> > > At what RPM was the highest horsepower created?
> > >
> > > Just some questions because I'm looking into stroking my 4.0
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> > >
> > > "William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
> > > news:2hhg59Fd4rv0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > > 4.2 block / 4.0 Head.
> > > >
> > > > Results: 124.9 Horsepower. I should have about 160, yes?
> > > >
> > > > Air/Fuel ratio came back a tad lean if anything.
> > > >
> > > > Engine has about 60 miles on it.
> > > >
> > > > Mechanic told me there's nothing wrong with the injectors.
> > > >
> > > > Bill
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

 

so if we assume a 20% loss at the drivetrain...his HP comes out to be...
124.9/.8=156.13 HP
close enough to 160 HP right?

"c" <c@me.org> wrote in message
news:jUMsc.21102$zn.19115@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Bill,
>
> They probably didn't get the engine to its peak power RPM. Remember, the
4.0
> head makes peak power at about 4000 RPM. The head doesn't know what engine
> it is sitting on top of. If the engines are approximately the same size,
the
> bore and stroke don't have much effect on the peak power RPM. A long
stroke,
> small bore engine should make more low RPM torque than a short stroke, big
> bore engine. Also, porting a head will almost always move the power band
up.
>
> To explain this to some degree, a cylinder head port by design has a
"sweet
> spot" where it best fills and empties the cylinder. This is basically
where
> your power peak will be. This also works in conjustion with the intake,
> camshaft and exhaust. This is why it is important to match all of the
> components so that they all, by design, produce their peak power at about
> the same RPM. In your case, the head is probably helping a little in the
> lower RPM and will show more improvement as the RPM gets closer to 4000.
>
> As far as the dyno test, if they used a chassis dyno and read the power at
> the rear wheels, then it is rear wheel horsepower. This number is
generally
> about 20-30% lower than the flywheel rating due to friction losses in the
> trans, transfer case, and axle. An automatic trans will usually show more
> power loss than a standard because of the toque convertor and more
friction
> loss internally.
>
> Did they give you a copy of the dyno sheet? If so, look at the number in
the
> BSFC (Brake specific fuel comsumption) column. This will give a good idea
as
> to where the fuel mixture is. The number should be around 0.5 or a bit
> higher for the correct fuel mixture. This basically means that it is using
> .5 pounds of fuel per horsepower per hour. If the number is too high, it
> shows an inefficient engine. This would have also been a good time for you
> to play with your timing to optimize it. Normally, the timing that shows
the
> best power on the dyno will be 2-4 degrees higher than what you should run
> because of temperature, barometric pressure, and load changes in real
world
> driving.
>
> Chris
>
> "William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
> news:2hhi42Fco2thU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > The 4.2/4.0 mod should add about 40 horse power due to the porting on
the
> > 4.0L head.
> >
> > I'm not sure how the dyno test works but I think it's at the wheels.
> >
> > Looks like they cut it off at about 3350 rpm.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> > "Tim Vice" <timothy.vice@washburn.edu> wrote in message
> > news:36Msc.67492$iy5.64474@okepread05...
> > > Is the horsepower that you are getting at the wheels, or at the crank?
> > >
> > > What is the difference in the heads to create more horsepower, or have
> you
> > > done some other things?
> > >
> > > At what RPM was the highest horsepower created?
> > >
> > > Just some questions because I'm looking into stroking my 4.0
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> > >
> > > "William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
> > > news:2hhg59Fd4rv0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > > 4.2 block / 4.0 Head.
> > > >
> > > > Results: 124.9 Horsepower. I should have about 160, yes?
> > > >
> > > > Air/Fuel ratio came back a tad lean if anything.
> > > >
> > > > Engine has about 60 miles on it.
> > > >
> > > > Mechanic told me there's nothing wrong with the injectors.
> > > >
> > > > Bill
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

 

thanks for posting the results! i've been wondering about the power gains
using a 4.0 head. i'm going to take mine in too when i'm finally done with
it.

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:2hhg59Fd4rv0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> 4.2 block / 4.0 Head.
>
> Results: 124.9 Horsepower. I should have about 160, yes?
>
> Air/Fuel ratio came back a tad lean if anything.
>
> Engine has about 60 miles on it.
>
> Mechanic told me there's nothing wrong with the injectors.
>
> Bill
>
>

 

thanks for posting the results! i've been wondering about the power gains
using a 4.0 head. i'm going to take mine in too when i'm finally done with
it.

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:2hhg59Fd4rv0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> 4.2 block / 4.0 Head.
>
> Results: 124.9 Horsepower. I should have about 160, yes?
>
> Air/Fuel ratio came back a tad lean if anything.
>
> Engine has about 60 miles on it.
>
> Mechanic told me there's nothing wrong with the injectors.
>
> Bill
>
>

 

thanks for posting the results! i've been wondering about the power gains
using a 4.0 head. i'm going to take mine in too when i'm finally done with
it.

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:2hhg59Fd4rv0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> 4.2 block / 4.0 Head.
>
> Results: 124.9 Horsepower. I should have about 160, yes?
>
> Air/Fuel ratio came back a tad lean if anything.
>
> Engine has about 60 miles on it.
>
> Mechanic told me there's nothing wrong with the injectors.
>
> Bill
>
>

 

thanks for posting the results! i've been wondering about the power gains
using a 4.0 head. i'm going to take mine in too when i'm finally done with
it.

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:2hhg59Fd4rv0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> 4.2 block / 4.0 Head.
>
> Results: 124.9 Horsepower. I should have about 160, yes?
>
> Air/Fuel ratio came back a tad lean if anything.
>
> Engine has about 60 miles on it.
>
> Mechanic told me there's nothing wrong with the injectors.
>
> Bill
>
>

 

Well, let me just say this. At this time in my break in process, the my
BUTT Dyno sees little difference between the previous 4.2 and the current
setup.

After a couple of thousand miles I'll let you know how it feels then.

Bill


"serg" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:rmUsc.57116$y%3.49430@newssvr29.news.prodigy. com...
> thanks for posting the results! i've been wondering about the power gains
> using a 4.0 head. i'm going to take mine in too when i'm finally done
with
> it.
>
> "William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
> news:2hhg59Fd4rv0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > 4.2 block / 4.0 Head.
> >
> > Results: 124.9 Horsepower. I should have about 160, yes?
> >
> > Air/Fuel ratio came back a tad lean if anything.
> >
> > Engine has about 60 miles on it.
> >
> > Mechanic told me there's nothing wrong with the injectors.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
>
>