Normal rule is that angle x no of cylinders / 360 should be an integer for
any engine to get it well balanced, so v6s should be 60 degrees regardless
of whether it is for a front wheel drive or a rear wheel drive application.

Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

"L. Ron Waddle" <penguincathedral@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0zR1h.98850$R52.68502@fe07.news.easynews.com. ..
> Like most V6 engines
> designed for front-wheel-drive vehicles, it is a 60 degree V6 in order
> to be narrower than the V8-derived engines.

 

Normal rule is that angle x no of cylinders / 360 should be an integer for
any engine to get it well balanced, so v6s should be 60 degrees regardless
of whether it is for a front wheel drive or a rear wheel drive application.

Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

"L. Ron Waddle" <penguincathedral@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0zR1h.98850$R52.68502@fe07.news.easynews.com. ..
> Like most V6 engines
> designed for front-wheel-drive vehicles, it is a 60 degree V6 in order
> to be narrower than the V8-derived engines.

 

Normal rule is that angle x no of cylinders / 360 should be an integer for
any engine to get it well balanced, so v6s should be 60 degrees regardless
of whether it is for a front wheel drive or a rear wheel drive application.

Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

"L. Ron Waddle" <penguincathedral@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0zR1h.98850$R52.68502@fe07.news.easynews.com. ..
> Like most V6 engines
> designed for front-wheel-drive vehicles, it is a 60 degree V6 in order
> to be narrower than the V8-derived engines.

 

DC Controled GEMA is producing 4 cyclinder "world" engines. Massive
public demand might result in Wranglers with one of these.

L. Ron Waddle wrote:
> Jd Lyall wrote:
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >> It's been around a while, it's the Chrysler minivan engine turned 90
> >> degrees.
> >>
> >>> I thought that the 2007 were going to have the 3.6 V6 that is used on
> >>> other Jeep models. I just found out that it is a brand new 3.8
> >>> engine. I wonder how many years it will take to get it bullet proof.
> >
> > But why wouldn't they use the 3.7 from the Liberty? That engine is
> > derived from the 4.7 V8, a purpose designed truck engine.
>
> The 3.7 from the Liberty is a 90 degree V6 (a 90 degree V8 with two
> cylinders chopped out). It is too wide to fit in the Wrangler's engine
> bay. The 3.8 engine in the 2007 actually is several years old and was
> designed for Chrysler's front-wheel-drive minivans. Like most V6 engines
> designed for front-wheel-drive vehicles, it is a 60 degree V6 in order
> to be narrower than the V8-derived engines. They had to make the new
> Wrangler 6 inches wider even to fit that narrow V6 into it, so you can
> see why they did not put the 3.7 from the Liberty in there.
>
> The 3.8 is an old-timey pushrod engine tho so while power is
> unexceptional, at least it's not a whiney high-strung engine like the
> 3.7 in the Liberty.
>
> -Elron

 

DC Controled GEMA is producing 4 cyclinder "world" engines. Massive
public demand might result in Wranglers with one of these.

L. Ron Waddle wrote:
> Jd Lyall wrote:
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >> It's been around a while, it's the Chrysler minivan engine turned 90
> >> degrees.
> >>
> >>> I thought that the 2007 were going to have the 3.6 V6 that is used on
> >>> other Jeep models. I just found out that it is a brand new 3.8
> >>> engine. I wonder how many years it will take to get it bullet proof.
> >
> > But why wouldn't they use the 3.7 from the Liberty? That engine is
> > derived from the 4.7 V8, a purpose designed truck engine.
>
> The 3.7 from the Liberty is a 90 degree V6 (a 90 degree V8 with two
> cylinders chopped out). It is too wide to fit in the Wrangler's engine
> bay. The 3.8 engine in the 2007 actually is several years old and was
> designed for Chrysler's front-wheel-drive minivans. Like most V6 engines
> designed for front-wheel-drive vehicles, it is a 60 degree V6 in order
> to be narrower than the V8-derived engines. They had to make the new
> Wrangler 6 inches wider even to fit that narrow V6 into it, so you can
> see why they did not put the 3.7 from the Liberty in there.
>
> The 3.8 is an old-timey pushrod engine tho so while power is
> unexceptional, at least it's not a whiney high-strung engine like the
> 3.7 in the Liberty.
>
> -Elron

 

DC Controled GEMA is producing 4 cyclinder "world" engines. Massive
public demand might result in Wranglers with one of these.

L. Ron Waddle wrote:
> Jd Lyall wrote:
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >> It's been around a while, it's the Chrysler minivan engine turned 90
> >> degrees.
> >>
> >>> I thought that the 2007 were going to have the 3.6 V6 that is used on
> >>> other Jeep models. I just found out that it is a brand new 3.8
> >>> engine. I wonder how many years it will take to get it bullet proof.
> >
> > But why wouldn't they use the 3.7 from the Liberty? That engine is
> > derived from the 4.7 V8, a purpose designed truck engine.
>
> The 3.7 from the Liberty is a 90 degree V6 (a 90 degree V8 with two
> cylinders chopped out). It is too wide to fit in the Wrangler's engine
> bay. The 3.8 engine in the 2007 actually is several years old and was
> designed for Chrysler's front-wheel-drive minivans. Like most V6 engines
> designed for front-wheel-drive vehicles, it is a 60 degree V6 in order
> to be narrower than the V8-derived engines. They had to make the new
> Wrangler 6 inches wider even to fit that narrow V6 into it, so you can
> see why they did not put the 3.7 from the Liberty in there.
>
> The 3.8 is an old-timey pushrod engine tho so while power is
> unexceptional, at least it's not a whiney high-strung engine like the
> 3.7 in the Liberty.
>
> -Elron

 

Dave Milne wrote:
> Normal rule is that angle x no of cylinders / 360 should be an integer for
> any engine to get it well balanced, so v6s should be 60 degrees regardless
> of whether it is for a front wheel drive or a rear wheel drive application.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

I do realize that a 60 degree is best for the V6. Buick demonstrated how
to make a 90 degree setup work with 6 cylinders, tho. After they
bought back the V6 from Jeep. The original setup for that engine was
rough. After they offset the crank pins it became smooth. I owned a 62
Buick special with the rough version and an 87 Park Avenue with the
smooth version.

It is hard to credit that the wrangler does not have room for a 90
degree engine tho. While a Chevy v8 is said to be narrow, can it be THAT
much narrower than the 4.7? The wrangler engine bay seems plenty big to
me. Never done an engine swap, I must say.

 

Dave Milne wrote:
> Normal rule is that angle x no of cylinders / 360 should be an integer for
> any engine to get it well balanced, so v6s should be 60 degrees regardless
> of whether it is for a front wheel drive or a rear wheel drive application.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

I do realize that a 60 degree is best for the V6. Buick demonstrated how
to make a 90 degree setup work with 6 cylinders, tho. After they
bought back the V6 from Jeep. The original setup for that engine was
rough. After they offset the crank pins it became smooth. I owned a 62
Buick special with the rough version and an 87 Park Avenue with the
smooth version.

It is hard to credit that the wrangler does not have room for a 90
degree engine tho. While a Chevy v8 is said to be narrow, can it be THAT
much narrower than the 4.7? The wrangler engine bay seems plenty big to
me. Never done an engine swap, I must say.

 

Dave Milne wrote:
> Normal rule is that angle x no of cylinders / 360 should be an integer for
> any engine to get it well balanced, so v6s should be 60 degrees regardless
> of whether it is for a front wheel drive or a rear wheel drive application.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

I do realize that a 60 degree is best for the V6. Buick demonstrated how
to make a 90 degree setup work with 6 cylinders, tho. After they
bought back the V6 from Jeep. The original setup for that engine was
rough. After they offset the crank pins it became smooth. I owned a 62
Buick special with the rough version and an 87 Park Avenue with the
smooth version.

It is hard to credit that the wrangler does not have room for a 90
degree engine tho. While a Chevy v8 is said to be narrow, can it be THAT
much narrower than the 4.7? The wrangler engine bay seems plenty big to
me. Never done an engine swap, I must say.