nrs

On Oct 25, 11:54 am, "Bill Spiliotopoulos" <vsp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have not seen the dyno results you say, maybe if you could post a link.
> But I have to note, that usually dyno results range from around 2000 rpm and
> up. They don't tell you what is going on bellow 2000 rpm, and most of the
> driving is in the 1200 - 2500 rpm range.
>
> Bill Spiliotopoulos,
> '96 XJ,
> '06 TJ.
>
> "nrs" <neale...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1193326015.528981.268800@o38g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Oct 25, 9:40 am, "Jack Carter" <jcarter10screws...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
> >> A friend tells me that the engine in my new Wrangler is made by
> >> Mitsubushi.
> >> Is he correct? All I've heard is that it's a "good" engine and that it's
> >> used in most Chrysler-made vans and has been around for a long time.
>
> > JP Magazine published a torque and HP curve chart from an independent
> > dyno test showing both the 4.0 and the new 3.8. The curves are just
> > about exactly the same util up high in RPM, then the 3.8 has a bit
> > more torque and hp. I have also read that it takes about 5000 miles
> > to break into this level of performance so in test drives of new
> > vehicles the engine tends to feel sluggish.
>
> > Actually, on paper, the torque curve of the 4.0 is crappy compared to
> > the 258 and even the old L and F head engines in terms of peak torque
> > RPM. However, in practice, jeepers love the 4.0.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Some of my facts were off due to bad memory but here is the link to
the chart. It actually goes to low RPMs.
http://www.jpmagazine.com/projectbui.../photo_03.html

nrs

On Oct 25, 11:54 am, "Bill Spiliotopoulos" <vsp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have not seen the dyno results you say, maybe if you could post a link.
> But I have to note, that usually dyno results range from around 2000 rpm and
> up. They don't tell you what is going on bellow 2000 rpm, and most of the
> driving is in the 1200 - 2500 rpm range.
>
> Bill Spiliotopoulos,
> '96 XJ,
> '06 TJ.
>
> "nrs" <neale...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1193326015.528981.268800@o38g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Oct 25, 9:40 am, "Jack Carter" <jcarter10screws...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
> >> A friend tells me that the engine in my new Wrangler is made by
> >> Mitsubushi.
> >> Is he correct? All I've heard is that it's a "good" engine and that it's
> >> used in most Chrysler-made vans and has been around for a long time.
>
> > JP Magazine published a torque and HP curve chart from an independent
> > dyno test showing both the 4.0 and the new 3.8. The curves are just
> > about exactly the same util up high in RPM, then the 3.8 has a bit
> > more torque and hp. I have also read that it takes about 5000 miles
> > to break into this level of performance so in test drives of new
> > vehicles the engine tends to feel sluggish.
>
> > Actually, on paper, the torque curve of the 4.0 is crappy compared to
> > the 258 and even the old L and F head engines in terms of peak torque
> > RPM. However, in practice, jeepers love the 4.0.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Some of my facts were off due to bad memory but here is the link to
the chart. It actually goes to low RPMs.
http://www.jpmagazine.com/projectbui.../photo_03.html

Mike Romain

You feel the need to insult my opinion just because you got took and
didn't look under the hood?

I feel sorry for you, but Chrysler 'did' make that special oil additive
'just' for the Mitsubishi smokers so it might last a little while... ;-)

So I have the sand pit wall in mind if you want a test, bring on the
mini van engines!!!

Seriously, it would be fun. I am in the Toronto Canada area and love to
sit at the top taking photos of folks trying to make it.

I'll even post the photo album up.

Mike


Jack Carter wrote:
> Maybe you should check out the gear ratios in the 6-speed transmission and
> then take one for a test drive - preferably one with the optional 3.73
> axles. If you're open minded - as opposed to empty headed - you might change
> your mind!
>
>
> "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:4720ad92$0$32392$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosti ng.com...
>> Yup, it would appear you now have a mini van engine. No more crawling up
>> the sides of sand pits or over rocks at 400-500 rpm like the old 6 would
>> do. You now need tire spinning, hole digging, rpm to get anyplace.
>>
>> Probably better on the highway.
>>
>> Mike
>> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's - Gone to the rust pile...
>>
>>
>> Jack Carter wrote:
>>> A friend tells me that the engine in my new Wrangler is made by
>>> Mitsubushi. Is he correct? All I've heard is that it's a "good" engine
>>> and that it's used in most Chrysler-made vans and has been around for a
>>> long time.
>
>

Mike Romain

You feel the need to insult my opinion just because you got took and
didn't look under the hood?

I feel sorry for you, but Chrysler 'did' make that special oil additive
'just' for the Mitsubishi smokers so it might last a little while... ;-)

So I have the sand pit wall in mind if you want a test, bring on the
mini van engines!!!

Seriously, it would be fun. I am in the Toronto Canada area and love to
sit at the top taking photos of folks trying to make it.

I'll even post the photo album up.

Mike


Jack Carter wrote:
> Maybe you should check out the gear ratios in the 6-speed transmission and
> then take one for a test drive - preferably one with the optional 3.73
> axles. If you're open minded - as opposed to empty headed - you might change
> your mind!
>
>
> "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:4720ad92$0$32392$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosti ng.com...
>> Yup, it would appear you now have a mini van engine. No more crawling up
>> the sides of sand pits or over rocks at 400-500 rpm like the old 6 would
>> do. You now need tire spinning, hole digging, rpm to get anyplace.
>>
>> Probably better on the highway.
>>
>> Mike
>> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's - Gone to the rust pile...
>>
>>
>> Jack Carter wrote:
>>> A friend tells me that the engine in my new Wrangler is made by
>>> Mitsubushi. Is he correct? All I've heard is that it's a "good" engine
>>> and that it's used in most Chrysler-made vans and has been around for a
>>> long time.
>
>

Mike Romain

You feel the need to insult my opinion just because you got took and
didn't look under the hood?

I feel sorry for you, but Chrysler 'did' make that special oil additive
'just' for the Mitsubishi smokers so it might last a little while... ;-)

So I have the sand pit wall in mind if you want a test, bring on the
mini van engines!!!

Seriously, it would be fun. I am in the Toronto Canada area and love to
sit at the top taking photos of folks trying to make it.

I'll even post the photo album up.

Mike


Jack Carter wrote:
> Maybe you should check out the gear ratios in the 6-speed transmission and
> then take one for a test drive - preferably one with the optional 3.73
> axles. If you're open minded - as opposed to empty headed - you might change
> your mind!
>
>
> "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:4720ad92$0$32392$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosti ng.com...
>> Yup, it would appear you now have a mini van engine. No more crawling up
>> the sides of sand pits or over rocks at 400-500 rpm like the old 6 would
>> do. You now need tire spinning, hole digging, rpm to get anyplace.
>>
>> Probably better on the highway.
>>
>> Mike
>> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's - Gone to the rust pile...
>>
>>
>> Jack Carter wrote:
>>> A friend tells me that the engine in my new Wrangler is made by
>>> Mitsubushi. Is he correct? All I've heard is that it's a "good" engine
>>> and that it's used in most Chrysler-made vans and has been around for a
>>> long time.
>
>

L.W. \(Bill\) Hughes III

Ditto. But I do love spinning tire, just it takes a heck of a lot more
horsepower than that puny V6: http://www.----------.com/pismo.htm
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------

"Earle Horton" <123456@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ffqkcl$del$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> Mike is right. There is no substitute for a low-revving, high torque
engine
> with high rotational mass. Simple physics says Mike is right and you are
> easily persuaded by marketing smoke and mirrors.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Earle



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

L.W. \(Bill\) Hughes III

Ditto. But I do love spinning tire, just it takes a heck of a lot more
horsepower than that puny V6: http://www.----------.com/pismo.htm
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------

"Earle Horton" <123456@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ffqkcl$del$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> Mike is right. There is no substitute for a low-revving, high torque
engine
> with high rotational mass. Simple physics says Mike is right and you are
> easily persuaded by marketing smoke and mirrors.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Earle



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

L.W. \(Bill\) Hughes III

Ditto. But I do love spinning tire, just it takes a heck of a lot more
horsepower than that puny V6: http://www.----------.com/pismo.htm
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------

"Earle Horton" <123456@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ffqkcl$del$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> Mike is right. There is no substitute for a low-revving, high torque
engine
> with high rotational mass. Simple physics says Mike is right and you are
> easily persuaded by marketing smoke and mirrors.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Earle



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Jeff Strickland

The jury is out, but as a general rule the V6 makes its power at speeds well
off of idle, but the old I6 makes 80% or 90% of its torque while idling. The
result is that the old I6 makes for better rock crawling because you can
select 1st in 4LO and have more than enough power to creep (crawl) over
stuff.

On the other hand, the V6 makes its power at speed, so it will make for a
far more pleasant commute -- where engine speeds are high, and thus noisey.

I can't say for certain, but the odds favor the new V6 to be a poor
performer for offroading. Having said that, the old 225 Even Fire (and, for
that matter the Odd Fire as well) were very desirable engines in the olden
days. But, when those motors were in production, they were essentially V8s
with two chopped off of one end. The point being, they had a long stroke,
which is where torque comes from. A motor with a short stroke will produce
torque further up on the RPM band, and offroaders (rock crawlers) prefer the
torque to be very low on the RPM band. It is far better to pull a stump at
idle than it is to yank it at 3000 RPM.





"Jack Carter" <jcarter10screwspam@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:RJmdneI2yLQALb3anZ2dnUVZ_gCdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Maybe you should check out the gear ratios in the 6-speed transmission and
> then take one for a test drive - preferably one with the optional 3.73
> axles. If you're open minded - as opposed to empty headed - you might
> change your mind!
>
>
> "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:4720ad92$0$32392$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosti ng.com...
>> Yup, it would appear you now have a mini van engine. No more crawling up
>> the sides of sand pits or over rocks at 400-500 rpm like the old 6 would
>> do. You now need tire spinning, hole digging, rpm to get anyplace.
>>
>> Probably better on the highway.
>>
>> Mike
>> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's - Gone to the rust pile...
>>
>>
>> Jack Carter wrote:
>>> A friend tells me that the engine in my new Wrangler is made by
>>> Mitsubushi. Is he correct? All I've heard is that it's a "good" engine
>>> and that it's used in most Chrysler-made vans and has been around for a
>>> long time.
>
>

Jeff Strickland

The jury is out, but as a general rule the V6 makes its power at speeds well
off of idle, but the old I6 makes 80% or 90% of its torque while idling. The
result is that the old I6 makes for better rock crawling because you can
select 1st in 4LO and have more than enough power to creep (crawl) over
stuff.

On the other hand, the V6 makes its power at speed, so it will make for a
far more pleasant commute -- where engine speeds are high, and thus noisey.

I can't say for certain, but the odds favor the new V6 to be a poor
performer for offroading. Having said that, the old 225 Even Fire (and, for
that matter the Odd Fire as well) were very desirable engines in the olden
days. But, when those motors were in production, they were essentially V8s
with two chopped off of one end. The point being, they had a long stroke,
which is where torque comes from. A motor with a short stroke will produce
torque further up on the RPM band, and offroaders (rock crawlers) prefer the
torque to be very low on the RPM band. It is far better to pull a stump at
idle than it is to yank it at 3000 RPM.





"Jack Carter" <jcarter10screwspam@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:RJmdneI2yLQALb3anZ2dnUVZ_gCdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Maybe you should check out the gear ratios in the 6-speed transmission and
> then take one for a test drive - preferably one with the optional 3.73
> axles. If you're open minded - as opposed to empty headed - you might
> change your mind!
>
>
> "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:4720ad92$0$32392$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosti ng.com...
>> Yup, it would appear you now have a mini van engine. No more crawling up
>> the sides of sand pits or over rocks at 400-500 rpm like the old 6 would
>> do. You now need tire spinning, hole digging, rpm to get anyplace.
>>
>> Probably better on the highway.
>>
>> Mike
>> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's - Gone to the rust pile...
>>
>>
>> Jack Carter wrote:
>>> A friend tells me that the engine in my new Wrangler is made by
>>> Mitsubushi. Is he correct? All I've heard is that it's a "good" engine
>>> and that it's used in most Chrysler-made vans and has been around for a
>>> long time.
>
>