kro10000

This is BS. Have run the stroker at max torque at the strip many times - no problems with the factory mounts (new) and zero fan interference. Have broke a couple of axles though. And I run dual electric fans with much less wiggle room up front than the stock mechanical fan. Strokers don't cause any more "shift" than a stock engine if the mounts are in good shape and the mounting points are intact. Suggest you peruse the various stroker forum and check out the preferred motor/tranny mounts. I'll rephrase that, it is possible that a stroker may overcome factory motor mounts, the stroker WILL be more likely to shift under load than a stock 4.0. So if the fact that it is a stroker isn't the problem itself, it is not helping the situation. It is common for hotrods with built motors to do this, and the same goes for our Jeeps. On the other hand the 4.7L stroker my brother and I built for his TJ has never had an issue with rubber mounts. So it is possible that the new mounts are of poor quality, or there is another reason as to why this is happening.

Actually it could very well be related to the fact he has a stroker. I'd try some urethane motor/trans mounts. That would be the best solution to that problem IMO. How? The stroker uses the same block and the same peripherals as a stock 4.0L so HOW could changing the crankshaft and rods inside the engine make the fan hit the shroud? The engine shifts under torque, it tries to move the opposite direction of the driveshaft. The factory mounts might be fine under max factory torque, but with the added torque of the stroker it will shift more under initial load.

Actually it could very well be related to the fact he has a stroker. I'd try some urethane motor/trans mounts. That would be the best solution to that problem IMO. On the other hand if you do the dual fans setup, use a shroud. It isn't going to limit your highway cfm much, and the issue you have is heating at low speeds. 220 degrees isn't much to worry about though.

:agree:

Don't see anything wrong with that :dunno:

Pretty sure it's the same one.

Got valvoline vr1 20-50 in her now, keeps the pressure from 20-50 psi... Usually it sits at 40ish, but for whatever reason it drops to 20 if driven on the highway for a while. This happens maybe after 1/2 hour, wondering if the oil pump is going out...

Well I am confused then, I thought this was "the death of a beautiful relationship"? Not the "I have all the respect in the world for you guys, and am going to be here for a while" thread. Seems that reading these 3 pages was a waste...

Right well as I have only the seat-of-the-pants dyno to use I don't think that before and after numbers gonna be possible. FWIW the pipes that really make or break your torque numbers are the header pipes, these are what create the exhaust scavenging effect that effects torque. Afterwards as long as the exhaust doesn't impede the exhaust scavenging, the best possible scenario is to remove all exhaust as fast as possible, which higher back pressure impedes. So you don't want to go with exhaust pipe that is too big, so that the exhaust has time to cool and become dense, which makes it more difficult to remove from the pipes. More exhaust backpressure means more power lost pushing it out the tailpipe.

No, Pat, I did not miss the part about the intake and the cam. I also did not miss where you said it will be primarily a daily driver. Lowering the torque curve does not result in a need for a high flow exhaust system ... and especially not for an engine that's not being run most of the time up at or near the red line. FWIW, the choice of cam has no effect on the engine speed/road speed relationship -- that's a mechanical ration that is entirely determined by tire diameter, axle ratio, and transmission ratio. If you are running 235/75-15 tires through 3.07 gears, then I respectfully submit that if your tach is telling you 1700 RPM at 70 MPH, your tachometer is wrong. Those numbers I toss out are all calculated based on actual tire manufacturers' data, in most cases actual revolutions-per-mile ... which is the only accurate way to calculate the engine speed from the road speed. A different tire model or make may vary by a few RPMs, but not by 200. Nonetheless ... Gibson's Jeep exhausts are tuned for hauling and they are reputed to really work. I never tried one but I dated a gal who had a Gibson system in her TJ. If I were ever to go for an aftermarket system, that's what I'd get. Never been a big fan of Gibson, a little too much $$$ for what you get, nice stuff though. However, I am going to have to disagree with you strongly on reducing backpressure/lowering torque. Unless you are going wild with your exhaust you are still going to have adequate backpressure for proper exhaust scavenging. It is true that oftentimes you will raise the torque peak up higher in the RPM band, but the torque will still be there where the original peak was. At most you might lose 5ft/pounds in any part of the band, but the change is almost always worth it. That whole large exhaust/no torque deal is way exaggerated, I switched from a cat+turbo muffler, to no cat, 40 series with a 2.5in pipe and turndown and might've picked up a little bit of power on the top end, but any changes in power weren't very noticeable.

To regear the D44 to 4.10s you will need a new carrier. I think the carrier break is 3.8ish

There should be a ground wire up under the dash, I'd check that

Whenever I feel like whining about having to shave all the time, I just remember, thank god I'm a man!

Possibly a bad ground :dunno:

FWIW Castrol GTX diesel kept the valvetrain quiet on my 4.0. On my last oil change I got some 20w-50 Valvoline VR-1 on sale and it started ticking again :doh:

:dunno: I work at an O'Reilly's and have sold tons of Sachs clutches, the only reason I've seen them come back is due to missing parts. That said we just switched from Dynapak to Sachs about 8 months ago, I've got a Dynapak disk and pressure plate with a Sachs slave in my MJ.

The super 44 is the louder muffler, my brother has one on his tj with 2.25 exhaust and is louder than mj mj with a 40 series and 2.5 inch. For a quiet good flowing exhaust I'd run a dynomax ultraflow. They are as pricey as a 40 series, but my buddy has one on his xj and it is very quiet. A little louder than stock, but not by much.

Also just a thought, but I'd unplug your temp sensor and try driving it that way. That should force it into closed loop and will disregard the O2 sensor entirely. If you're still having issues then it rules out an open loop issue.

http://www.lunghd.com/Tech_Articles/Eng ... ostics.htm This site is full of useful info, if you own a renix jeep a multimeter is your best friend.

O2 sensor is my guess, when your engine is cold it is in "closed loop" meaning it ignores the O2 sensor and runs on a preset fuel map. Once it warms up it gets the bad reading. Should've asked this first. What motor/year? If its a v6 then disregard above

I can't remember the last time I saw one of these for sale: http://kansascity.craigslist.org/cto/2406676022.html 1973 jeep cj6 - $1000 (tonganoxie) Date: 2011-05-27, 5:41PM CDT Reply to: sale-qyrrj-2406676022@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] 1973 jeep cj6. Basically a cj5 with an extra 20 inches of wheel base, like an early scrambler. Buick V8? with jeep 3speed. The whole thing is a little rough. She has some rust in the body, and the frame has had some repair but it does run and drive. don't see many of these any more. Bill of sale only. $1000.00 Location: tonganoxie it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests PostingID: 2406676022 Definitely rough, but man I'd love to have me a CJ-6 (or 8)

Here's mine It isn't quite as clean in appearance, mostly due to the 50 million hose clamps, but it works great

I'm! 6'1" and have MJ (or possibly 2dr xj) buckets. I fit fine with several inches to spare. IMO bench seats are horrible, I like to actually have some support

Bump?