ghetdjc320

I bought a full set of 4.0 stainless fasteners from totally stainless. It’s the second kit I bought from them and it’s all super high grade stuff. The intake/exhaust bolts are arp stainless and have 3/8 socket heads which are super easy to get at

I got a set of nos fronts I was about to use as rears. I run Napier flares and the front fit really nice on the rears with those flares

The MJ 44 is just a regular 44 nothing special about the center section/ring and pinion. Grab whatever locker or carrier you want for a standard 44 and throw on whichever gearset you prefer. The carrier break is 3.73 meaning anything numerically higher will have a different carrier to align the ring to the pinion. But thick cut gears are an easy way to keep the 3.73 and numerically lower carrier. The JK Dana 44 design was used previously (same guts as a 98+ rodeo/passport). They have 8.9” ring gears and a Dana 60 size pinion. The rubicon axle is a bit different as @derf mentioned TJ Dana 44 is also just a regular Dana 44 with thick cut gears. It had a unique rear locker that acted as a Torsen style limited slip when unlocked and a full spool when locked. A unique locker but not necessarily the most reliable option and not worth trying to track down. I’ve had a couple of these lockers in the past though and did like them. They used a much lower air pressure than the ARB’s and Yukon’s

How long is the hdmi your trying to use? Is it an “active” hdmi cable? An active hdmi is directional and has a source and display side. If it’s active, you’ll need to force the laptop to output audio over hdmi. Assuming windows 10 just search for “audio output” after clicking the start menu. Under Hardware and Sound > Manage audio devices > Sound, you need select the “Playback' tab. Then you need to left-click the “Digital OutputDevice (HDMI)” feature. This makes the device as the default option for audio in Windows 10. Now try to reboot the device.

The 98+ rodeo/passport axle is very stout for a half ton axle. Larger ring and pinion that an 8.8, no c clips, much bigger brakes, thicker axle tubes and better clearance than the 8.8. The 8.25 is a neat little swap though.

Wonder if we can convince Russ to jumó on the forum??

Russ does some amazing work (best I’ve seen in the Jeep world) and can get you everything you need for a good price. Or he can build you a whole stroker engine. I’d put his builds above Hesco and Golen any day.

If you scrap the idea that the 12cw is what you need then you can make the process a bit easier. But there is a lot involved still

As I mentioned, my current 4.0 definitely feels mor powerful than any of my strokers (except the one that had a 100hp shot of nitrous. The 12 counterweight cranks are very tough to find and will require additional machine work. They’re not tough to find because they’re so valuable either. They we’re just redesigned early on. When Skat, who is probably the biggest stroker crankshaft player in the industry built their stroker crank based on the 4.2, they scrapped the idea of the 12cw crank. Once you get more power, are you really going to keep it at lower rpm all the time? Engines that don’t drop rpm fast after you let off the throttle feel like they lack compression or the turbo wastegate didn’t open. The heavier crank really doesn't keep the engine running any better at lower rpm.

If we do get a Hawaii section I’ll join in from Guam .

The man behind the switch trim covers lol. In my natural habitat with our “Water Manche”

That going to need one massive intercooler, or 8 small ones I guess

They also pop up on rock auto from time to time as refurbished units. I was surprised to see them but they do show up

Looks like someone tried to polish it up

Yeah the heavier crankshaft has 12 counterweights and is quite a hefty piece of iron. The trick with it is the snout is a decent amount longer than a 4.0 crank so you’ll need to either have the machine shop grind it down or use a machined spacer for the balancer/pulley. You’ll also need a custom pilot bearing if it’s a manual tranny setup. Personally I’ve been quite happy with the newer lighter cranks. If I were going to build something for only low end torque I might consider a diesel. The 12cw crank does have quite a windage issue in the oil pan at higher rpm’s. I don’t really see the advantage with it but it I have seen both sides argue the issue. To me, you could also have a super heavy flywheel have the same result but we’re talking a very slightly marginal difference in real world application but considerable extra weight. Whichever way you go, I do strongly recommend having the machine shop balance the entire rotating assembly. This makes worlds of difference for a smooth running engine. The 96 and newer 4.0 blocks are also a nice revision since that was the first year of the NVH (noise vibration and harshness) revisions. The 87-90 renix 4.0’s also had a higher nickel content in the block supposedly which could possibly take for a more durable block but it’s just so minimal it’s probably not worth the effort. My current 4.0 definitely has more power than my last stroker engine. I took a 96 block, bored 60 over decked for zero clearance, thinner cometic mls head gasket, balanced and lightened 4.0 crank, hypereutectic pistons, mild cam, adjustable billet roller rockers, hylift Johnson lifter, chromo pushrods, melling hv pump, Edelbrock aluminum head, dui ignition, Ford 24# 6 hole injectors, 63mm TB, 99+ ported intake, arp bolts for everything. I don’t have a dyno available here but it’s quick and has loads of torque. My dream build would be an aluminum block diesel. Basically a light weight lcg diesel build on 37’s. Maybe one day

For regearing it depends on the axle but in general you would need: a press, dial indicator, micrometer (not digital calipers), beam style torque wrench in inlbs (for pinion preload), pinion yoke holder, and a gear bearing puller set (this one is insanely helpful for setting up gears but not 100% necessary. I use a unit from revolution axle and gear. You could also use setup bearings or make your own setup bearings with a die grinder and some old bearings.) A variety of large sockets is also a must along with a good impact wrench, vice and possibly a case spreader. Setting up gears requires a sizeable tool investment but the actual install isnt too hard. You just need to always be thinking in 3D (X, Y & Z axis) when making adjustments. For engine rebuilding, it all depends on how much you will do yourself vs how much you'll have done at the machine shop. The list of tools here is quite extensive.

Or some 10” shackles

Yeah I should have clarified I just didn’t have much time to reply lol. Eagle is correct. There are a many different stroker “recipes” I’ve build 3 of them along with several “high performance” naturally aspirated 4.0’s. The basic stroker recipe is to use the 4.2 crank and rods. To keep things relatively economical and plug and play you ideally you would want a donor 87-90 YJ 4.2 (258). As was mentioned, the rods front the 4.0 are longer and stronger so they don’t operate at such steep angles like the shorter 4.2 rods do. The 4.0 makes its power up higher which is typical of an over-square engine design (larger bore than stroke). The 4.2 crank with its longer stroke combined with the larger bore of the 4.0 gives a fairly “square” setup which is nice for all around power. Using the longer 4.0 rods though give a better rod angle which generally translates to durability at higher rpms. Another neat option is to get a crank from an amc 232 engine found in several 70’s amc cars. It’s has a 3.500” stroke vs the 3.411 of the 4.0. You can use a couple varieties of of the shelf pistons along with a .060 bore and get a pretty nice combo with the stock 4.0 rods. Not as torquey down low as the 4.2 based stroker but a nice hybrid. Here is a ton of good information I researched before building my strokers: http://jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/stroker.html

The short 4.2 rods have kind of a borderline rod angle. The most economical stroker is a mini stroker. Use a 232 crank and the 4.0 rods. Ideally use the 4.2 or scat crank and longer 4.0 rods but you’ll need specific pin height pistons. Keep quench real tight

It would be tough to get a spring over axle setup to be at 4” of lift or less. I’m using a set of XJ Cherokee leaf springs and replacing all but the main leaf on my Comanche with them. The Cherokee springs have less arch and will bring you down a bit but likely not enough to be legal. You can switch back to spring under axle and you’ll have some more options for 4” or under

Soa nets 5-6” depending on springs. 2” longer than stock shackles lift 1”

And don’t forget to get a tape measure to get your actual tire size. Most 33’s are 32’s or even 31’s when new.

TJ axles are a downgrade unless they are from a rubicon.