jpnjim Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 http://theamcforum.com/forum/40l-edelbrock-cylinder-head_topic55254.html looks like they are working on them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogmorgo Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 :popcorn: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oyaji Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 Advantages will be most pronounced for high RPM/top-end power. Still curious as to what they come up with. This would be a head for which to take a hard look at fabricating a high-flow intake manifold (a specialty of Edelbrock) and some long-tube headers too, I reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpnjim Posted December 1, 2013 Author Share Posted December 1, 2013 I know the HESCO head has been criticized for not making enough of a difference vs cost, we'll see what Edelbrock can come up with. At the very least, it will be a nice option to rebuilding a stock head. The aluminum by itself can help the engine tolerate more compression, but the heat loss from an Aluminum head has been criticized for costing HP, so some of the gain from more compression is a wash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oyaji Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 I know the HESCO head has been criticized for not making enough of a difference vs cost, we'll see what Edelbrock can come up with. At the very least, it will be a nice option to rebuilding a stock head. The aluminum by itself can help the engine tolerate more compression, but the heat loss from an Aluminum head has been criticized for costing HP, so some of the gain from more compression is a wash. The heat loss comment is interesting to me. I think it is misplaced criticism. Because the primary means of heat rejection is via liquid cooling, and since the cooling is controlled by the thermostat, I don't see how the use of aluminum would make any difference in heat loss, nor how it would cost horsepower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitroxsteve Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 I would think the biggest advantage would be the weight savings and I wonder if you would gain any cooling advantages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oyaji Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 I would think the biggest advantage would be the weight savings and I wonder if you would gain any cooling advantages. Aluminum transfers heat better than cast iron, but the limit on how much heat can be transferred is from coolant flow and the heat sink (radiator). Advantage would be in hot-spot reduction (mainly from fast heat build-up resulting from high-load demand suddenly applied) and, of course as you mentioned, weight savings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalob Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 If headers are in the future offering by edelbrock. It should be noted that Edelbrock no longer bends tubes nor fabricates headers of any kind. This work has been sold off by them and is being done offshore. The company I work for made their tube bending tooling for years untill they made the change a couple of years back. I do not know if they are marketing the aisian fabricated headers under the edelbrock name, all myprevious contacts there have all left for other bend shops (primarily carsound/magnaflow). Edelbrock's. Heads and intake manifolds which were always the core buisness is still being done in California however to my knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpnjim Posted September 17, 2014 Author Share Posted September 17, 2014 annnnnd they are developing it, & looking for some test vehicles; http://www.edelbrock.com/automotive/misc/test-vehicles/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 annnnnd they are developing it, & looking for some test vehicles; http://www.edelbrock.com/automotive/misc/test-vehicles/ Oh, yeah. Sign me right up to let a bunch of people I don't know wrench on my Jeep, and then keep it for four to six WEEKS doing God only knows what to it. Sounds like a great deal to me (not). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyc Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 Stock with less than 50K miles? No one I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokermjcomanche Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 In that link they are looking for a 2006 4.0 . When the 4.0 block was recasted for the WJ's and TJ's, wasn't the head also? I'm not sure ( but it would be nice ) if the two would even bolt up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockfrog Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 AFAIK the only redesign to the head was the upgraded TUPY casting of the original 0331 design (added material between rockers). Otherwise the same head as my 00 XJ. At least it was on my 2006 TJ. And since my XJ runs a 93 head, should be cross compatible. ... although it may mean changing the exhaust to the newer 50 state 2000 cast split manifolds. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokermjcomanche Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 AFAIK the only redesign to the head was the upgraded TUPY casting of the original 0331 design (added material between rockers). Otherwise the same head as my 00 XJ. At least it was on my 2006 TJ. And since my XJ runs a 93 head, should be cross compatible. ... although it may mean changing the exhaust to the newer 50 state 2000 cast split manifolds. ... To my knowledge the 00 and 01 xj engines are specific to those two years and not compatible with the Tj's or Wj's as the tabs for the motor mounts are in different locations and there is a extra tab for the a/c compressor that is not on the xj4.0's . If it's not the case and the heads are reasonably priced I'd like to put one my stroker I'm building . I do see your logical thinking though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockfrog Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 From what I saw and have researched the head didn't change other than the above mentioned, but yes the block changed extensively ... Making newer block incompatible with earlier vehicles without a wee bit of work. But we are really only talking about the head, really. The exhaust port changes made in mid 99 should be the only real hurdle as far as just the cylinder head is concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now