jared Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 but looking on the bright side it runs better than whats in the manche now ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinnaevd Posted July 11, 2007 Share Posted July 11, 2007 that is true. I saw chris drive it a few times and it really had some get up and go. i honestly don't think he would intentionally lie, unless he was lied to and did it by accident. the whole thing seems screwy to me. i kinda wish i would have kept my mouth shut about the whole deal.... but in the mean time i guess theres no sense in getting worked up about it just yet??? Pete if you need anything just let me know and i will do my best to help you out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyComanche Posted July 11, 2007 Share Posted July 11, 2007 Stop the suspense. Just drop the pan and get the numbers off the crank or measure the stroke. Or pull the head an measure the stroke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejndssn Posted July 11, 2007 Share Posted July 11, 2007 DirtyComanche Stop the suspense. Just drop the pan and get the numbers off the crank or measure the stroke. :agree: with that and there where two types one called the heavy weight which i believe is the 70's vintage crank(12cw) and the light weight was in the mid 80"s vintage crank (8cw) like that of the 4.0 and i do believe that bryce was one of the first pioneer's in this arena. here are some links that i have found that may help http://www.yankeeinfluences.com/jeep/JeepEngines.pdf http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/tech_specs.html http://www.bc4x4.com/tech/bryce/stroker/assembly.cfm I also do agree with Pete's assessment hope this helps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted July 11, 2007 Author Share Posted July 11, 2007 Tomorrow I'll dig into the engine and follow up with the phone calls. Today was spent driving all around town buying, selling and trading axles. :driving: It's practically like work and it has to be done. Tomorrow all I have to do is box up a 242 and get everyone's stickers in the mail. As a side note, tomorrow is supposed to be in the mid-70s with only 40% humidity. WooHoo!!! :banana: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockhardzj Posted July 11, 2007 Share Posted July 11, 2007 As a side note, tomorrow is supposed to be in the mid-70s with only 40% humidity. WooHoo!!! :banana: Yea, you passed the crap weather on to me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejndssn Posted July 11, 2007 Share Posted July 11, 2007 sounds like Pete will be inspector gadget :wrench: on a very nice day good luck. Pete just another question do you know what type of axles gears was on the XJ prior to the surgery. :hmm: btw we are expecting to get wet down here. :jump: its about time too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted July 11, 2007 Author Share Posted July 11, 2007 The XJ had stock axles, Dana 30 and 8.25. I think they were original to the Jeep so it'd be 3.55 gears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted July 12, 2007 Author Share Posted July 12, 2007 Um, so I'm lying there under my half-J waiting for the oil to drain and it dawns on me that I haven't a clue what I'm looking for after I get the pan off. Is the crank clearly marked somewhere with a serial number? Or do I have to rotate the crank to measure the stroke? (which might be rough as I don't have help at the moment). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinnaevd Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 i was under the impression that it would be marked on the balancing weight on the crank somewhere near the front or back??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejndssn Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 Pete look at the counter weights the 4.2L had two types if there is 12 cw then for sure it has been stroked. If there are 8cw then you will have to measure the stroke which it appears to be difficult at the moment. I was hoping that you had some time to look at the links that i have provided. The first link may be of great value to us all since its the jeep performance book. I will check with the stroker site and see what they have to offer and post my findings from the stroke site shortly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejndssn Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 Update from the stroke site by Greg Approximately ’72 – 80 model years. The casting number you want is 3214723. It has 12 counterweights vs. 4 on the lighter cranks. If you get an engine with that crank, also be sure to nab the main caps. They are the solid ones and are preferable and even necessary on high-rpm engines. The downside is that you have to get your block align-honed to use them on a different block than they came from. For street strokers it’s not real important, but save them anyway because somebody else might need them I was wrong in stating 8 cw for the 4.2l :oops: only the 4.0l had 8 cw and i do believe that the Dino's web site will provide additional help as well. here is an response by Dino from the stroker's siteYou'll need a 12-counterweight crank (66lb weight) from a '72-'80 258engine. Cranks from '81-'90 had 4 counterweights and weighed only 46lb. For comparison, all 4.0 cranks have 8 counterweights and weigh 55lb. The 258 main caps that Greg referred to are desirable but not really necessary unless you intend to build a high revving stroker that'll see 6000+ rpm. In that case, you'd need to have the crank balanced and nitrided, and you'd also need to have the main bearing saddles align honed as Greg suggested. In addition, pistons would need to be weight-matched, rods balanced and shotpeened, and ARP 112-6001 rod bolts used. keeping my fingers crossed that there is 4 cw or 12 cw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted July 14, 2007 Author Share Posted July 14, 2007 Can't find any counterweights (not sure what I'm looking for), but I did find the casting number and that clearly shows that I have a run-of-the-mill 4.0L crankshaft, part# 3003453. :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :dunce: Guess I should change the title of this project to "swapping a bad 4.0 for a good 4.0". :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyComanche Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 That's the $#!&s. Well, if it is a low mile 4.0 it's still going to be better than what you've got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted July 15, 2007 Author Share Posted July 15, 2007 That's the $#!+. Well, if it is a low mile 4.0 it's still going to be better than what you've got. Yeah, but more expensive than it's worth. :( I've alerted the seller to my findings and he's still adamant that he bought a stroker. I replied back with the whole story and I'm waiting on another reply. Monday I've got some more calls to make and I may even hop the border to talk to the shops in person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jared Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 that sucks pete, i hope it still works out you might have got something kinda special. maybe it has a cam and a nice port and polish ro something. kinda will never know unless you pull it aprt which obviously is not worth the trouble because it still runs great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted July 15, 2007 Author Share Posted July 15, 2007 Cam number (89330-02983) shows up on this website as a 4.0L http://www.perfectengine.com/category_s/65.htm :dunno: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejndssn Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 Pete first want to say sorry for the out come. Any way at the bottom of this shot you will see a CW http://www.printroom.com/ViewAlbumPhoto.asp?shopperid=NBD19WSC2EJ98KS1LP61H7T968RCERP8&userid=Lancia1&album_id=48070&image_id=1 also the Dinos site has a good picture of the AP stroker without obstructions that is a 4 CW one on each end and two in the center you stated that he was adamant that it was a stroker he could have been tooked and didnt know it and may be he's just as :mad: or in denial :???: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted July 15, 2007 Author Share Posted July 15, 2007 Oh, so this is the counterweight? In that case, I have 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejndssn Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 thanks for the up load whats the trick. :dunno: I do hope that the performance doc comes in handy you may already have it. should you stroke the 4.0l i recommend lite version, for others the heavy are the one of choice, this sounds like a beer commercial :cheers: (less filling /taste great). the differences is that lite is a plug and play & 4 cw . the heavy requires a trim at the snout & 12 cw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted July 16, 2007 Author Share Posted July 16, 2007 Well, since this one turned out to not be a stroker, I'll eventually be going through with my plan to build one using the extra 4.0 and 4.2 that I bought years ago. It's a 12 cw one for more offroad oompf at clutch engagement. Trimming off the extra length isn't too big a problem. Are you asking about how to put pictures in your posts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oizarod115 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 it could still be bored if its a rebuilt motor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyComanche Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 it could still be bored if its a rebuilt motor It most likely is. While a guy can pull off a rebuild on a higher milage motor without over-boring, typically it makes more sense to just bore it out a bit. However, there's almsot nothing to be gained in regards to power by this. Unless you're going to bore is .060+ over. Then you're running risks with the block's integrety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oizarod115 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 well can't he slap a 4.2 crank in there+that bore and have a stroker? the expensive block work like milling and stuff is done right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted July 16, 2007 Author Share Posted July 16, 2007 This block was professionally rebuilt (.04 over in the cylinders) and I'm not touching the innards with a 10 ft pole. It'll be swapped directly into the 88 as-is. Then, later on (when I have money again), I'll build a stroker like I was going to do before (using the 4.0 and 4.2 I have in storage), put the stroker into the 88 and move this rebuild over to the 90. Or if the 88 works good with the rebuilt motor, maybe I'll put the stroker into the 90 and burn the MTRs down to shreds. :D 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