MJ Turbo 4.0

[Dzimm]

Dzimm,. Just stay away from 505 Racing. Don't think of giving them your money. Their reputation on jeepstrokers is terrible.

Good to know. Thanks. I did look at some of their equipment but it was hard because their website is garbage.

[johnj92131]

As you likely know, a dyno is a tool. Some Dyno is a heartbreaker, others are optimistic. But if you use the same dyno for each test, it will give you good information. Don has used the same dyno for years. So the changes he illustrates are real. I have been playing with VW diesels for 10 years now and only used 2 dynos. For an autocross car or truck, peak power is not what matters. Sort out brakes and suspension first. You will find lots of fun there.

[Dzimm]

As you likely know, a dyno is a tool. Some Dyno is a heartbreaker, others are optimistic. But if you use the same dyno for each test, it will give you good information. Don has used the same dyno for years. So the changes he illustrates are real. I have been playing with VW diesels for 10 years now and only used 2 dynos. For an autocross car or truck, peak power is not what matters. Sort out brakes and suspension first. You will find lots of fun there.

Right and thats what I am really going for. I don't have access to a dyno nor do I have the money to go test multiple times (I wish I did). My results will be measured by 0-60 and 1/4mile time. I will also try to find a place to run it around a few corners and time myself. Obviously not the best for representing the results but will be enough to show what gain there is.

[Green Mesa XJ]

0-60 is so subjective, it's fun but not always indicative of the power you have.

 

 

Edit: you might look for 80s Supra and MR2 even celica turbo set up, those were set to fairly weak boosts 6-8 pounds.

 

only thing is the some of the old ct26 turbos had radiator fluid cooling lines, many newer setups are oil only because (I'm told) newer oils are superior to the 70&80s Dino oil.

Supra will have the straight 6 platform, so do some Nissan's, not sure which ones were imported here, other manufacturers may have a similar set up like old Mercedes

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Dzimm]

0-60 is so subjective, it's fun but not always indicative of the power you have.

 

 

Edit: you might look for 80s Supra and MR2 even celica turbo set up, those were set to fairly weak boosts 6-8 pounds.

 

only thing is the some of the old ct26 turbos had radiator fluid cooling lines, many newer setups are oil only because (I'm told) newer oils are superior to the 70&80s Dino oil.

Supra will have the straight 6 platform, so do some Nissan's, not sure which ones were imported here, other manufacturers may have a similar set up like old Mercedes

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Mostly true about the 0-60 however in a autocross/rally vehicle, acceleration is key so my time should change. And when I don't have any real way to test power, it's a good option.

 

A supra turbo will be hard to find around here but I'll look into the Nissans and see what I can find.

[Green Mesa XJ]

I'd thought every junk yard would have a dead MK3 Supra. (Jk)

 

The Nissan straight 6 is I think their old 280z and the R32 skyline, think skyline is the only one with factory turbo.

We got all the 300zx v6 turbos which might be a source.

 

I'd think the exhaust adapter plate would be the trickier part to locate and/or fabricate. The rest like intercooler should be pretty much off the shelf. There is a guy who put a 7mgte engine (Supra turbo) in a XJ. Wonder how that worked out for him

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[johnj92131]

Should be able to find an app for your cell phone that let's you test acceleration at many different speeds.

[Jeep Driver]

:shake:    ^^  Everybody's lying and wasting their money says Mr. 2.5.   :yes:    Tell that to the dyno. He is correct somewhat regarding the AW4. It doesn't break, but the total drivetrain loss from the test stand numbers to the rear wheels after installation was ~30%. The numbers would have been much better, at least 12% overall, with an AX15. But I like my auto.

 

Dzimm, I hope you can do the similar with less money with the turbo and retain reliability. That was the key for me. Going strong for 9+ years now. Looking forward to your build.

 

No, I'm not disputing your numbers. I've seen your charts and I've actually looked at other charts in comparison. 

 

I do not doubt your numbers. 

 

I see a lot of chassis pulls and virtually no engine dyno results, chassis results are not conclusive to me,,,,,,I'm not going to wage my $5K on inconclusive results, too many variables. Your dyno result are for you, not a standard for every stroker.

 

AW4 is a dead end for me, no manual valve body..........and I ain't doing hocus pocus controllers and switches to fool the AW4. 

 

 

 

You can read about it at NAXJA, when guys start claiming that they are building strokers that are productive through 5-6-7K rpm...........they have gone off the reservation, utter BS. 

 

Even your own chart........torque drops like a rock above 3500.

 

 

Somewhere there is a Chysler stock graph that looks similar to yours, just lower numbers, of course. 

[Jeep Driver]

[HOrnbrod]

Your dyno result are for you, not a standard for every stroker.

 

AW4 is a dead end for me, no manual valve body..........and I ain't doing hocus pocus controllers and switches to fool the AW4.

Nope, definitely not a standard for every stroker, I agree. But every Hesco built crate stroker has guaranteed dyno test stand minimum HP/Torque numbers depending on the flavor of the mild-to-wild recipe built you select, i.e. cam, valve train, aluminum head, displacement, etc. etc. No one does it better, but you have to pay for it.

 

Also agree with "no hocus pocus controllers and switches to fool the AW4". In spite of it's power loss, the AW4 is a super reliable tranny and will handle any 4.x stroker engine with ease if left alone. My goal going in with a stroker was reliability first with decent gains over stock. Got all that ten-fold, and in the long run it's smarter financially than cheaping out on some yahoo-built stroker, doing it yourself (possibly more yahoo), or most other builders. Check it out, stroker horror stories abound. It's the old axiom, you get what you pay for.

[jerpderp]

I don't have much first hand experience with this, but I've had friends do the junkyard turbo set up. I'd definitely recommend using a used turbo over a Chinese one. Look for Saabs or Volvos, should be pretty cheap. Also try to grab a used intercooler as well just to save $$. Since you don't want to run high boost psi, a smaller intercooler should work fine with less lag. Not sure if this will work space wise, but you may be able to fab an adapter or weld a flange onto the stock manifold. For bottom dollar engine management, megasquirt seems to be the way to go. Good luck

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dzimm]

So I just finished doing the math and putting together a sheet of the boost numbers for the Jeep 4.0.  This shows what the numbers are for different PSI of boost, and gives the info needed to compare to compressor maps to select the proper turbo for this engine.    Since this is an autocross based project, I need most of the power in the lower to mid area of the RPM range (2000-4000 RPM) for faster acceleration.  I'm still somewhat lost when it comes to selecting a turbo based on this information and don't entirely understand how to read the compressor maps.  I'm hoping that one of you does and can help me understand it. 

 

[Motorhead X]

Hey Dzimm,

 

I ran across your post from a while back while researching turbos. Did you ever get the 4.0 turbo worked out? I watched an informative video recently from Gale Banks. A lot of the video is his own personal history with turbos, but I did learn a lot from it.

 

 

[Dzimm]

2 hours ago, bluenotenick said:

Hey Dzimm,

 

I ran across your post from a while back while researching turbos. Did you ever get the 4.0 turbo worked out? I watched an informative video recently from Gale Banks. A lot of the video is his own personal history with turbos, but I did learn a lot from it.

 

 

No unfortunately life got in the way so I didn't get any further than my research.  Hopefully in the next year or so I'll be able to actually do it.  I don't have time to watch this video right now but I'll definitely check it out!  I never did decide on exactly what turbo to use but the concensus I found was Garret brand is the top dog. 

[dasbulliwagen]

After reading through all this, I still think an LS swap with matching trans would be the easiest swap with the least headaches for what youre trying to accomplish. And I hate LS swaps, but for the cost and least amount of fab for what youll get out of it, I think it would be your best bet. The more complex the fab and tuning is on a modified 4.0 the less likely youll actually finish the job and have fun with it. If it were my project doing what you want to do with it, I think the LS would be the best choice. don't get me wrong, I love the 4.0 and 2.5 AMC engines and I have plans to modify one myself, but having experienced project car issues over the years, and loosing interest in them over time due to compexity and money issues, I think keeping it simple would be your best bet, and the LS is a relatively simple swap cpmpared to building and tuning a turbo setup from scratch. MY 2 Cents.

[Smokeyyank]

Honestly, at $2,500 you could get a turbo on there. It's been done. I've looked into getting a turbo in the 4.0 simply because FI at elevation is a thing of beauty. Yes, no replacement for displacement unless you're at 10k feet, FI kicks its @$$ especially a turbo. Superchargers are meh IMHO. One thing I have not saw mentioned was doing a remote mount turbo. Definitely an option if you're not banging around on rocks. Downside is losing some umph on the exhaust side, but trade off is being able to free up engine space, reduce under hood temps and getting away with a smaller intercooler.  Turbo wise 16G or 20G turbo can do a lot, they are cheap and easy to modify. Megasquirt to piggy back for the EFI. You'll need to fab a manifold.  Boom done. 

[Dzimm]

12 hours ago, dasbulliwagen said:

After reading through all this, I still think an LS swap with matching trans would be the easiest swap with the least headaches for what youre trying to accomplish. And I hate LS swaps, but for the cost and least amount of fab for what youll get out of it, I think it would be your best bet. The more complex the fab and tuning is on a modified 4.0 the less likely youll actually finish the job and have fun with it. If it were my project doing what you want to do with it, I think the LS would be the best choice. don't get me wrong, I love the 4.0 and 2.5 AMC engines and I have plans to modify one myself, but having experienced project car issues over the years, and loosing interest in them over time due to compexity and money issues, I think keeping it simple would be your best bet, and the LS is a relatively simple swap cpmpared to building and tuning a turbo setup from scratch. MY 2 Cents.

I actually thought about this originally but I want to keep costs as low as possible and I really want to keep the 4.0 in the truck to stay all Jeep.  I did the 97+ swap on my current truck and honestly don't want to go through swapping a drivetrain again right now.  I really want to dabble in the boosted side of things and see what I can do but I do agree, it would definitely be more straight forward to do an ls swap. 

[Dzimm]

9 hours ago, Smokeyyank said:

Honestly, at $2,500 you could get a turbo on there. It's been done. I've looked into getting a turbo in the 4.0 simply because FI at elevation is a thing of beauty. Yes, no replacement for displacement unless you're at 10k feet, FI kicks its @$$ especially a turbo. Superchargers are meh IMHO. One thing I have not saw mentioned was doing a remote mount turbo. Definitely an option if you're not banging around on rocks. Downside is losing some umph on the exhaust side, but trade off is being able to free up engine space, reduce under hood temps and getting away with a smaller intercooler.  Turbo wise 16G or 20G turbo can do a lot, they are cheap and easy to modify. Megasquirt to piggy back for the EFI. You'll need to fab a manifold.  Boom done. 

Actually you may be on to something there.  I could put the turbo in the indent where the t-case would normally go to keep it close to the front since I'll be 2wd.  Then pipe the intake up through the center console and out through the firewall on the passenger side and up into the intake manifold.  Not exactly sure where to mount the intercooler on this setup tho. 

 

My original plan was just to mount the turbo where the stock intake would go but that would require rediculous fab work on the exhaust.  I definitely like the remote idea better, especially since I could mount so far forward. 

[Smokeyyank]

16 hours ago, Dzimm said:

Actually you may be on to something there.  I could put the turbo in the indent where the t-case would normally go to keep it close to the front since I'll be 2wd.  Then pipe the intake up through the center console and out through the firewall on the passenger side and up into the intake manifold.  Not exactly sure where to mount the intercooler on this setup tho. 

 

My original plan was just to mount the turbo where the stock intake would go but that would require rediculous fab work on the exhaust.  I definitely like the remote idea better, especially since I could mount so far forward. 

I'd forgo any tubing through the cab. It will get way too hot. You should have enough room to run the IC piping back through the other side. I'd mount the IC in the front under the rad. You could also use a water cooled IC to save space but will need to beef up the cooling system. A plus with the remote mount turbos is since there is more tubing it will help cool the charged air limiting the need for a big ol honking IC.