What the 4.0 could have been
- Thread starter Brianj5600
- Start date
I owned one, and liked it very much for the areas I was using it in (Forest Service roads, and the like). Also, that little 2.4R-E has a proven track record for reliability. Add to that the fact that the 1st-Gen 4Runner really holds its value, and yeah, it'd be my first choice.
Cost to swap vs an LS. Not thought it through enough yet.
Been on my mind for years in fact. The 54 Chevy I owned can be body swapped onto an S-10 frame. Many stories about them keeping the 4.3L and 5-speed trans.
I can see your reason , here where I live at 9000 + ft. elevation that 105 h.p. turns into 76.65 h.p. I guess I would stick with the Cherokee for 4 drs. 68 more h.p.
solid axles with actual travel and also holds value. Hey , how is not commuting to a job going ?
This makes a sense ! I've seen a few advanced design trucks swapped to a S-10 chassis , fits well and the dimensions work well.
Most of the trucks I've seen have a SBC and T-350 swapped in place of the 4.3.
Well I should have said in Midsize SUV's not HO 5.0 Mustangs or Kali equipped 305 pee whiffing Corvettes.
Perhaps to be more accurate , I should have compared apples to apples.
In 1987 in midsize SUVs this is how the comparison sizes up. with highest horsepower engine available.
87 Chevy S-10 Blazer 2.8 V-6 125 h.p.
87 Ford Bronco II 2.9 V-6 140 h.p.
87 Toyota 4runner 2.4 I-4 105 h.p.
87 Jeep Cherokee 4.0 I-6 173 h.p.
So in it's market the 4.0 was powerful compare to the rest of the market at introduction.
Today you can could go way high tech and have a butt load of power but your cost / horsepower ratio goes out the window.
This is why " just LS swap it " pisses so many people off and yet make a ton of sense in the cost / horsepower ratio.
Kinda the same way folks would swap a 327 into a flattie 50 years ago , sure you had to steer with your left hand because your right hand was busy holding the T-90 into 2nd gear....
Not a GREAT comparison of motors, but I don’t disagree … I’d pick motors with similar displacement and use case. PS That 2.8 Chevy powered XJ was god aweful, friend got a nice one back in the day for 800 bucks and we BOTH think he overpaid for that heap of crap.
I’d include the
Toyota 3.0/3.4 V6 … 3.0 was a turd, 3.4 had longevity but barely broke 200hp, reliable tho… quad cam modern tech couldn’t surpass the Jeep 4.0
Toyota 4.0 L6 HA! Probably japans best equivalent… 4 liters made about 140hp 200tq. Hunk of crap, but they CAN survive a lot of mileage.
Toyota 4.5 L6 one dang reliable slug, all the modern goodies Japan could muster plus incredible displacement. But only 190hp but good torque at 260ftlbs
Chevy 4.3 V6 , this one got close but it had more displacement and a more advanced design with that vortec cylinder head, this would have been the next evolutionary step in the AMC/JEEP 4.0.
Chevy 3.8 V6 close in displacement, crap for a truck. I HATE the racket they make, worst sounding exhaust tune. I will admit in supercharged form, they scoot …
Ford 4.9 L6 at best made 150hp (good tq tho) with more (a lot more) displacement. Powered much bigger vehicles
The lack of traffic related stress is at least equal to the lack of work related stress. It's amazing!
It would be a toss up between a 4Runner or Cherokee for me, but I think an SR5 Turbo 4Runner would be my choice.
What's your point, App?
View attachment 425849
View attachment 425850
View attachment 425851
View attachment 425852
