Straight 6 or V6?
- Thread starter 5632
- Start date
I've owned 4 vehicles with the 4.0L, and worked on many more. While by today's standards it is a low-powered boat anchor, it's low-end torque and simple design make it a nice match for a Jeep. Obviously once you pile on heavy bumpers, bigger tires, and lots of gear the low power output becomes obvious. It would be my choice for someone learning to wrench on vehicles or something to rely on out on the trail. I can't see the 3.6L with it's many electronics and plastic cracking oil filter housing being good for heavy trails and abuse. Electronics don't enjoy water and mud.
Why not mount up dual wheels to the front of your TJ and run a Twin-six ? Go ahead and stretch the front clip 40" Displacement be damned.
It would improve front traction for sure! World's first, last, and only TJ with a 702 CID engine!Why not mount up dual wheels to the front of your TJ and run a Twin-six ? Go ahead and stretch the front clip 40" Displacement be damned.
I actually have dreamed of a bucket-T roadster style hot rod with that engine. Complete with personalized plates "702CID". Would be completely stupid, but fun! 4 separate 3 into 1 headers to side pipes, maybe even a custom intake with 12 velocity stacks...
Of course don't let the L-88 chevy guys see you put velocity stacks on an engine with a 2400 RPM redline.
Otherwise this build is so wrong I love it.
I *think* the "Thunder V-12" version redlines in the high 3,000s somewhere (shooting from the hip, I don't remember offhand) - but either way - who cares? Its so stupid that anything goes! It'd be the only bucket-T in existence that tows its own mobile garage!Of course don't let the L-88 chevy guys see you put velocity stacks on an engine with a 2400 RPM redline.
Otherwise this build is so wrong I love it.
You and I are probably the only two people on this forum who have ever heard of this engine, everybody else is like "da Fuq?"!
Last edited:
Probably the only T- bucket that would be rolling on 10:00 -20's !
The info. I have shows 250 H.P @ 2400 rpm and 585 lb. ft @ 1600 -1900 rpm.
It's fun bench building shit we neither one will do!
Thunder V-12 claims 270HP and 630 ft-lbs stock. Modified, 425 at 4,200 RPM, torque was apparently unmeasurable on the dyno used because it couldn't hold the engine back. They consider 5,000 RPM to be an absolute redline, but they do all this on 87 octane gas!Probably the only T- bucket that would be rolling on 10:00 -20's !
The info. I have shows 250 H.P @ 2400 rpm and 585 lb. ft @ 1600 -1900 rpm.
It's fun bench building shit we neither one will do!
Another fun engine that might actually make vague sense in a TJ for rock crawling - if you could fit it in and support its weight: The CAT D6600. 3 cylinder diesel, 8 inch stroke, 5-3/4 inch bore - the ultimate long stroke under-square motor. 52 flywheel HP, 45 at the drawbar. Redlines at 900 RPM or thereabouts, max power at around 600 if I remember correctly. Neighbor had one in a CAT RD-6 bulldozer from the 1930s. VERY distinctive sound. Starts up with a two cylinder gasoline pony motor. They also had 4 and 6 cylinder versions, same cylinder specs.
This ought to piss off everyone on the road to the trail and then even some on the trail !
I am too lazy to do the math at the moment
but I wonder what the lb. ft. of torque is !The 8.0" stroke doesn't promote a 5000 rpm . redline .
And they'd be pissed off even before they smelled it!This ought to piss off everyone on the road to the trail and then even some on the trail !
I am too lazy to do the math at the moment
The 8.0" stroke doesn't promote a 5000 rpm . redline .
I love my 4.0 but I dream of the Cummins crate diesel. Swap seems pretty easy. Awesome gas mileage.
More work/less money would be a Volkswagen diesel.
Third choice for me would be a Chevy V-6. Based on the same architecture as the LS. And just like the Barra it can do well with some easy mods.
Fourth might be a 2JZ. Just too hard to find and too expensive.
-Mac
More work/less money would be a Volkswagen diesel.
Third choice for me would be a Chevy V-6. Based on the same architecture as the LS. And just like the Barra it can do well with some easy mods.
Fourth might be a 2JZ. Just too hard to find and too expensive.
-Mac
I thought you meant 305 Chevy small block V8 but I just read about the GM big block V6 truck motor (which apparently had a 305 version) from the 60s. Is that your beloved? Was it in a Jeep?
That is well said-
The 3.6 in a 2 door is likely the best power to weight ratio we have seen in the jeep line up to the 392, which is obscene.
The 4.0 ,much like all inline motors, is sort of like my cousins’ husband- never stops, pretty boring and won’t leave.
Around our area non -dealer Jeep shops, the 3.6 is viewed with little love- it is known for electrical gremlins.
To answer the OP, you really don’t have a choice- there is no TJ V6 , there is the 4.0, then the 4 cylinder....that leaves one choice, the 4.0.
I’ve had about 8 of them and appreciate the reliability and simplicity, the power off road is tractable and smooth, and another 40 -50 horsepower under the hood would be really great on the highway.
As a reference, I have a 2000 TJ with a 360- the first thing you notice when you make one of these move a lot faster is how the short wheelbase and steering response comes into play -
If there is anything in our age that baffles me on the 4.0 is it has the durability of a detuned motor, but there is no beast inside it to unleash-at all. About all you can do is make it louder or get some psychological benefit from a few mods and actually shorten its’ lifespan if you aren’t careful. Its’ greatest feature to me is that is moves the one vehicle that I enjoy more than any other - a jeep.
Similar threads
