Any other Jeepers here?

[Idaho45guy]

I wanted a fun vehicle for the weekends and was going to buy a KLR650 adventure bike, but decided a Jeep would be more flexible and useable more months out of the year.

I thought I could get a pretty nice late 90's or early 2000's Jeep for the price of a new KLR. I was wrong. Jeeps are going for a premium around here. Finally found one that had most of the mods done to it that I wanted and just needed a bunch of little things that I could do myself.

It's older than I wanted but is in pretty nice shape. I've had it less than a week and already have a list of things to do it that will take me all Summer to complete.

It is a blast around town and in the mountains, but on the highway, it is not very forgiving, at all.

I'd post pics, but this site is giving me fits again.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Just
Empty
Every
Pocket

Been doin' it for 20 years now and they are the most useful vehicles on earth. You'll be addicted in a very short time, and they go together nicely with guns and the outdoors.

Here's pic of my current project. Built from Scratch CJ-8 Scrambler with Cummins 4BT Diesel.

199524

199525

199526

Randy

[labradigger1]

76' cj5 here, 355 sbc, block higher headers, comp cam, dbl hump heads, dbl roller timing chain, 1.7 rockers, Holley 650, Holley street dom intake, accell super coil, 5.5" lift, 33/12.50's. Had it since 95'

[Went2kck]

I wish i would have never sold mine to my brother for next to nothing. He needed a vehicle to drive about. Almost got it back sister called and said she wanted to buy it back from brother for her son. needed an engine in it took that off the price. I know it family. Then nephew sold it shortly their after, He was suppose to give me a chance to buy it back from him. I sure wish i never sold the old girl.

[Isaac]

My wife and I purchased a used 1997 TJ Sport 4.0 auto back in 2007. It came with a hard top and the dealer gave us a deal on a new soft top that was removed from another TJ. We became hooked almost immediately. There is something about those vehicles that just seem to become a part of you. We would ride down the road in it and try to figure out what it was that made them so appealing. They are noisy, ride stiff, rattle a bit and yet are so likeable. We reluctantly traded it and a 2000 Explorer on a new 2010 Unlimited. I used the Explorer for work and basic duties. We thought the Unlimited would provide the best of both worlds: 4 door SUV/Jeep. It did as far as capabilities but it was so much more refined that the TJ and so much different. Missing the TJ, two years later we added a 2000 TJ Sport equipped just as the 1997. Last year we traded the 2010 Unlimited for a new Ram Big Horn 4 dr. with the Hemi. We still have the 2000 TJ and probably will until it falls apart.

Isaac

[tim338]

I have owned 2 Wranglers (1987,1999) a Comanche and currently drive a 2000 Cherokee. I love Jeeps and have been on the hunt for another Wrangler unlimited (pre 2007).

[HATCH]

I owns 2004 unlimited.
Has around 73000 miles on it.
Has a body lift and 31s.
Other then that it's bone stock.

[Petrol & Powder]

Owned a TJ for a while, wished I hadn't sold it. Worked on several Jeeps for friends, wish they had sold theirs :wink:

I had use of a CJ for some time. Loved it off road, hated it on road.

The word "Jeep" encompasses a LOT of very different vehicles. As each generation progresses CJ to YJ to TJ to JK they get more civilized and more expensive. I will say the old 258 six and the newer 4.0 liter six were outstanding engines and it was a shame to see that line shut down.

[Petrol & Powder]

Just
Empty
Every
Pocket

Been doin' it for 20 years now and they are the most useful vehicles on earth. You'll be addicted in a very short time, and they go together nicely with guns and the outdoors.

Here's pic of my current project. Built from Scratch CJ-8 Scrambler with Cummins 4BT Diesel.

199524

199525

199526

Randy

AW........why did you have to post that? Now I really want one!

The CJ-8 Scrambler was my all time favorite but they didn't stay on the market very long. They're now almost impossible to obtain without a second mortgage. The 4 cyl Cummins TD conversion is also high on my list of ideal Jeep engine transplants.

I had a Dodge with the old 12 valve turbo Cummins engine. That engine is bullet proof. The 4 cylinder is nearly identical but missing two cylinders (and a couple of hundred pounds !).

NICE !

[Larry Gibson]

Had a 47, 55, 73 and now a 05 Jeep.
199548


Larry Gibson

[Sven]

Since 1976 I've had: '70 Bronco, '73 Wagoneer, '46 CJ2A, '70 CJ5, '97 TJ that I kept for 18 years. Did a little bit of everything with and to that TJ, including dropping a 5.7 Hemi in it. Been from the sand at Rocky Point, Mexico to the Rubicon, the Colorado passes, including Black Bear Pass, on many of the trails in Moab, including Cliff Hanger, Moab Rim and the Lion's Back. My wife needed a softer ride due to headaches, so now have a '04 WJ from Europe with a 2.7 CRD diesel.

Sven

[funnyjim014]

Got me a 79cj7. 6.5in lift on 35s. Factory 258, manual transmission manual steering manual brakes....it's a tractor lol. It's rides like a tank, stinks of unburnt fuel and I love it. Some day a CSB swap but for now it's still running good.

[Petrol & Powder]

Got me a 79cj7. 6.5in lift on 35s. Factory 258, manual transmission manual steering manual brakes....it's a tractor lol. It's rides like a tank, stinks of unburnt fuel and I love it. Some day a CSB swap but for now it's still running good.

I would take that straight six 258 over any small block V-8 conversion. IF you wear that one out, put another inline six back in!

[Down South]

I have a 92 Wrangler S. Body and frame are in great shape and paint is very good. It needs a little TLC but it is my beat around the house vehicle.
No AC and a 4 Cyl motor sort of sucks but I really enjoy it.

[MUSTANG]

Have had a 1942 Jeep (Ford built), 1990 Cherokee (it traveled to both Korea and Japan), 1998 (Totaled it in an ice storm/white out in Reno in 2009), and currently have a 1998 for the mountains/desert/towing the aluminum fishing boat. Wish I had the 1942 Ford Jeep back, sold it when I went I enlisted and went into the Corps.

[MaryB]

I had a J100 pickup for awhile... every jeep attribute plus a lot of rust! I had to weld the passenger door shut because it would no longer latch and parts were unobtanium. Thing went through mud and snow like crazy, did a little rock crawling but the rear over hang caused issues on steep approaches and when coming off a rock. Hung it on the back bumper a few times, nothing a hi lift jack didn't fix. Jack it up, tilt it forward until it fell off the jack. Didn't care if it beat up the end gate! Was a fun driver but the rust got so bad it was unsafe. That was followed by a 1979 Jimmy with 225k miles. I drove that to 350k miles then the engine went. It was a rust bucket too!

Been looking for a project jeep but prices are nuts for rusty pieces of junk!

[Petrol & Powder]

Yep, rust kills more vehicles than wear.

I know a guy that has a old CJ that the frame is rusted so bad it will not pass a state safety inspection but the drivetrain is still chugging along. It will be sold for parts.

I've had several vehicles that the body rotted off while the rest of it was fine.

[Rufus Krile]

199576


A more complete jeep set-up... you will notice a certain lack of numbers on these vehicles...

[Idaho45guy]

Finally figured out the picture issue, I think...

199578

[Idaho45guy]

199579

[fjruple]

I currently own two Jeeps. My every day vehicle is a 2006 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited with a hard top. 4.0L engine and automatic transmission. I just turned 118,000 miles on the Jeep. I have found that these style Jeep vehicles are little more than a sport SUV and not a light truck. I have found a number of features that are poorly designed such as the oil pump for the 4.0L engine. It went at about 10,000 miles. Jeep replaced with another that went at 25,000 miles. I bought an after market oil pump and it as been going strong since. The automatic transmission really sucks. I was amazed at the number of plastic and aluminum parts are in the transmission. The transmission lasted for 35,000 miles. It was rebuilt in Colorado with steel parts and guaranteed for 250,000 miles. The one saving grace that the new jeeps have it does not have the body cancer like the older Jeeps. The other Jeep is a Sable Brown 1979 Jeep CJ7 Golden Eagle with the bronze tone hard top. I ordered and bought it brand new. The CJ7 was loaded, it came with a 4 speed California manual T-18A transmission 304 V-8. It was a great Jeep. I bought it back from my brother and am in the process of restoring the CJ7 Jeep. The good thing about Jeeps you can get all of the parts for them to include a new frame and body. I would rather restore the CJ7 than purchase one of the new Jeeps for $42,000. If you buy a Jeep get the older CJ5 or CJ7 series. In 1980 Jeep went to a longer wheel base and dropped the V8 engine. It is worth rebuilding if you are mechanically inclined. I am considering going to the Cummins 4BT Diesel engine as well on my 2006 when it finally goes.

--fjruple

[Petrol & Powder]

There's nothing magical about the Jeep 4WD system, it works like most other 4WD systems BUT the size of the vehicle is handy.
The short wheelbase and short front/rear overhangs give the little Jeep some real advantage off-road. They don't high-center as easily as a longer wheelbase vehicle and the approach/departure angles are about as good as they get on a Jeep. The overall small size lets them fit in places that larger vehicles just cannot go and the narrow track often lets you pick a line that just isn't available to a wider vehicle.

However, that short wheel base, narrow track that makes Jeeps great off road makes them less than ideal on road. Everything in life is a compromise!

The old 6 cylinder Toyota FJ-40 Land Cruiser was also a great off road vehicle but if you think the old Jeeps have a bad rust problem you've never seen an old FJ ! You can almost watch an old FJ-40 rust :)

[Idaho45guy]

We're pretty blessed out here that despite our harsh winters and lots of snow, we don't salt the roads. My Jeep has only light surface rust on the undercarriage.

[MaryB]

I keep watching for a CJ5 project jeep. Body rust I can deal with, frame not so much. Whatever I buy has to be winter ready and that rules out some of the fiberglass body tubs because the hard tops and doors don't fit well...


I currently own two Jeeps. My every day vehicle is a 2006 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited with a hard top. 4.0L engine and automatic transmission. I just turned 118,000 miles on the Jeep. I have found that these style Jeep vehicles are little more than a sport SUV and not a light truck. I have found a number of features that are poorly designed such as the oil pump for the 4.0L engine. It went at about 10,000 miles. Jeep replaced with another that went at 25,000 miles. I bought an after market oil pump and it as been going strong since. The automatic transmission really sucks. I was amazed at the number of plastic and aluminum parts are in the transmission. The transmission lasted for 35,000 miles. It was rebuilt in Colorado with steel parts and guaranteed for 250,000 miles. The one saving grace that the new jeeps have it does not have the body cancer like the older Jeeps. The other Jeep is a Sable Brown 1979 Jeep CJ7 Golden Eagle with the bronze tone hard top. I ordered and bought it brand new. The CJ7 was loaded, it came with a 4 speed California manual T-18A transmission 304 V-8. It was a great Jeep. I bought it back from my brother and am in the process of restoring the CJ7 Jeep. The good thing about Jeeps you can get all of the parts for them to include a new frame and body. I would rather restore the CJ7 than purchase one of the new Jeeps for $42,000. If you buy a Jeep get the older CJ5 or CJ7 series. In 1980 Jeep went to a longer wheel base and dropped the V8 engine. It is worth rebuilding if you are mechanically inclined. I am considering going to the Cummins 4BT Diesel engine as well on my 2006 when it finally goes.

--fjruple

[shoot-n-lead]

I love Jeeps...everybody should have at least one during their lifetime.

Back in the day, the CJ was king...but I would never swap a Wrangler for any CJ that I ever had. My favorite CJ was '79 CJ7...good vehicle...but years later, the YJ Wrangler came along and it was an improvement and then the TJ came along...best Jeep, IMHO. The articulation on the TJ suspension really makes it go over terrain like goat.

[rondog]

I have a 1956 Willys CJ5 that I'm restoring back to showroom new condition, that's the plan anyway. Kinda stalled at the moment, I need a better place to work on it and mo' money. It was my dad's elk hunting Jeep in the 70's and is really in quite good condition.

The frame is perfect, it's been sandblasted and powdercoated. Both axles all rebuilt and housings powdercoated, front is a D30 off a 1972 CJ5. Brakes are all new 11"x2". Body is in excellent shape - very, very little rust or damage. Drivetrain is all original F-134. Got boxes and boxes of new and original parts just waiting. Like I said, I really just need work space, most of the $$$ has already been laid out.

But I really want it back to stock, except for safety & performance mods like 12v electrics, electronic ignition, upgraded steering, top notch brakes, stronger front axle, things like that.

[Petrol & Powder]

I love Jeeps...everybody should have at least one during their lifetime.

Back in the day, the CJ was king...but I would never swap a Wrangler for any CJ that I ever had. My favorite CJ was '79 CJ7...good vehicle...but years later, the YJ Wrangler came along and it was an improvement and then the TJ came along...best Jeep, IMHO. The articulation on the TJ suspension really makes it go over terrain like goat.

IMO, the TJ's were the best compromises between on & off road performance as long as you didn't put huge tires on them. They still had solid axles but the coil springs seemed to give them a little better manners on road. I think the JK's got a little too far from their roots.

[Lloyd Smale]

ive got a 2000 tj (well it was mine and is sitting in the barn waiting one more year for the granddaughter to turn 16) and a 2015 jk willys addition. Ive had two other tjs on yj and two cj5s in the past. Bought a razor thinking it would replace the 2000 and after a month without a jeep bought the willys. Nothing better for getting out to where I hunt. Plus the jeep can serve as a second vehicle and the razor couldn't. Theres an old 50s willys pickup sitting out in a farm field on the road to my dads that I keep threatening the wife that I'm going to stop and make an offer on. Been sitting there for at least 5 years. Looks pretty solid from the road. Love to drop a v8 in that thing and make a 4x4 rat rod out of it. I picked up that 2000 for 6k with 60k on it. Still the only rust on it is surface rust on the frame and a hole in the passenger side from fender (they all do it there). I know what mary refers to though. You really have to watch it up here because the frames can be trouble. Especially the yjs. Tough to find ANY yj up here anymore with a solid frame. Tj prices can be all over the place. Some really think they have something and ask ridiculous prices but most of those sit unsold. I sure wouldn't by a 15000 dollar tj no matter how nice when for 5k more you can have a jk. Sorry to the purists but a jk is just in a different class then a tj. I hopped in my tj last month to run to the store (close by because I have not plates or insurance on it) to get the fluids moving. It was like hopping in fred flinstones rock car compared to the jk.

[Petrol & Powder]

With each succession of Jeep generations (CJ, YJ, TJ, JK) the owners of the previous generation claim theirs was the last real Jeep ! :-o I always take those proclamations with a big grain of salt.

The Jeeps have certainly become more refined over the years. I've driven all of them in their unmodified forms and there are real differences, particularly in regard to their on-road manners. The newer generations are a bit more tolerant of driving mistakes on the highway. Things that would get you killed on the highway in CJ you might be able to get away with in a JK. I think Jeep (Chrysler) is aware that a large number of their customers seldom take their Jeeps off-road, at least not the original purchasers. There's some incentive to make them more civilized and perhaps more highway friendly. That doesn't mean they're incapable of off-road performance, it just means that a leaf spring equipped, rag top, metal floored, 3 speed CJ might not be as pleasant to drive at 60 mph for 3 hours as a new JK.

I like the on-road/off-road compromise of the TJ and I really liked the 4.0L in-line six that was offered in those models.

[Lloyd Smale]

actually more capable off road two. 285hp vs 100-200 in the old ones. better and stronger steering gear, suspensions (a hard suspension contrary to what some think isn't better off road. A suspension that keeps the wheels on the ground is better) and better transmissions. compare my old 2000 that was wide open doing 65 on the highway, had a dana 30 dana 35 both open to the new one that has 5 times the power, actually enough to pull a good sized tire, a posi dana 44 in the rear and a much more compliant ride off road. that and its quieter (you cant hardly talk to a passenger if you have a soft top in an older jeep), smoother on the road, gets better gas mileage 20 vs 16 for that anemic 4 cyl (which is about the same mileage the 4.0s got) My old yj just flat felt like a lumber wagon. I think the only thing that ever road worse was a cj or a old 70s 3/4 ton chev truck! Now if jeep wanted to make my ultimate jeep it would be a 2 door (real jeeps have only two doors) Rubicon with a hemi v8, and the 9 or 10speed autos they have in the new trucks. That new diesel jk is interesting too. lots of torque and 30mpg. a 2.5 inch lift and 35 inch tires. I like old classic stuff too but bottom line is the new jks are a much more capable vehicle. Theres nothing my cj, yj or tj did that this jk doesn't do better other then the cool factor of ancient technology.

[Petrol & Powder]

Lloyd, I've noticed that you always defend new technology, which is fine. Not everything old was great.
Yes, keeping the wheels in contact with the ground is preferable. Yes, the Dana 44 is far stronger than the old Dana 30 & 35. Locking differentials are key and you can break a Dana 30/35 with a locker in second. Yes the 4 cylinders were weak, they were a poor option.

But, the 4.0L inline six was a great motor as was the older 258 ci Six (4.2L). A diesel would be cool. 5 gears is plenty in a manual and 3 gears with a sub-low worked for years. Tall skinny tires will get you through a lot (sometimes more) than giant tires. With the correct final drive ratio 31"-32" tires will get you through most off-road situations and be decent on the road. You will not break a Dana 35 with a limited slip carrier if you drive like you have a little sense. (you can break one with a locking carrier in a hurry - it was a weak point). Knowing how to pick your line is often more important than what size tire you have and seems to be a rapidly disappearing skill.

However, I don't NEED 300 hp in a Jeep (nor would I want it). I don't want 9 or 10 gears. If I want to ride in a quiet vehicle, I'll buy a nice car.

So - YES a new JK is a far more capable vehicle but it comes at a price. That "ancient technology" is now affordable technology and it wasn't horrible ;)

[shoot-n-lead]

Lloyd, I've noticed that you always defend new technology, which is fine. Not everything old was great.
Yes, keeping the wheels in contact with the ground is preferable. Yes, the Dana 44 is far stronger than the old Dana 30 & 35. Locking differentials are key and you can break a Dana 30/35 with a locker in second. Yes the 4 cylinders were weak, they were a poor option.

But, the 4.0L inline six was a great motor as was the older 258 ci Six (4.2L). A diesel would be cool. 5 gears is plenty in a manual and 3 gears with a sub-low worked for years. Tall skinny tires will get you through a lot (sometimes more) than giant tires. With the correct final drive ratio 31"-32" tires will get you through most off-road situations and be decent on the road. You will not break a Dana 35 with a limited slip carrier if you drive like you have a little sense. (you can break one with a locking carrier in a hurry - it was a weak point). Knowing how to pick your line is often more important than what size tire you have and seems to be a rapidly disappearing skill.

However, I don't NEED 300 hp in a Jeep (nor would I want it). I don't want 9 or 10 gears. If I want to ride in a quiet vehicle, I'll buy a nice car.

So - YES a new JK is a far more capable vehicle but it comes at a price. That "ancient technology" is now affordable technology and it wasn't horrible ;)

X 2

Well said...

Ain't nobody dissing the JK...but the TJ will certainly get the job done and at a fraction of the cost...based on my local prices.

I will stand by my thought that, dollar for dollar, the TJ is about the best road/off-road capability that you can get for the money.

[Nueces]

I drove Scouts and Cruisers for years, but my Y2K TJ is my last 4WD. I've kept the mods mild. It'll do 85 mph smoothly and crawl the Hill Country trails and low water crossings hereabouts.

The Jeep aftermarket is extensive. Because of all the cool storage stuff available, mine carries more gear than I carried in my Scout, but leaves the entire rear cargo deck clear. I removed the back seat, making it a roadster.

After 180,000 miles, we get along well.

[Petrol & Powder]

........

I will stand by my thought that, dollar for dollar, the TJ is about the best road/off-road capability that you can get for the money.

/\ I can't disagree with that.

As much as I admire new technology, I think it's a good thing to have some old technology around to keep the new car salesman in check. If left unbridled, I fear the extortion would be extreme.

[Petrol & Powder]

I drove Scouts and Cruisers for years, but my Y2K TJ is my last 4WD. I've kept the mods mild. It'll do 85 mph smoothly and crawl the Hill Country trails and low water crossings hereabouts.

The Jeep aftermarket is extensive. Because of all the cool storage stuff available, mine carries more gear than I carried in my Scout, but leaves the entire rear cargo deck clear. I removed the back seat, making it a roadster.

After 180,000 miles, we get along well.

I took the back seat out of my TJ the day I purchased it and put it back in the day I sold it :)

If I had the money I would have put a half cab on it and "Rhino lined" the back and would still be driving it. It was worth more to someone else than it was to me; so now it belongs to someone else !!!!!

[Jeff Michel]

1962 CJ-5. Currently in the middle of a complete restore. Frame, electrical, brakes are finished. Ordered a new tub and need to put in a new synchronizer in the transmission (Dana) and maybe a motor rebuild, it definitely needs valve guides. Had a number of current production, prefer AMC and before.

[Lloyd Smale]

I agree with most of what you said. Only disagreements are that the 35 is kind of week but the 30s hold up pretty well even with a posi. Ive yet to see where more power is bad unless it breaks parts. As to prices look at what the 4.0 tjs are going for. Ive seen 15k prices on tjs with a 150,000 miles on them. Ive seen rubicon tjs go for even more then that. If I'm going to spend that much ill step up to a jk. Now yjs are affordable but up here good luck finding one that still has a good frame. Even the tjs are to the point that most up here have rotten frames due to the fact they used such thin metal on them. The 4.0 was a good motor. I wont argue that. But its no better then the 3.6 (it is better in my opinion then the 3.8 though) As to the 9 speed thing. Its advantageous to keep your motor in its sweet spot. Where it produces the best power and torque. A 9 speed just does that better then 4 or 5 speed. Enough better to justify it? probably not but like I said that's a dream set up for me. I'm perfectly happy with the 5 speed auto in the willys. As to a stick. Ive owned a lot of jeeps and trucks with sticks. Autos just do better in about any situation be it in a tj or jk or truck or performance car for that matter. Its why its rare to see a stick in anything anymore. I also will ask you why you would want to hear wind noise and road noise when your driving. Me I prefer music.

The old ones have a cool factor and it might even be fun once in a while to drive one to remember that old raw feeling but for day to day use and even for off road capabilitys the best wrangler ever is built today. No doubt not everyone can afford one or wants to. But don't try to convince me the old ones were somehow better. Same goes for muscle cars. I love the old gm and mopar muscle cars and have owned many. but I'm sure not dumb enough to make the statement that there better in any way other then cool factor compared to the newer ones. Take ANY gm muscle car build back in the day and line it up agains a zl1 Camaro and watch it get its lunch handed to it in ANY performance category and get twice the gas milage doing it. I can fill in the blanks using a challenger hellcat or a boss mustang too. So yes I'm a proponent of modern technology. Not that I dislike the cool of old school but I don't live in a fantasy world either. The newer vehicles are just flat out better in any category you want to compare them in. more power, better ride, better handling, safer, much better brakes, better quality control, longer lasting and better fuel economy. Whats not to like other then a lien with the bank. Bottom line is when I replaced the 2000 I wouldn't have had to money to buy something like a low mileage tj rubicon without a loan anyway.
Lloyd, I've noticed that you always defend new technology, which is fine. Not everything old was great.
Yes, keeping the wheels in contact with the ground is preferable. Yes, the Dana 44 is far stronger than the old Dana 30 & 35. Locking differentials are key and you can break a Dana 30/35 with a locker in second. Yes the 4 cylinders were weak, they were a poor option.

But, the 4.0L inline six was a great motor as was the older 258 ci Six (4.2L). A diesel would be cool. 5 gears is plenty in a manual and 3 gears with a sub-low worked for years. Tall skinny tires will get you through a lot (sometimes more) than giant tires. With the correct final drive ratio 31"-32" tires will get you through most off-road situations and be decent on the road. You will not break a Dana 35 with a limited slip carrier if you drive like you have a little sense. (you can break one with a locking carrier in a hurry - it was a weak point). Knowing how to pick your line is often more important than what size tire you have and seems to be a rapidly disappearing skill.

However, I don't NEED 300 hp in a Jeep (nor would I want it). I don't want 9 or 10 gears. If I want to ride in a quiet vehicle, I'll buy a nice car.

So - YES a new JK is a far more capable vehicle but it comes at a price. That "ancient technology" is now affordable technology and it wasn't horrible ;)

[6bg6ga]

Lloyd,

You know that I love horsepower and nothing exceeds like excess. Having owned two CJ's in the past one CJ5 anniversary model with a 304 and three speed manual and the other being a CJ7 304 automatic. I hated the CJ7 and will never own another one. I found the CJ5 had almost enough power but would benefit from having a high torque engine of twice or three times the power. So, I think that a 502 chevy big block crate engine would almost be enough.

[Lloyd Smale]

lets be practical:) the 502 is a great motor but a bit on the heavy side. Lets change that to a 505 hp all aluminum ls7 out of a zo6!!! Or even if you want lame a 405 hp c5 zo6 motor!!! One thing cool about hp is it doesn't bite. You only use what your right foot demands. Like you ive owned many high hp cars and some anemic ones. I recall many times thinking to myself I need more power but not once in my life have I though less would be better. Ive pined for old muscle cars because they were fun and cool. I never pined for a 1970 gremlin or vega and sure don't pine for another 4 cyl wrangler and I'm sure not going to have my jk retuned to lower the hp to 4.0 tj levels either.
Lloyd,

You know that I love horsepower and nothing exceeds like excess. Having owned two CJ's in the past one CJ5 anniversary model with a 304 and three speed manual and the other being a CJ7 304 automatic. I hated the CJ7 and will never own another one. I found the CJ5 had almost enough power but would benefit from having a high torque engine of twice or three times the power. So, I think that a 502 chevy big block crate engine would almost be enough.

[6bg6ga]

Yup a better choice of engines. MAybe a power adder? Naw, just kidding ....or am I?

[Lloyd Smale]

ya a supercharger sure woulnt hurt a thing. Nitrous might be a bit harder to finesse.
Yup a better choice of engines. MAybe a power adder? Naw, just kidding ....or am I?

[6bg6ga]

Nitrous wouldn't be that hard since the computer could be programed to compensate for the additional gas needed. Having said that I'm not a nitrous fan simply because when you need it the bottle is generally next to empty. The supercharger on the other hand is always ready when the need or maybe I should say the foot demands. Your the expert on turbo's since you had one on your Grand National. I'm thinking a small amount of boost around 5-6 lbs would yeald about 75-100 hp depending on the engine and won't heat up like trying to run say 18-20 lbs of intercooled boost.

Getting back to the nitrous... I had always thought about a shot of nitrous into the intercooler to cool down the inlet air to the supercharger. God, now I'm thinking about another muscle car....

[Petrol & Powder]

Lloyd, I'm not trying to convince you that the old ones were better, but will you at least acknowledge that they were adequate ?

I was with an acquaintance about a year ago that sold his like new JK back to a dealer (long story, not something I would do). The Jeep was in excellent condition, less than 20K miles and had new tires and wheels (35's I think). They handed him a check for $23,000 and then turned around and put it on the lot for just under $29,000. I'm sorry, but new technology or not, there just wasn't $29K worth of stuff between the front and rear bumpers of that vehicle.

Yes, new vehicles have the advantage of better engineering. We are making more power while burning less fuel. We have ABS brakes, traction control, stability control and air bags. We have electronic manipulation of just about every engine function possible.
However the price for all of that engineering is incredibly complex electrical systems, computers that are essential to the operation of that stuff and most of all - Increased cost.

I'm not a Luddite. I do not oppose technology. However, I recognize that new technology comes at a price. The "Cool" factor of the new stuff is often way more than the actual value of that new technology.

[Lloyd Smale]

I agree theres lots of unnessisary junk on all these new vehicles but you can thank the liberals for most of it. I also agree that the old ones were adequate. Even that 4 cyl 2000 went places that would make the hair stand up on many and places not many are going to put there shinny new jk. Luckily I don't think that way. My trucks and jeeps get used as trucks and jeeps the minute they leave the dealership. Heres my take on it. If all I wanted was a third vehicle to puts around in the woods once in a while the tj would have been fine. But as a second vehicle (my primary vehicle as the wife drives the truck winter and me the jeep and then it switches in the summer) it just wasn't liveable. Fine to go to town to pick up some milk but to drive anymore then 5 miles wasn't fun on the highway. It also was down right dangerous on ice. Something the jk well not perfect at is adequate. I wouldn't in a million years make my wife drive a tj on the winter roads up here. It made me grey on a number of occasions. The jk on the other hand rides good enough and handles good enough and gets good enough fuel economy that I wouldn't hesitate a bit to take off cross country in it. I guess a lot of it comes down to what your needs are.
Lloyd, I'm not trying to convince you that the old ones were better, but will you at least acknowledge that they were adequate ?

I was with an acquaintance about a year ago that sold his like new JK back to a dealer (long story, not something I would do). The Jeep was in excellent condition, less than 20K miles and had new tires and wheels (35's I think). They handed him a check for $23,000 and then turned around and put it on the lot for just under $29,000. I'm sorry, but new technology or not, there just wasn't $29K worth of stuff between the front and rear bumpers of that vehicle.

Yes, new vehicles have the advantage of better engineering. We are making more power while burning less fuel. We have ABS brakes, traction control, stability control and air bags. We have electronic manipulation of just about every engine function possible.
However the price for all of that engineering is incredibly complex electrical systems, computers that are essential to the operation of that stuff and most of all - Increased cost.

I'm not a Luddite. I do not oppose technology. However, I recognize that new technology comes at a price. The "Cool" factor of the new stuff is often way more than the actual value of that new technology.

[Lloyd Smale]

Nitrous wouldn't be that hard since the computer could be programed to compensate for the additional gas needed. Having said that I'm not a nitrous fan simply because when you need it the bottle is generally next to empty and ive just seen to many motors go to the graveyard because of it. The supercharger on the other hand is always ready when the need or maybe I should say the foot demands. Your the expert on turbo's since you had one on your Grand National. I'm thinking a small amount of boost around 5-6 lbs would yeald about 75-100 hp depending on the engine and won't heat up like trying to run say 18-20 lbs of intercooled boost.

Getting back to the nitrous... I had always thought about a shot of nitrous into the intercooler to cool down the inlet air to the supercharger. God, now I'm thinking about another muscle car....

For a jeep nitrous is a bit to abrupt unless you spend a lot on progressive controllers ect and like you said even then when you need it the bottles empty. Turbos (at least the ones ive played with) have to much lag and when they come on the come on kind of abruptly too. Not as much as nitrous but unless your going with two small progressive turbos I think it wouldn't be really useable in a hard core 4x4. Supercharging is the only replacement for displacement. Its about seamless power and its allways there especially in a roots style blower. The centrificals aren't as seamless but still much better then no2 or turbos. I'm sure I'm not telling you anything here. You've fooled with blowers more then me.

[MaryB]

Helped a friend build a 1970 Mustang Mach 1 428cj. 12:1 compression plus nitrous. Power was great, replacing pistons after 2-3 drag races not so great...

[6bg6ga]

Helped a friend build a 1970 Mustang Mach 1 428cj. 12:1 compression plus nitrous. Power was great, replacing pistons after 2-3 drag races not so great...

That's because when the nitrous is used gas must also be injected. Failure to have enough gas always results in burned or blown pistons. Been there just a few times. If you want the Ford to really run you need to install a fuel injection system along with a "FAST" programable computer with all the sensors. Its not going to be a 10 second 1/4 mi car by any means in my opinion but it will run harder and faster than a carb with no 02's or other ensors.

Lloyd, your correct. Nitrous would mean controlled injection per added controllers and electronics to run them. Turbo's as you mentioned result in excess lag. Centrifical blowers like the D1R with the helical impeller provide boost from about 2K on up. Even at 2K the boost results in uncontrollable results. Never was a fan of roots type blowers. When I was young we setup 8-71,6-71, and 4-71 blowers. The problem with them has always been heat and expansion of internal parts as a result of the heat. Some of the blower cooling was actually done with excess gas from either a single large 4 barrel or dual 4 barrels or even injection on top of the blower. The best setup is a light high horsepower engine capable of providing gobs of torque at low RPM's.

The question of the low tech older Jeeps vers the newer ones... My answer would be low tech simple Jeeps from the 60's or 70's before the age of computers and all the added junk. If the SHTF and someone drops nuke the older ones without the computers will run and the newer stuff won't. Personally I don't need all the gadjets and trinkets the newer Jeeps have. My older Annerversary Jeep with the 304 and three speed would do fine.

[Thin Man]

I was 21 when I bought a 1961 CJ5 with the Hurricane 4 cylinder engine. It did well enough for off road but I wanted more road speed. Added an overdrive and found that by shifting both levers in sequence it proved to have 6 forward gear speeds. That was fun for winning arguments about the number of of gears it had. Kept it 2 years but sold it when I got married at 23.

The sale made me so miserable the new wife allowed me to buy another CJ5, this time a used 1970 pre-Renegade - it had all the hardware for a Renegade but not the mandatory wild colors or hood stripe. This one had the Buick v-6 engine, a real power house in the Jeep. My most frequent repair was to replace clutch cables (woven wire cable with little life span). Replaced several tops and learned that the weather inside the Jeep was always the same as outside - hot or cold or wet or dry, all the same. I added an air booster (extra fan) to the heater duct and it helped some, but only a little. I rode that Jeep to work for about 28 years. Late in that span a co-worker asked why I still drove that ratty old Jeep to work. My answer was that I got married in '70 and bought the Jeep the same year, and that since that time I had decided that both the wife and the Jeep were still pretty good rides. The co-worker walked away just shaking his head. Another occasion - I was driving the Jeep on a 10-mile trip when I heard click-click-click, then knock-knock-knock, then a loud WHAM and the Jeep started free wheeling. At the sound of that last noise I glanced in the rear view mirror and saw something (?) bouncing toward the side of the road. Looking under the body I found I had lost the drive shaft. A universal joint had failed. Walked back and recovered the drive shaft. Reached into the floor and shifted the transfer case into 4WD and completed the trip. Replaced the U-joint and all was well. You gotta love the simplicity of these early Jeeps. Finally I sold the Jeep due to body rust and excessive wear from daily driving.

Later I got a 1969 CJ5 to use for a woods buggy, kept it about 5 years before finally sending it away.

I could go on at length about the fun Jeep riding experiences but the quick message is that these early Jeeps were versatile, usually reliable and always fun. That's good enough for me.

[Lloyd Smale]

youd have to have a REAL old one. Most of them on the road at least have electronic ignitions and I guess the last consideration I give to buying a car is if Russian is going to set off a nuke above me.
That's because when the nitrous is used gas must also be injected. Failure to have enough gas always results in burned or blown pistons. Been there just a few times. If you want the Ford to really run you need to install a fuel injection system along with a "FAST" programable computer with all the sensors. Its not going to be a 10 second 1/4 mi car by any means in my opinion but it will run harder and faster than a carb with no 02's or other ensors.

Lloyd, your correct. Nitrous would mean controlled injection per added controllers and electronics to run them. Turbo's as you mentioned result in excess lag. Centrifical blowers like the D1R with the helical impeller provide boost from about 2K on up. Even at 2K the boost results in uncontrollable results. Never was a fan of roots type blowers. When I was young we setup 8-71,6-71, and 4-71 blowers. The problem with them has always been heat and expansion of internal parts as a result of the heat. Some of the blower cooling was actually done with excess gas from either a single large 4 barrel or dual 4 barrels or even injection on top of the blower. The best setup is a light high horsepower engine capable of providing gobs of torque at low RPM's.

The question of the low tech older Jeeps vers the newer ones... My answer would be low tech simple Jeeps from the 60's or 70's before the age of computers and all the added junk. If the SHTF and someone drops nuke the older ones without the computers will run and the newer stuff won't. Personally I don't need all the gadjets and trinkets the newer Jeeps have. My older Annerversary Jeep with the 304 and three speed would do fine.

[Lloyd Smale]

Helped a friend build a 1970 Mustang Mach 1 428cj. 12:1 compression plus nitrous. Power was great, replacing pistons after 2-3 drag races not so great...

yup mary most power adders are not going to work with pump gas and 12:1 compression. Without some real thought out aluminum heads I doubt your going to run anymore then 11 to 1 with pump gas without a power adder. Any more then that and you need computer controlled timing curves and knock sensors. Even watch that tv show about the street racers in MO. they run some high compression nitrous stuff and have to tune for even outside temps and humidity and even then they leave parts on the road. But in a stock computer controlled car like a mustang or Camaro, challenger, vette ect. A 100 hp kit is pretty safe with no tuning other then to make sure you can flow enough fuel through your stock setup and a set of colder heat range plugs. 150hp is getting on the borderline and at that level your getting to the point you need bigger injectors. Any more then that and you need a dedicated fuel system just for your nitrous. Those guidelines pretty much are the same whether your using no2, or turbos and blowers with intercoolers.

[Petrol & Powder]

Somehow I think that if a nuke goes off nearby my vehicle operation is going to be the least of my problems.

[MaryB]

We were runing mid 10's with that setup, and yes we had plenty of fuel from a dual quad setup. Thing was a beast and my friend pushed it to the limits, 428's are not designed for 7k RPM...


That's because when the nitrous is used gas must also be injected. Failure to have enough gas always results in burned or blown pistons. Been there just a few times. If you want the Ford to really run you need to install a fuel injection system along with a "FAST" programable computer with all the sensors. Its not going to be a 10 second 1/4 mi car by any means in my opinion but it will run harder and faster than a carb with no 02's or other ensors.

Lloyd, your correct. Nitrous would mean controlled injection per added controllers and electronics to run them. Turbo's as you mentioned result in excess lag. Centrifical blowers like the D1R with the helical impeller provide boost from about 2K on up. Even at 2K the boost results in uncontrollable results. Never was a fan of roots type blowers. When I was young we setup 8-71,6-71, and 4-71 blowers. The problem with them has always been heat and expansion of internal parts as a result of the heat. Some of the blower cooling was actually done with excess gas from either a single large 4 barrel or dual 4 barrels or even injection on top of the blower. The best setup is a light high horsepower engine capable of providing gobs of torque at low RPM's.

The question of the low tech older Jeeps vers the newer ones... My answer would be low tech simple Jeeps from the 60's or 70's before the age of computers and all the added junk. If the SHTF and someone drops nuke the older ones without the computers will run and the newer stuff won't. Personally I don't need all the gadjets and trinkets the newer Jeeps have. My older Annerversary Jeep with the 304 and three speed would do fine.

[MaryB]

We were running 120 octane Av gas in that thing, pump gas was a no way. Back in the early 80's so what computers! Tune it, run it, fix it when it melted something. I don't think the nitrous kits back then added much more than 100hp.


yup mary most power adders are not going to work with pump gas and 12:1 compression. Without some real thought out aluminum heads I doubt your going to run anymore then 11 to 1 with pump gas without a power adder. Any more then that and you need computer controlled timing curves and knock sensors. Even watch that tv show about the street racers in MO. they run some high compression nitrous stuff and have to tune for even outside temps and humidity and even then they leave parts on the road. But in a stock computer controlled car like a mustang or Camaro, challenger, vette ect. A 100 hp kit is pretty safe with no tuning other then to make sure you can flow enough fuel through your stock setup and a set of colder heat range plugs. 150hp is getting on the borderline and at that level your getting to the point you need bigger injectors. Any more then that and you need a dedicated fuel system just for your nitrous. Those guidelines pretty much are the same whether your using no2, or turbos and blowers with intercoolers.

[shoot-n-lead]

A pretty narrow set of naturally occurring geographic parameters have to exist to require more than naturally aspirated engines for off-roading.

[6bg6ga]

We were runing mid 10's with that setup, and yes we had plenty of fuel from a dual quad setup. Thing was a beast and my friend pushed it to the limits, 428's are not designed for 7k RPM...

Will all due respect as one that has raced for many many years you don't melt pistons when you have plenty of fuel. For the record....when I ran Fords I was the only one in my neck of the woods as a small racer that kept mine together at 7K plus and that was when they scattered at anything over 6K. I ran 406 Tri-power Fords and graduated to 427 side oilers and then to 427 DOHC's. I also ran my share of 428's and 460's.

Yes, you could get way over 100HP with the Nitrous parts available back then. I hope your not trying to use a dry kit hoping that there is enough gas with the dual quads. It won't work. You will need what is called a wet kit which means when the nitrous is injected there are also gas jets to inject additional gas with the nitrous.

I wouldn't have used aviation gas but rather a blend. Sounds like you have a few problems such as too much timing, too little gas under nitrous and general lack of knowledge. But then again that's my take on things based on 48+ years of racing off and on.

[6bg6ga]

yup mary most power adders are not going to work with pump gas and 12:1 compression. Without some real thought out aluminum heads I doubt your going to run anymore then 11 to 1 with pump gas without a power adder. Any more then that and you need computer controlled timing curves and knock sensors. Even watch that tv show about the street racers in MO. they run some high compression nitrous stuff and have to tune for even outside temps and humidity and even then they leave parts on the road. But in a stock computer controlled car like a mustang or Camaro, challenger, vette ect. A 100 hp kit is pretty safe with no tuning other then to make sure you can flow enough fuel through your stock setup and a set of colder heat range plugs. 150hp is getting on the borderline and at that level your getting to the point you need bigger injectors. Any more then that and you need a dedicated fuel system just for your nitrous. Those guidelines pretty much are the same whether your using no2, or turbos and blowers with intercoolers.

Your right Lloyd. Generally power adders aren't used with high compression. Using a turbo, or supercharger and even nitrous requires experience and know how. Most of the idiots out there try to run platinum spark plugs with turbo's, superchargers, and nitrous. Platinum spark plugs are a big NO NO because they DO cause detonation. The ONLY exception is the FACTORY setups like GM's Cadillac and Corvette engines for example because the computers and sensors are designed for them.

For the record Mary.... My last toy ran low compression with a D1R Procharger making 18-20 LBS of intercooled boost. The engine featured forged pistons, premium rod bolts and main bolts, LT4 heads and intake and 60lb injectors with an FMU which gave me 120+ PSI fuel pressure under boost. I ran it one time thru the 1/4 mi. I spun thru 1st and 2nd gear and managed a 10.12@138mph going thru the traps in 5th gear. I ran 7K thru the gears with the 355. After my first run I was told to leave the drag strip and not come back until I got a cage rated for my speed in it. This car had 9's easily in its grasp but I felt my grocery getter would be too hard running around thru town with the added safety features added to it. Mary, this is what experience can do for you with 9:00-1 compression with mostly stock available Chevy parts and the mild LT4 cam.

Using power adders like a supercharger, turbo, or nitrous is basically the same as running high compression since these power adders increase compression. I'll give you a hint.... too much compression with the nitrous. Wrong fuel blend. Wrong air fuel ratio under boost. Wrong tuning.

[6bg6ga]

Getting back to the thread again... Any Jeepers here. Like I mentioned I owned a CJ5 and CJ7. Both were V8's. Having driven a few Jeeps I thend to think its all about the gearing. The little straight 6's had plenty of power climbing rocks using the low side of the transfer case.

My choice between Jeeps and Scouts would have me with my old Scouts. The 4 banger I had ran thru about everything and the Ralley with the 304 automatic was a fun ride that was superior to the CJ7 304 auto that I owned.

Engine, transmission, transfer case gearing and rear end ratio's all depend on your fun plans with your Jeep. Front lockers and rear lockers only increase your fun ratio but do take additional power. With the locking axels additional power is needed.

[Petrol & Powder]

6bg6ga- Couldn't agree with you more about the straight 6's (although I wouldn't call them little) and gearing.

I'm a huge fan of the in-line six and the AMC 258 was one of the best. The in-line six's made plenty of torque and gave decades of reliable service. They just couldn't be beat for longevity. The later 4.0L was sort of a reincarnation of the 258, it was a totally new design but the basic DNA was there and it also proved to be an outstanding engine.

I've never been a fan of V-8's in Jeeps but I make an exception for the AMC 304. A V-8 is obviously shorter than an in-line six, which is an advantage in vehicle that's short to start with. You don't need a lot of horsepower in a Jeep but a little extra HP can allow for some more highway friendly gearing and still be useful on the low end. The 304, particularly the early ones, were just about right in terms of balancing size, weight, HP and torque. The little extra HP provided by the 304 allows for a little more flexibility in gearing. The 304 was compact, didn't burn a huge amount of fuel, was fairly durable and wasn't insanely dangerous in a Jeep.

Jeep vs. Scout - They both suffer from attack by the dreaded tin worm. They used some of the same engines (AMC 232 & 258) but a lot of Scouts had the IH 4 cylinder. My former FIL had a first generation Scout (with factory rust option :razz:) and that thing was unstoppable.
The closed knuckles on the front axle (which Jeep also suffered from) resulted in poor turning radius but the short wheelbase helped.
I think the Scouts may have had slightly better weight distribution which contributed to their off road ability but the Jeeps and Scouts were a close match.

[MaryB]

Think you missed the early 80's part... technology was not quite the same as it is now. Nitrous kit was basically a spacer under the carbs with a spray bar... he eventually had everything in that engine balanced so it would hold up better and yes you can melt aluminum pistons with to much gas under some circumstances... he raced every weekend locally and once a month at a big track after 2 years(and fewer engine issues as we got it tuned to survive). Local races were a section of road the sheriff closed for us, none of us were pro racers and we were learning the engines as we went! We had no fancy computers, no fuel injection that didn't cost an arm and a leg... Build it, run it , break it, fix it and learn from it. We were 20 and having fun!


Will all due respect as one that has raced for many many years you don't melt pistons when you have plenty of fuel. For the record....when I ran Fords I was the only one in my neck of the woods as a small racer that kept mine together at 7K plus and that was when they scattered at anything over 6K. I ran 406 Tri-power Fords and graduated to 427 side oilers and then to 427 DOHC's. I also ran my share of 428's and 460's.

Yes, you could get way over 100HP with the Nitrous parts available back then. I hope your not trying to use a dry kit hoping that there is enough gas with the dual quads. It won't work. You will need what is called a wet kit which means when the nitrous is injected there are also gas jets to inject additional gas with the nitrous.

I wouldn't have used aviation gas but rather a blend. Sounds like you have a few problems such as too much timing, too little gas under nitrous and general lack of knowledge. But then again that's my take on things based on 48+ years of racing off and on.

[6bg6ga]

Think you missed the early 80's part... technology was not quite the same as it is now. Nitrous kit was basically a spacer under the carbs with a spray bar... he eventually had everything in that engine balanced so it would hold up better and yes you can melt aluminum pistons with to much gas under some circumstances... he raced every weekend locally and once a month at a big track after 2 years(and fewer engine issues as we got it tuned to survive). Local races were a section of road the sheriff closed for us, none of us were pro racers and we were learning the engines as we went! We had no fancy computers, no fuel injection that didn't cost an arm and a leg... Build it, run it , break it, fix it and learn from it. We were 20 and having fun!

Raced since the late 60's. Back then nitrous was somewhat new. A lot of us went to maniford runner injection down stream from the carb for the nitrous and the gas so each cylinder got its correct amount. The stuff we made was one of a kind per each engine.

We had experimented with direct port injection only to find that it puddled and caused piston damage. We read our air/fuel ratio by what our plugs looked like before the days of computers.

Never saw a piston melted with too much gas like you mentioned.

[Petrol & Powder]

A pretty narrow set of naturally occurring geographic parameters have to exist to require more than naturally aspirated engines for off-roading.

/\ AGREED /\

I'll go a little farther. I've never seen a situation in which a straight six, with the right gears and tires, wouldn't get the job done OFF-ROAD.
I have seen some situations in which a little more power allowed for more civilized highway gears without unduly compromising the of-road performance.

The ability to pick your line while driving off-road seems to be a drying art. It saddens me a bit when I see someone whose only solution to off road obstacles is wider tires and more horsepower.

Tall skinny tires (AKA Pizza Cutters), the right gear, low end torque and a little common sense; will get you through places that horsepower and fat tires will not. The exception to the skinny tires is when operating on mud or sand that has no bottom. Sometimes you need to spread that load over a bigger footprint and a fat tire is the solution in those conditions.

[Lloyd Smale]

If you doubt horse power is an advantage to to a mud bog race sometime. Most stock vehicles cant make it half way through the ones up here and that's even v8 stock units. You need to spin your tires to clean them out in the mud or you about instantly get slicks. Same with hill climbs. Go to one once and witness the stock 6 cyls running out of steam half way up the hill. They run out of power and slow down and start to spin. Same goes for rock climbing when you need that extra grunt to pop up over a rock. Granted a 4 or 6 cyl will get you to your hunting spot and out to watch birds but theres absolutely no doubt that more hp is an advantage when the going gets real tough. Honestly I could probably get by with my old 4.0 wrangler but the 2.5 wrangler ive got sitting in the garage runs out of power fast even for what I use it for and its about dangerous on the road. Tops out at 70 with a good tail wind on a perfectly level road. If you get behind a truck doing 50 you stay behind a truck going 50.

[Petrol & Powder]

Racing and competition is one thing, getting from point A to Point B is another.

A mud bog race isn't exactly analogous to reaching the back of a farm to cut firewood and I don't really want to drive that mud bog rig down the highway after I'm done with my off-road chores.
There are work horses and show horses.

You'll get no argument from me concerning the lack of power from the 4 cylinder TJ's. I've driven them and they are underpowered. Maybe as a coastal town Jeep than occasionally drives on the sand but never climbs a hill or needs to travel on a highway?

I drove 2WD pickups in places that I shouldn't have and trust me, you learn how to drive off road when you DON'T have 4WD to save you. I also drove trucks with 6 cylinder engines and I drove trucks with V-8's. The 6 cylinder will never win a race but it will get the job done. The extra power of a bigger engine is nice on the highway and that's where it shines.

[Lloyd Smale]

Don't know if its proper terminology or not but we used to call it static compression. All power adders like turbos, blowers no2 add static compression but increasing the amount oxygen being compressed. to compensate for it you NEED more fuel or you go lean and detonate and in most cases if your running any kind of high boost or more then about an 200 hp no2 kit you need to lower compression and use forged piston that have a bit more strength to take the abuse and heat that detonation brings. No2 can be very safe if its tuned properly but the cheap dry and even wet systems that people just bolt on and go scare me. If I was even doing a 100hp kit id be visiting a tuner with a dyno to make darned sure I wasn't going lean at any rpm. Just reading your plugs is a poor way to gauge fuel air mixtures. If you cant get to a tuner AT LEAST run a air/fuel ratio gauge or an exhaust temp gauge or both. A throttle peddle activation switch is real smart too as you can bend rods and cranks if you turn your no2 on at to low of an rpm. Most smart guys run window switches too that shut off the no2 if fuel pressure drops for any reason. For all these reasons I'm not a fan of cheap no2 kits. Then like was said you have the hastle of getting bottles filled, keep your bottle filled and even tuning can be tricky because as you use no2 the bottle pressure drops and you make less power. So to get the best power if your going to race you about need a full bottle. I also don't like cheap kits because most don't come with a purge valve to get liquid no2 out of the lines. Liquid no2 is bad news for your motor.
Your right Lloyd. Generally power adders aren't used with high compression. Using a turbo, or supercharger and even nitrous requires experience and know how. Most of the idiots out there try to run platinum spark plugs with turbo's, superchargers, and nitrous. Platinum spark plugs are a big NO NO because they DO cause detonation. The ONLY exception is the FACTORY setups like GM's Cadillac and Corvette engines for example because the computers and sensors are designed for them.

For the record Mary.... My last toy ran low compression with a D1R Procharger making 18-20 LBS of intercooled boost. The engine featured forged pistons, premium rod bolts and main bolts, LT4 heads and intake and 60lb injectors with an FMU which gave me 120+ PSI fuel pressure under boost. I ran it one time thru the 1/4 mi. I spun thru 1st and 2nd gear and managed a 10.12@138mph going thru the traps in 5th gear. I ran 7K thru the gears with the 355. After my first run I was told to leave the drag strip and not come back until I got a cage rated for my speed in it. This car had 9's easily in its grasp but I felt my grocery getter would be too hard running around thru town with the added safety features added to it. Mary, this is what experience can do for you with 9:00-1 compression with mostly stock available Chevy parts and the mild LT4 cam.

Using power adders like a supercharger, turbo, or nitrous is basically the same as running high compression since these power adders increase compression. I'll give you a hint.... too much compression with the nitrous. Wrong fuel blend. Wrong air fuel ratio under boost. Wrong tuning.

[6bg6ga]

Lloyd,

We always called it static compression also. I'll agree with a lot of points you have made. In todays world with for example GM's 1998 and on up computers one can add what is called a "wet" kit and the computer automatically adjusts the gas mixture to compensate for the nitrous gas. In anything computer controlled from 1997 and down GM's require a kit which consists of nitrous and gas. In todays world the air / fuel gauge is common place as is the dyno. The racing computers like I mentioned generally are piggy backed to the stock computer or in the case of the vehicle being old before the days of the computer it is run stand alone. Thes computers provide instant read outs so one can actually tune themselves with the dyno as the backup.

Back in the late 60's early 70's sure we read the plugs to determine what the engine was doing but also went by the known charts for nitrous which were way rich gas wise and never tried to lean anything down. We didn't have air/fuel gauges back then and no computers either. We did the best with what we had and we must have done something correct becaause we didn't burn pistons or burn holes thru them.

In todays world there is no excuse to burn holes in pistons and or break ring lands. Forged pistons are the only way to go with ANY high performance engine regardless if it has a power adder or not. Smart switches are the only way to go with nitrous systems because in addition to the wido open throttle switch the window switch won't allow the nitrous to trigger until the RPM limit has been reached.

Nitrous with another power adder... I used a shot of nitrous on the outside of the intercooler to actually cool the intercooler to lower the internal temps to boost the power of the supercharger on one particular engine I worked on. The 75Hp shot actually provided almost that much additional power to the engine by simply lowering the inlet temp on the dyno. Near the end of having my Z-28 I was actually contemplating a 75 shot at the intercooler and a 75 shot before the throttle valve but common sense took over. You mentioned bottle temps but I don't believe you touched on over pressure in the bottle which in several instances I observed resulted in blown engines.

The nitrous in the 428 with that compression is totally asking for nothing but trouble. Pull the nitrous off and you will probably quit burning pistons. Want to make it run? Do what I suggested and purchase a "FAST" computer with all the sensors. Beings that you have a electronics background it will be easy for you to fabricate the necessary wiring harness to hook up the sensors. Dump the aviation gas and blend a mixture of which any good tuner will be able to help with. I'll be honest here I'm not going to give out the mixture I used.

ANY power adder will require additional Gas. Generally 10:00-1 is the absolute maximum compression ratio one should consider using a power adder with. As Lloyd mentioned and I agree 100% with is the static compression raises considerably when ANY power adder is used under boost or in the case of nitrous under injection. In my case I was right around 9-9:50-1 which required special pistons which were forged to be made and generally requires that the cylinder heads be O-ringed.

[MaryB]

That Mustang went to the graveyard in 1986 after a blown tire sent it into the wall at Brainard International Raceway... my friend quit drag racing(well at least seriously) then. Now he runs more tame setups like his dual dual turbo Mustang(another 428) with no nitrous. Thing is still barely streetable...

[Lloyd Smale]

"streatable" Now theres the word. today we have cars that run 10s that are capable of daily driving. Cars in the 9s that can get you comfortably to the drive in on Saturday. those I considers streetable. Watch that show street outlaws and they call themselves street racers but they are barely legal (not is some states) race cars with lights and a license plate on them. Id like to see a show where anyone who raced had to first drive a 100mile road course pull to the finishing line of that and line up and drag.

[6bg6ga]

My friend has learned and his buddy has a dyno in the shop. But he is tuning to the edge so it is not that street friendly. It is his weekend go have fun car and not his daily driver which is a piece of garbage small Chevy full of dents and rust lol His theory is why drive something good to the college parking lot for the kids to slam doors into(he teaches electronics 3 days a week) plus nobody is going to want to steal the piece of junk. Mustangs are his garage queens that come out for a weekend drive, he has 7 last I heard plus he is building a sleeper of a Galaxy 500 7 Liter...

Streetable... My Z-28 had a LT-4 cam which really didn't amount to anything too much different than the stock LT-1 cam. If I took the supercharger belt off you wouldn't know it was capable of running low 10's under boost. It was completely capable of passing any smog test in any state to be considered 100% street legal. You don't need a nasty lumpy cam to get a car into the 10's in todays world. You do however need to know what you are doing. Less is generally more. Most mistakes are trying to add either too big turbo's or too big of a carb/carbs.

The one thing I absolutely loved about the Turbo Buicks is you could drive them to the strip empty out the trunk with your charirs , cooler, and a few hand tools change the plugs and go racing and put a lot of the so called performance cars to shame. When you were done you loaded the stuff back in the trunk threw the new trophy in the back seat and went home. The Buick GS455 Stage 1 or stage 2 was the ultimate sleeper. Years ago when they were new I watched as a guy drove in from out of state jacked up the rear pulled off his rear wheels with street tires changed to some slicks and ran low to mid 11.'s

The street outlaw show depicts the absolute maximum. Most states will not allow a car to pass unless emissions and safety equipment is all there. As a rule nothing with a super wild cam works well with either turbo's or superchargers because of the excessive tuning required and I'm talking street and not strip now. With strip only cars generally the builder is also the racer and generally has a dyno or two in his garage. The slightest change in boost or timing requires the car to be strapped down on the dyno and tuning to be started again. And I wouldn't believe everything you see on the show because the show is designed for drama and ratings. Nothing on that show would pass a street legal test in my state and note just about all the people on the show have their own shops with their own dyno's.

[Larry Gibson]

/\ AGREED /\

I'll go a little farther. I've never seen a situation in which a straight six, with the right gears and tires, wouldn't get the job done OFF-ROAD.
.........

Couldn't agree more. My '05 has the straight six and a six speed trans. With the high/low that gives me 12 forward speeds. In low range 1st gear I can step out and walk faster than the jeep. My days of "I got 4 wheel drive and a winch....I can go anywhere" are long over. I found that attitude ended up with digging out, pulling or getting pulled out more than I wanted. My jeep is to get me from point A to B in comfort in town, urban and out in the desert.

[Grmps]

That's age speaking Larry. I was going to get a hog when my last kid graduated university but..... I'll stay with my truck.

[Larry Gibson]

That's age speaking Larry. I was going to get a hog when my last kid graduated university but..... I'll stay with my truck.

Ya sure got that right....my elk hunting rule for a number of years has been; never shoot one on the down hill side of a road.......

[wgr]

so what would you guys buy to tow behind a motor home? just like the idea of a 4wd if I want / need it

[skeettx]

This is my used to have listing
MB
CJ-2a
CJ-5
Wagoneer

Current
Grand Cherokee

[enfield]

I learned to drive with a 47 Willys , then at 14 bought a 52 Willys ( Ford built ) 5 years after that one rolled I got a 81 CJ5 ( in 1991 ) and it's still in the driveway and goes to the woods every weekend ( 302 Ford powered of course ). actually the Frame, transmission & T/case are the only original bits. Gota love em.

[beagle]

Jeeps...love 'em. Been running various configurations of military jeeps around since 1967 in the Army. Then switched to pickups. That got to be a hassle as everyone wanted you to be a family owned moving service. So, couple of years ago, bought a Sport Wrangler. Nice but small. The dealer called one day and made me a deal I couldn't refuse on a demonstrator Oscar Mike Edition so now, I'm enjoying that. No mudding and I take it easy in the dove fields but I'm again a happy camper. Never be without one again./beagle

[Petrol & Powder]

With the exception of operating in soft sand or bottomless mud, a tall skinny tire with aggressive thread will out perform a fat tire almost every time. If you have to spin a tire to clean out the tread, you're already in trouble. And if you do need to spin the tire there's a fine line between cleaning the thread and burying the tire. Trying to float a wide tire on top of snow, mud, dirt, etc. is a tough balance between power and momentum. It works in a narrow window and when you get outside of it, you're digging or walking.

Fat tires and big engines look cool to 18 year olds in mall parking lots. People that actually work with vehicles that are routinely driven on and off road generally don't take that approach unless they work in sand or really deep mud.

Knowing how to pick you line off road and knowing how to conserve momentum will KEEP you out of trouble more often than horsepower will GET you out of trouble.

[MaryB]

Little Suzuki Samuri, I see them being towed all the time. Pretty capable off road with a few mods.


so what would you guys buy to tow behind a motor home? just like the idea of a 4wd if I want / need it

[MaryB]

Forgot I owned one of these

http://topclassiccarsforsale.com/uploads/photoalbum/1956-willys-jeep-utility-wagon-4-x-4-truck-solid-barn-find-100-original-2.jpg

Had a 289 ford, 4 speed, under/overdrive with a top speed of 55mph... had to much rust like most MN cars! 1st gear granny low on the transfer case and then under drive on the add on over/under was 1mph top speed. I would let it idle and crawl over logs and rocks.

[Lloyd Smale]

the real cool thing about the GNs was how cheap it was to make them go fast. Even cheaper then the old small block chev. Theyd run mid to high 13s stock and for less then a grand on bolt on parts you could have them doing very low 12s and for about another 500 for a bigger turbo crack the 11s. That's still being completely docile on the street and pulling 22 mpg on the way to the race with the ac on and drive it to church on sunday with a baby seat in the back (I did it) . Thats a bit quicker then a ls6 chevelle or a hemi cuda. Two of the most well known top dog muscle cars of the 70s. You couldn't even get air with those two motors and if you got 10mpg on the way to the race you were ecstatic. Ive also seen them modded and running like new with over 100k on them. You aint doing that with a old muscle car. About 50k and they needed freshening. That and every 5k they needed valves lashed, points and plugs minimum.
My friend has learned and his buddy has a dyno in the shop. But he is tuning to the edge so it is not that street friendly. It is his weekend go have fun car and not his daily driver which is a piece of garbage small Chevy full of dents and rust lol His theory is why drive something good to the college parking lot for the kids to slam doors into(he teaches electronics 3 days a week) plus nobody is going to want to steal the piece of junk. Mustangs are his garage queens that come out for a weekend drive, he has 7 last I heard plus he is building a sleeper of a Galaxy 500 7 Liter...

Streetable... My Z-28 had a LT-4 cam which really didn't amount to anything too much different than the stock LT-1 cam. If I took the supercharger belt off you wouldn't know it was capable of running low 10's under boost. It was completely capable of passing any smog test in any state to be considered 100% street legal. You don't need a nasty lumpy cam to get a car into the 10's in todays world. You do however need to know what you are doing. Less is generally more. Most mistakes are trying to add either too big turbo's or too big of a carb/carbs.

The one thing I absolutely loved about the Turbo Buicks is you could drive them to the strip empty out the trunk with your charirs , cooler, and a few hand tools change the plugs and go racing and put a lot of the so called performance cars to shame. When you were done you loaded the stuff back in the trunk threw the new trophy in the back seat and went home. The Buick GS455 Stage 1 or stage 2 was the ultimate sleeper. Years ago when they were new I watched as a guy drove in from out of state jacked up the rear pulled off his rear wheels with street tires changed to some slicks and ran low to mid 11.'s

The street outlaw show depicts the absolute maximum. Most states will not allow a car to pass unless emissions and safety equipment is all there. As a rule nothing with a super wild cam works well with either turbo's or superchargers because of the excessive tuning required and I'm talking street and not strip now. With strip only cars generally the builder is also the racer and generally has a dyno or two in his garage. The slightest change in boost or timing requires the car to be strapped down on the dyno and tuning to be started again. And I wouldn't believe everything you see on the show because the show is designed for drama and ratings. Nothing on that show would pass a street legal test in my state and note just about all the people on the show have their own shops with their own dyno's.

[Blue2]

I have a 79 CJ7 all done up with secondary and off road usage in mind. I had a 4 wheeler ATV for awhile but I like the extra space and being out of the weather of a small Jeep. Lots of extra room for a friend and canine companions. We are restoring a 65 Willys CJ5 to original condition.
I went out on a off road ride a few years ago with a bunch of modern Jeeps and the 79 had no problem following the rest of the modern high tech versions. And if something goes amiss it is easy to diagnose and deal with,no computer analysis required.

[Hickok]

76' cj5 here, 355 sbc, block higher headers, comp cam, dbl hump heads, dbl roller timing chain, 1.7 rockers, Holley 650, Holley street dom intake, accell super coil, 5.5" lift, 33/12.50's. Had it since 95'Lab you have her set up about perfect. Do you ever drag race her in the Tucker County 4 wheel races in Parsons?

I had a CJ7 with a 304 and a CJ5 with the 250 six cyl. back in my "mudding" days.

[wgr]

Little Suzuki Samuri, I see them being towed all the time. Pretty capable off road with a few mods.did,nt know they still made them

[Lloyd Smale]

does sound like a cool jeep!
76' cj5 here, 355 sbc, block higher headers, comp cam, dbl hump heads, dbl roller timing chain, 1.7 rockers, Holley 650, Holley street dom intake, accell super coil, 5.5" lift, 33/12.50's. Had it since 95'

[MaryB]

They don't, find one of the years that has a ton of aftermarket parts and build one. I know I saw pics in 4 wheeler magazine of them taking one over the Rubicon Trail! Tough little 4 wheeler and lght so easy towing. I see Jeeps being towed a lot too though, People drive them on a car dolly and drop the rear driveshaft.


did,nt know they still made them

[RP]

I have a 1983 CJ 7 that got parked when my sons started driving, could not afford insurance and something for them to drive and keep it on the road. Well its been sitting along time I need a new windshield frame and I am sure brakes maybe a fuel tank and all the other stuff that happens when on sits that long. I really need to get it out and start working on it just seems there is not enough time now days.

[6bg6ga]

They don't, find one of the years that has a ton of aftermarket parts and build one. I know I saw pics in 4 wheeler magazine of them taking one over the Rubicon Trail! Tough little 4 wheeler and lght so easy towing. I see Jeeps being towed a lot too though, People drive them on a car dolly and drop the rear driveshaft.

I miss the old days when you put the transfer case in neutral.

[MaryB]

My 79 GMC Jimmy had neutral on the transfer but they still recommended not towing more than 10 miles. 4 low lock meant lock! If you hit dry pavement it was a bear to turn with the inside wheels having to break loose.

[izzyjoe]

I worked in a shop that specialized in 4x4 off road trucks, and jeeps for several years, and it was fun at first, and then it became a living hell! I'm glad that stuff belonged to someone else, cause it seemed like if they weren't broke, they will be. A friend tried to talk me into buying a jeep, so I proved to him that my 2 wheel drive truck would go any where I wanted to go in the deer woods. Which was mainly on main roads, cause if you get off the road you're gona tear something up.

[Ron in PA]

My JK takes me to point A,B after I fixed the Death Wobble.200400

[izzyjoe]

Ahh, the dreaded death wobble, we had a few of those that drove us nuts with that. That's a scary situation!

[Idaho45guy]

Did some more work on mine last week like new shocks, suspension inspection, checked axle fluid, added a side mirror and a couple of other little things. Then I took it out in the mountains on some mild trails and had a blast going places that my full-size pickup can't go...

200469

[Lloyd Smale]

Heres my take on yjs. I don't like the square headlights, they ride rough and there frames were even more prone to rot through then the tjs but the bodys almost seemed better when it came to rust. there simple leaf spring straight axles set ups are easy to lift and easy to work on. Nice thing is they can be picked up for a song compared to the overpriced tjs ive seen lately. Probably the best bang for the buck jeep today.
Finally figured out the picture issue, I think...

199578

[popper]

My son has turned into a jeeper. Put big wheels and rise kit on his Rubicon. Today he leaves with wife & 2 grade schoolers from DFW to Moab, Jackson Hole, Estes Park & back to DFW. Not a trip I want to take (in a jeep). I get the Border Collie for 1 1/2 weeks.

[Lloyd Smale]

actually if its a jk he has I wouldn't be afraid to hop in mine and drive across country. Its as comfortable as a lot of the cars ive owned in the past.

[Idaho45guy]

Yeah, I should have spent more and got a newer Jeep. Mine is painful to drive very far. I drove it to the cabin about 70 miles away on rural 55mph roads Friday. Drive there was during the day and it was 90 degrees. Fun drive. The ride back at 9:30pm when it was 55 degrees and I had to dodge deer was less pleasant.

[JasonYbarbo]

2004 Rubicon that was bought with all the mods so i did not have to do much. We crawl rocks in west texas.

[popper]

He got to Jackson Hole OK last nite. Text said "no more driving for a while".
200886 200887

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

This has got to be tough on the spine?

click on image for music filled video to start

https://www.facebook.com/BaaBaaBlackJeep/videos/1939382202941568/