mcarterbrown.com  

General Chat MCB's Coffee House: Pull up a seat, and grab your favorite caffeinated beverage. Non-paintball related chat within.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-22-2013, 10:32 PM   #11 (permalink)
Active Member
 
nels840's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Waterloo, Ont

Thanks for all the help, I put an offer in on 2013 sahara unlimtied so should hear back from the bank in a few days.
nels840 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 10:36 PM   #12 (permalink)
MCB Member
 
lukster14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Long Island, New York

Brass N Wood Fan
Palmers Fan
i want to tase whichever pencil pushing whiny eco jerkoff at chrysler killed the 4.0.

I have run 2 4.0 engines into the ground. (324k and 350k miles respectively) its a bit of a gas hog, but nothing beats a truck you can buy for less than 3 grand at 160k miles that hs only seen half of its life(and usually not the fun half either)

as to real jeeps(they named the new ones JK for a reason) theyre leaky, rusty, smoky, cold, drafty, gas hogs. and ill never be without one ever. EVER.

also if the pickup is a problem, get a daily driver. i havent ever met a pickup guy that was truly happy switching to a jeep. it can go the other way. but the loss of storage is painful to the uninitiated.

i have a 95 yj that is my beater.(245k and still going strong on the 4cyl.)
and i'm building a 87-89 cj7 from the frame up as my doom machine. gonna use a DC4 catepillar as the powerplant.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~AXEL
What's that shadowy place over there?

That is Canada, Simba. You must never go there
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~FinSec
Always remember, If it has tits or tires, its going to give you trouble.

my feedback
http://www.mcarterbrown.com/forums/f...-feedback.html
lukster14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 10:50 PM   #13 (permalink)
Thrillin' Heroics
 
Marauder_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Whitehorse, Yukon

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukster14 View Post
i want to tase whichever pencil pushing whiny eco jerkoff at chrysler killed the 4.0.

I have run 2 4.0 engines into the ground. (324k and 350k miles respectively) its a bit of a gas hog, but nothing beats a truck you can buy for less than 3 grand at 160k miles that hs only seen half of its life(and usually not the fun half either)

as to real jeeps(they named the new ones JK for a reason) theyre leaky, rusty, smoky, cold, drafty, gas hogs. and ill never be without one ever. EVER.

also if the pickup is a problem, get a daily driver. i havent ever met a pickup guy that was truly happy switching to a jeep. it can go the other way. but the loss of storage is painful to the uninitiated.

i have a 95 yj that is my beater.(245k and still going strong on the 4cyl.)
and i'm building a 87-89 cj7 from the frame up as my doom machine. gonna use a DC4 catepillar as the powerplant.
*Sigh*

I'll go over this again, for the millionth time between here and JeepForum.com, where I'm a mod. And, keep in mind, I own, and love the **** out of, a 4.0L-powered TJ.

1: The 4.0L would have been wholly insufficient in the JK, had the version used in the '03-'06 Wrangler and '99-'04 Grand Cherokee been used-the best version, minus the randomly exploding ODPA modules in '05-'06 Wranglers. You think the 200-hp 3.8L V6 was bad on the highway? Slap 31"s on a 3.07-geared LJ, and then drop a few hundred pounds in the back and see how much fun you're having. The 4.0L was an amazing engine, but by modern standards it's obsolete-it's only had three changes since it started out as a Steudebaker engine in 1953.

2: It wasn't Chrysler's decision. It was the EPA's. It no longer met emissions regulations-it stopped easily meeting them in the '90s, but Chrysler managed to keep it just a hair under the wire until '06 because it was a fantastic engine for Jeep.

3: The Wrangler JK is the most competant off-roader Jeep has ever made. A JK Sport beats a TJ Rubicon in almost every measurable aspect, a JK Rubicon is vastly superior in every way except for a breif moment around 2000 RPM where the torque/time/weight ratio on the TJ is better. But I'll take stronger axles, better A/D angles, better breakover, more horsepower and torque everywhere else and more ground clearance any day.

There's a reason the JK is doubling the sales of the TJ, and tripling the sales of certain TJ and YJ models. It's just a better vehicle. And it damn well should be, what with the advancements in automotive tech over the past few years.
__________________


Glory, glory, what a hell of a way to die,
With a rifle in your hands and you're falling through the sky,
Glory, glory, what a hell of a way to die,
He ain't gonna jump no more!

Quote:
Originally Posted by usagi_tetsu View Post
Nothing says "violent and insane" like sharpening a shotgun.
Marauder_Pilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 11:16 PM   #14 (permalink)
Resurgence
 
docholiday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Winston Salem, NC

Surprise no one sent you here sooner, but check out JK-Forum.com - The Ultimate Jeep JK Wrangler Bulletin Board

I use to hang out there when I had my 08 JK back from 08-10 before I traded it for a V8 Challenger. It's the only other forum that has an McB feel I've ever been on. At least it did back then.
docholiday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 07:05 AM   #15 (permalink)
MCB Member
 
Jordan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Smithville, Ontario

Palmers Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marauder_Pilot View Post
*Sigh*

I'll go over this again, for the millionth time between here and JeepForum.com, where I'm a mod. And, keep in mind, I own, and love the **** out of, a 4.0L-powered TJ.

1: The 4.0L would have been wholly insufficient in the JK, had the version used in the '03-'06 Wrangler and '99-'04 Grand Cherokee been used-the best version, minus the randomly exploding ODPA modules in '05-'06 Wranglers. You think the 200-hp 3.8L V6 was bad on the highway? Slap 31"s on a 3.07-geared LJ, and then drop a few hundred pounds in the back and see how much fun you're having. The 4.0L was an amazing engine, but by modern standards it's obsolete-it's only had three changes since it started out as a Steudebaker engine in 1953.
Studebaker?

They never had anything to do with Nash, or AMC. And the 4.0, while sharing a few components with the venerable 258, was a grounds-up redesign shortly before Chrysler bought AMC.

But yes, it's a great motor.
__________________
Please Leave Me Feedback
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurtCow View Post
And God turned to Gabriel and said: “I shall create a land called Canada of outstanding natural beauty, with majestic mountains soaring with eagles, sparkling lakes abundant with bass and trout, forests full of elk and moose, and rivers stocked with salmon. I shall make the land rich in oil so the inhabitants prosper and call them Canadians, and they shall be praised as the friendliest of all people.”

“But Lord,” asked Gabriel, “Is this not too generous to these Canadians?”

And God replied, “Just wait and see the neighbors I shall inflict upon them.”
Jordan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:37 AM   #16 (permalink)
Straight 6 DID Bust!
 
Kermit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Pace, FL

I love my 4.0. It's torquey, beefy, and powerful. But it gets 14 city in my XJ.

The JK motor is definitely more refined in about every regard.
Kermit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:39 AM   #17 (permalink)
MCB Member
 
lukster14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Long Island, New York

Brass N Wood Fan
Palmers Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marauder_Pilot View Post
*Sigh*

I'll go over this again, for the millionth time between here and JeepForum.com, where I'm a mod. And, keep in mind, I own, and love the **** out of, a 4.0L-powered TJ.

1: The 4.0L would have been wholly insufficient in the JK, had the version used in the '03-'06 Wrangler and '99-'04 Grand Cherokee been used-the best version, minus the randomly exploding ODPA modules in '05-'06 Wranglers. You think the 200-hp 3.8L V6 was bad on the highway? Slap 31"s on a 3.07-geared LJ, and then drop a few hundred pounds in the back and see how much fun you're having. The 4.0L was an amazing engine, but by modern standards it's obsolete-it's only had three changes since it started out as a Steudebaker engine in 1953.

2: It wasn't Chrysler's decision. It was the EPA's. It no longer met emissions regulations-it stopped easily meeting them in the '90s, but Chrysler managed to keep it just a hair under the wire until '06 because it was a fantastic engine for Jeep.

3: The Wrangler JK is the most competant off-roader Jeep has ever made. A JK Sport beats a TJ Rubicon in almost every measurable aspect, a JK Rubicon is vastly superior in every way except for a breif moment around 2000 RPM where the torque/time/weight ratio on the TJ is better. But I'll take stronger axles, better A/D angles, better breakover, more horsepower and torque everywhere else and more ground clearance any day.

There's a reason the JK is doubling the sales of the TJ, and tripling the sales of certain TJ and YJ models. It's just a better vehicle. And it damn well should be, what with the advancements in automotive tech over the past few years.

most of my love of these engines is reliability and workability. Ive never required computers or high tech gadgets to fix my trucks. I can swap out a suspension or a transmission, or an engine in my backyard.

thats what makes the difference for me. plus the availability of aftermarket and used parts for them is unparalelled.

besides, i cannot lease a truck. and 30 some grand for a jeep makes my head spin.

also i rag on chrysler because theyre a ****ty company that cant manage to balance its books. bailed out how many times? GM too.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~AXEL
What's that shadowy place over there?

That is Canada, Simba. You must never go there
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~FinSec
Always remember, If it has tits or tires, its going to give you trouble.

my feedback
http://www.mcarterbrown.com/forums/f...-feedback.html
lukster14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 09:58 PM   #18 (permalink)
Born again
 
mustangii's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Warrensburg MO
Send a message via AIM to mustangii

oops, lol double post.

edm
__________________
Will no longer be selling anything outside of North America

ASE certifed master tech
Master Certified Chrysler Tech

Last edited by mustangii; 01-24-2013 at 10:14 PM.
mustangii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:13 PM   #19 (permalink)
Born again
 
mustangii's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Warrensburg MO
Send a message via AIM to mustangii

Yeap don't buy a Wrangler with the 3.8 and the 42LTE trans. They are not designed for running big muddies. The 42LTE basically has the same guts as the 40/41 TE transaxles that Chrysler used in the Neon, PT Cruiser, Caravan, and all of the other front drive Chrysler cars. Up until Fiat took over. Don't know if Chrysler is planning to use the New 8 speed auto in the Wranglers behind the 3.6 Pentaster engine, but it is available in the 1500 ram. Time will tell. if you want the 3.8 find a 6 speed manual. I can't tell you how many times I had to rebuild trans under warranty, because some dufuss took his wrangler off roading and burned up his tranny. Now if it never leaves the hwy you can run the larger tires, but don't expect it to last rock crawling or bogging. The wrangler with the 5 speed auto and 3.6 is using the Nag1 Transmssion, that is also avalable in the Durango.

edm
__________________
Will no longer be selling anything outside of North America

ASE certifed master tech
Master Certified Chrysler Tech

Last edited by mustangii; 01-24-2013 at 10:16 PM.
mustangii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2013, 05:11 PM   #20 (permalink)
Post Whore
 
HP_Lovecraft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern Maine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
They never had anything to do with Nash, or AMC. And the 4.0, while sharing a few components with the venerable 258, was a grounds-up redesign shortly before Chrysler bought AMC..
Nearly all the engine components interchange between the 4.0 and 4.2.

For example, its a fairly common mod to take the head and EFI off the 4.0 and put it on the 4.2, or take the crank and pistons out of the 4.2 and put it in the 4.0.

Obviously its mostly just semantics, but the modern 4.0 was basically the same internally as the original Nash engine designed 50 years ago.

Nothing really to argue about. Its a great engine, as far as strength and simplicity. I love inline 6 engines, since they are extremely easy to work on, and can be pushed to very low RPMs without vibrations, etc.

But the reality is the size of a strainght-six is too hard to fit into modern cars, and the long-stroke design produces too much emissions.
__________________
www.montneel.com

"the evidence strongly suggests that neither Billy nor Adam (Smart Parts) could have invented the electronic paintgun" -Garr M. King, U.S. Judge
HP_Lovecraft is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  mcarterbrown.com » General » General Chat

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO
© MCB Network LLC