[DMCForum] Re: Jeep Inline 6 (Robert)

["therealdmcvegas" <dmcvegas@xxxxxxx>]

I keep seeing them mention that the engine was redesigned, but no one 
says how. I do know that the Cherokee uses a different exhaust system 
than the Jeep, hence where the extra little bit of power comes from. 
Because I believe that the Cherokee, Wrangler, and Dakota are all 
supposed to share the same Chrysler Light Truck PCM.

Another thing that I've heard to back the seperate exhaust system up 
theory up, is that I've been told that they tend to bust the welds at 
the collector on the exhaust header on the Wranglers. Which is why 
when started up, I smell sweet hyrdro carbons at the FRONT of the 
Jeep, and almost nothing at the exahust pipe. That and the fact that 
the thing runs fine, but sounds like a damn lawn mower!

As for the missing .2 liters of displacement, who knows. They 
probably reduced them for economy and emissions. Which I love the 
fact that some people touted the I-6 as an archaic engine, yet it can 
easily meet LEV standards...

-Robert



--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "content22207" <brobertson@xxxx> 
wrote:
> Am having a hard time finding the Jeep forum I read yesterday (I'll
> keep searching) but until then here are a couple consumer articles
> that mention the Power Tech I-6 "redesign" in 1999:
> 
> http://www.wthr.com/global/story.asp?s=2590959
> http://www.cartrackers.com/am/showarticle.php?id=6213
> http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?modelid=3178&src="">
> http://www.autointell.net/nao_companies/daimlerchrysler/jeep/jeep-
cherokee/jeep-cherokee-01.htm
> 
> Of course three years doesn't make any real difference. The 232/258
> (which AMC ultimately pegged at 4.2 liters -- where did Chrysler's
> missing .2 liters go?) was one helluva design with one helluva
> production run. I shudder to think how many millions were
> manufactured, and how many remain in reliable daily service. 
> 
> *MY* AMC, on the other hand, languishes behind a GM 151 (not even 
the
> proper truncated 2.5). My parents were too wierded out by the second
> gas crisis to splurge on a 6 cylinder. I've passed through 2 other
> AMC's on my perennial quest for a 258, and yet only the underpowered
> little Green Car remains...
> 
> Bill Robertson
> #5939
> 
> >--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "therealdmcvegas" <dmcvegas@xxxx> 
wrote:
> > Check out this link right here:
> > http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=46011
> > 
> > It does indeed reflect that the I-6 had it's block redesigned the 
> > strengthen itself. It might be the same engine in overall desgin 
and 
> > function, but the block is indeed different.
> > 
> > No, Chrysler never moved the injectors into the heads. The 
injectors 
> > have always remained in the manifolds. Same with my '98 4.0 
Wrangler, 
> > my '96 2.5 Dakota (only year for 1st gen truck, with Jeep 
engine), 
> > and even the 2004 Rubicon: http://tinyurl.com/8v6ne
> > 
> > As for the new 3.7L V-6, I've not heard good reviews of it 
either, 
> > let alone the new 4-speed automatic on the Wranglers. The same 
> > transmission used on the Chrysler LH cars. One review said that 
with 
> > the the Jeep in 4-L, and the tranny in 2nd gear, they could crank 
the 
> > engine to over 2K RPMs, and the tires wouldn't spin. One 
interesting 
> > tid bit I have heard, is that DCX is increasing the displacement 
of 
> > the 3.7 to 4.0. They're worried that since the displacement of 
the 
> > engine is decreasing, many regular consumers may think that the 
2006 
> > Jeeps will be *underpowered* when compared to their previous 
> > counterparts.
> > 
> > A big hope is that if DCX takes away that I-6 Powertech, maybe 
> > they'll compromise with an I-5 or so diesel engine! I would 
certainly 
> > be willing to buy that (used of course).
> > 
> > -Robert
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "content22207" <brobertson@xxxx> 
> > wrote:
> > > According to online Jeep forums, you're off by 3 years (1999). 
They
> > > also claim the only changes were on the topside (intake 
manifold,
> > > head, and fuel delivery). This may be when fuel injection moved 
into
> > > the head -- I had heard that Chrysler fuel injected the 258 in 
the
> > > head, but when I looked at a mid 90's Jeep at a shop once the
> > > injectors were clearly in the intake.  I couldn't find a single
> > > reference of anything changing inside the engine. In fact, the 
Jeep
> > > boys are rather emphatic that the "redesigned" 4.0 "Power Tech" 
is
> > > pretty much the same 4.0 and that moniker more properly belongs 
to 
> > a 
> > > totally new 3.7 liter V6 (which doesn't get good reviews BTW).
> > > 
> > > Bill Robertson
> > > #5939
> > > 
> > > >--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "therealdmcvegas" 
<dmcvegas@xxxx> 
> > wrote:
> > > > If you're talking about the straight six, it is NOT the same 
> > motor. 
> > > > 1996 was the final year for the AMC design. The block itself 
was 
> > > > completely redesigned, is much stronger structurally, and has 
> > better 
> > > > vibration dampening, although the heads are interchangable.
> > > > 
> > > > It's a damn fine engine, that's pretty easy to work on, and 
> > straight 
> > > > forward. The old Magnum 2.5 that they canceled was literally 
the 
> > same 
> > > > engine, with 2 cylinders lopped off. I have that one in my 
> > Dakota. 
> > > > Everything is in reach, and is easily accessable.
> > > > 
> > > > If I end up keeping my truck, a swap over to an I-6, with a 6-
> > speed 
> > > > gearbox is definetly a long-term goal. An engine swap on a 
truck 
> > I 
> > > > already like is a far cheaper alternative than buying a new 
pick-
> > up.
> > > > 
> > > > -Robert
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "content22207" 
<brobertson@xxxx> 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > That's because it is the old AMC 232/258. One of the single 
best
> > > > > engines ever built. In a fit of genius Chrysler threw away 
> > their 225
> > > > > when Lee Iacoca reinvented the company. We all know the sad 
> > story of
> > > > > its aluminum replacement (that's the reason Chrysler 
resorted 
> > to the
> > > > > PRV in the LH platform, which was designed by former AMC 
people 
> > > > BTW).
> > > > > When Chrysler bought AMC they were smart enough to drop 
fuel 
> > > > injection
> > > > > on the 258 and keep using it all the way until 2004.
> > > > > 
> > > > > You can't kill a 232/258. I don't think you could even hurt 
it
> > > > > intentionally. The things are truly indestructible.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Do you realize the engine in your 1998 Jeep is a 1964 
design? 
> > Fuel
> > > > > injection is of course late model, but that's in the intake 
> > manifold
> > > > > only. Rest of the block is pure vintage quality design. 
It's 
> > also a
> > > > > torque monster -- something like 215 lbs at no more than 
1,800 
> > RPM.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Bill Robertson
> > > > > #5939
> > > > > 
> > > > > >--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, DMC Erik <dmcerik@xxxx> 
wrote:
> > > > > > A quick chime in on the Jeep mention.  My parents bought 
a 
> > new 
> > > > Jeep
> > > > > Cherokee in 1998.  Its the biggest work horse I've seen!  
That 
> > I-6 
> > > > has
> > > > > hauled more deloreans across country...hauled more (fill in 
the 
> > > > blank)
> > > > > on our flatbed trailer than I can remember.  The thing even 
> > hauled 
> > > > the
> > > > > original D-rex from Texas to Chicago through the 
mountains.  
> > Sure, 
> > > > we
> > > > > weren't going 80MPH through the mountains, but a nice 
steady 
> > 55mph 
> > > > got
> > > > > us there and back with no issues.  When my dad found out 
they 
> > were
> > > > > cancelling the Cherokee he shook his head in disbelief.
> > > > > > 160K miles later the 1998 Cherokee is still going along, 
as 
> > good 
> > > > as
> > > > > it was when it was new.
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > erik
> > > > > > 4512
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Once upon a time before the Cherokee got canceled (and 
now 
> > > > brought 
> > > > > > back), the I-6 engine was able to fit in both the 
Cherokee, 
> > and 
> > > > the 
> > > > > > Wrangler. And even the Commanche pick-up truck once upon 
a 
> > time 
> > > > ago. 
> > > > > > It's a great engine, but what else could you shove it 
into 
> > > > because of 
> > > > > > it's length? So when the time comes to retool, it gets 
dumped 
> > in 
> > > > > > favor of more compact engines that are used on multiple 
> > > > platforms. 
> > > > > > And many Jeep owners (including myself) are not happy 
about 
> > the 
> > > > > > demise of such a rugged, reliable engine. But Jeeps keep 
> > selling, 
> > > > so 
> > > > > > it's not a loss of profit motivation from consumer input. 
> > It's 
> > > > just 
> > > > > > what's cheaper in the long run, despite customer loyalty 
in 
> > many 
> > > > > > cases. Kinda like the F-body too...
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >             
> > > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > >  Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

SPONSORED LINKS

De lorean

Delorean part

Delorean cadillac

---

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

•  Visit your group "DMCForum" on the web.
   
•  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   
•  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---