International Full Size Jeep Association
Home Forums Reader's Rigs Tech Library Trail Stories FSJ-List
International Full Size Jeep Association  

Go Back   International Full Size Jeep Association > Tire Kickin' > General FSJ Tech

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:14 AM
243 243 is offline
304 AMC
 
Join Date: Apr 08, 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,478
Post

I am posting this in response to a member stating that a 401, after balancing will pull 500 ft-lbs at less than 3500 rpm. I am not using his example to dispute what he said, only to discuss 500 ft-lbs of torque.

I have only driven one vehicle with close to 500 ft-lbs of torque. My 99 Dodge diesel dynoed 282 hp and 492 ft-lbs to the ground and the truck weighed 6,680 lbs. The rest of the powertrain included a D60 front diff, a D80/D70 hybrid rear diff, NV4500 trans and a NV241HD xfer case. I towed Blue approximately 600 miles at between 60-80 mph with out a problem. I rarely drove 80 mph for any length of time, normally to pass other vehicles out in West Texas. GCVW was approximately 11,980 lbs.
In comparison, Ford advertises the Lighting as 4,670 lbs with 380 hp at 4,750 rpm and 450 lb-ft tq at 3,250 rpm. Very similar in weight to an FSJ and below the magical 500 ft-lb mark.

Is it safe to assume that a Jeep would have to have major upgrades in the drivetrain to handle an engine putting out 500 ft-lbs?

Is it a waste of money to build a high dollar, high torque motor if the rest of the drivetrain will remain close to stock?

What are 99.5% of IFSJ owners going to build their Jeeps for?

Will you need or want 500 ft-lbs?

If not, how much?

[ December 28, 2002, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: 243 ]
__________________
David
76 NT Cherokee
83 CJ7
05 Frontier CC 4x2
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:41 AM
FSJeeper FSJeeper is offline
King of Unfinished Projects
 
Join Date: May 20, 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,268
Post

Once you go diesel, you never go back. I recently towed a surplus 1980 AM715 military Jeep service truck and the drivetrain/axles out of CUCV trucks. I figure about 12,000 lbs worth. I have a 2001 Dodge HO Cummins with the 6 speed. The torque that engine cranks out makes towing a pleasure. That torque eats up hills and makes passing a breeze with that kind of load. Thats why you need 500 ft lbs.

In a FSJ you would have to literally modify everything to handle that kind of torque which is what I have done. If you want to play with big torque, you have to pay. Whether or not I actually will use the 500 + ft lbs my FSJ has is yet to be seen, but I figure I can crawl up anything at 1900 rpms all day long without even straining the engine. At the end of the day, gearing is the key to four wheeling and massive HP and torque numbers are more for fun than necessity.
__________________
In Process: 91 Wagoneer, D61/71 axles with 3.07 gearing, NV4500, NP205. Cummins 6BT.

Back burner project: Crew cab M715, Cummins/Allison/Rockwell Tcase/Dana 61/Dana 71.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-28-2002, 03:59 AM
WillyPete WillyPete is offline
Gear Head
 
Join Date: Apr 03, 2001
Posts: 717
Post

bragging rights!

of course, until i can afford all those cool 1.5" axleshafts and beefy engines, i'm stuck using a near-stock 360 and drivetrain

i keep fantasizing about building a 454 for over 500 ft lbs and 350+ hp. that could just be a pipe dream tho
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-28-2002, 04:21 AM
243 243 is offline
304 AMC
 
Join Date: Apr 08, 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,478
Post

FSJeeper~

Are you a member of TDR?
__________________
David
76 NT Cherokee
83 CJ7
05 Frontier CC 4x2
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-28-2002, 04:46 AM
Stuka's Avatar
Stuka Stuka is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 21, 2001
Posts: 13,743
Post

I dont see a FSJ *needing* 500ft pounds for anything. Our 77 ford F150 trailor special with a factory 460/C6/9in has had the engine modded a bit, to pump out 480ft pounds, and it screams up hills with a big load. Never had ANY trouble with power in it. But then its a full size truck that hauls and such.

For a wag/chero..they dont need this. A J20 on the other hand, I would love to build up a 401 to have 450+ ft pounds. Which wouldent be to tuff to do NA, but would be much easier if you slapped a SC on it. The AMX SS with a 390 had 445ft pounds of torque NA, with stock cam. They just upped the compression to 12.5:1, ported the heads, and put a cross ram intake on it (it had 385hp). That engine I feel would work well for a jeep, as it has stock cam, so its not gona have a lopy idle. Has more then enough torque and HP for most things a FSJ would ever do.

My jeep does ok at towing, except for the tranny. The gears are to spread apart to be great at towing. It does slow stuff fine, but going up some hillls here it doesnt like because i get stuck between gears 3rd is to low, 4th is to high. But is fine on the flats.

But a J20, yes that would be a great candidate for a tow rig. Put either a diesel or a nice 401, and it would do well.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-28-2002, 04:51 AM
heydave's Avatar
heydave heydave is offline
Master Mechanic
 
Join Date: May 20, 2000
Location: Beatrice Nebraska
Posts: 1,344
Post

What is an Olds 350 diesel rated at? I may be getting one of these cheap and it is already in a 78 J-ten.
Would this be alright with 3.73 gears for a daily driver. I don't tow so it would just have the weight of the truck to move.Any thoughts?
__________________
Dave Lyons
79 J-10 "The Gorilla"
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-28-2002, 05:02 AM
FSJeeper FSJeeper is offline
King of Unfinished Projects
 
Join Date: May 20, 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,268
Post

Nope, not a member of TDR, guess I should be.

WillyPete, those 1.5" 32 spline shafts are a necessity with big torque. I have been warned by the guy that makes the doublers that with the torque my engine makes at low rpms, and the 110 to 1 crawl ratio I have, I am probably going to have breakage problems with my front Dana 60 unless I really be careful. I upgraded the entire with all brand new parts, detroit locker, 35 spline custom shafts, Forged steering jounts, etc, etc. About $1800 worth in parts. I am probably going to toast the lockouts for sure and have to go with drive plates instead.

I also had to go with a 32 spline transmission, 32 spline NP203 gear reduction box, and 32 spline all the way out NP205. These are hard to find and not cheap but with all that extra troque, I can't take a chance with anything less. The shafts will have 1410's on them also.

For the average guy all of this time and money to upgrade a FSJ to handle big torque and HP is a total waste of time. A stock FSJ is quite capable and most FSJeepers should focus on keeping their jeeps in perfect condition rather than build big HP and torque and exceeding its strength limits and creating breakage. Unless you totally upgrade the drivetrain and axles on a FSJ, the more HP and toprque you make the more undependable and less reliable you will be. It is simply not smart to go with big power unless you upgrade the drivetrain and axles to handle it.

My FSJ is definitely not practicle and will only be good as a toy rather than as transportation. Why am I building it this way? Cause I have been building these things for 25+ years and decided to build something fun with no limits or budget.
__________________
In Process: 91 Wagoneer, D61/71 axles with 3.07 gearing, NV4500, NP205. Cummins 6BT.

Back burner project: Crew cab M715, Cummins/Allison/Rockwell Tcase/Dana 61/Dana 71.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-28-2002, 05:03 AM
Elliott's Avatar
Elliott Elliott is offline
Cowboy Up
 
Join Date: Jun 22, 2002
Location: Pilot Point, TX
Posts: 12,704
Post

My point about the torque.... if what I was told was accurate, and Stuka's points on the 390 may support that, was that a relatively mild build on a 401 can produce a lot of available torque.
Here's link you can scroll down to June '98 Hotrod and pick up a few things from a drag built 401 that steered the build of my 401: http://www.javelinamx.com/JavHome/articles/article2.htm
The oiling mods are highly recommended, cheap and fairly straight forward to install, I won't build a motor without them.
__________________
*** I am collecting pics and info on any factory Jeep Dually trucks from the J-Series at the new Jeep Dually Registry.
***I can set you up with hydroboost for your brakes: http://www.ifsja.org/forums/vb/showthread.php?t=106056
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-28-2002, 05:15 AM
243 243 is offline
304 AMC
 
Join Date: Apr 08, 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,478
Post

"For the average guy all of this time and money to upgrade a FSJ to handle big torque and HP is a total waste of time. A stock FSJ is quite capable and most FSJeepers should focus on keeping their jeeps in perfect condition rather than build big HP and torque and exceeding its strength limits and creating breakage. Unless you totally upgrade the drivetrain and axles on a FSJ, the more HP and toprque you make the more undependable and less reliable you will be. It is simply not smart to go with big power unless you upgrade the drivetrain and axles to handle it."

FSJeeper~

I could not have said it better!

Elliott~

Thanks for the link, I will read it shortly...btw, I hope you understand that I was not taking shots at you with this thread [img]smile.gif[/img]
__________________
David
76 NT Cherokee
83 CJ7
05 Frontier CC 4x2
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-28-2002, 05:53 AM
Stuka's Avatar
Stuka Stuka is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 21, 2001
Posts: 13,743
Post

That site rocks. When I go to rebuild my 360, I am wondering if I should either find a 401 to replace it with. Or just build the 360 stronger. I only need 300hp and about 400ft pounds of torque, which I think is easily atainable, and still have it be reliable.

Just wondering if I should do it myself, or find a good AMC rebuilder here in california.

But its a long ways off...i hope [img]smile.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-28-2002, 06:08 AM
gwdawg gwdawg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 05, 2002
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 68
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by HeyDave:
What is an Olds 350 diesel rated at? I may be getting one of these cheap and it is already in a 78 J-ten.
Would this be alright with 3.73 gears for a daily driver. I don't tow so it would just have the weight of the truck to move.Any thoughts?
There was a discussion about the Olds diesel on the general board a couple of weeks ago. The general consensus is that the Olds diesel is a POC.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-28-2002, 06:40 AM
Elliott's Avatar
Elliott Elliott is offline
Cowboy Up
 
Join Date: Jun 22, 2002
Location: Pilot Point, TX
Posts: 12,704
Post

243,
I didn't take it as a shot, thanks though. I realize that tons of torque ain't fo most jeeps, and boy did I enjoy reading about a guy in a basically stock 6cyl Renegade winning a trail run.
Problem I have is in leaving anything original and with the history of Jeeps being what it is they have to be about the most built rigs on the planet. The Cherokee I built the 401 for did everything but pull my 22' boat well, when the wife of the moment blew my 360 for not watching the temp gauge when I had a bad radiator... I was going to build another motor.
For the money... might as well be a 401. I didn't build it for torque, but that 401 seems to exude it soon as you start with a cam and balance. Remember that torque to the rear wheels is less then at the flywheel, maybe 100lbs.
FSJeeper... what I've been reading about doublers has me planning to downsize my ideas of building this shortbed. I'll probably stick with the jeep axles (with flattop knuckles) and run around 35-36 tires to keep from building an extreme drive line to handle the 38+ tires I was looking at. Save all that for a long bed truck, 1/2 of which is already waiting.
That torquey 401 in my Laredo only spun 31.5 yokohama mud diggers (awesome tire by the way) so it never hurt my driveline. I am sure I could have put it in a destructive situation, but I don't wheel hard as a lot of guys do around here.

[ December 28, 2002, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: Elliott ]
__________________
*** I am collecting pics and info on any factory Jeep Dually trucks from the J-Series at the new Jeep Dually Registry.
***I can set you up with hydroboost for your brakes: http://www.ifsja.org/forums/vb/showthread.php?t=106056
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:06 PM
Gwamp's Avatar
Gwamp Gwamp is offline
High Tech Redneck
 
Join Date: Mar 08, 2002
Location: Oregoon coast
Posts: 4,563
Post

500lb of torque? Why not build it if you are going to beef up the drivetrain behind it. I know that the mildly built caddy mill that is going into my blue pig may be too much motor for the NP-205/D-60/14 bolt combo that going to go in there and I may have to put a set of Rockwells into it to handle the torque. The sad thing about the Rockwell bit is that you cen get a set for about $700 which is less than the cost of your average front D-60 unless you find a deal. Lockers for hte Rockwells are reasonable $400 or so I have seen them on the web selling for and you cen install them yourself with no problems.(I just re-read this and it sounds like I am trying to sell myself on a set no?) I will probably go with whatever I find first. the D-60 or the Rockwells. I could always stuff that 14 bolt under my Cherokee....
__________________
Roll up on you like Eastwood...
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:11 PM
Elliott's Avatar
Elliott Elliott is offline
Cowboy Up
 
Join Date: Jun 22, 2002
Location: Pilot Point, TX
Posts: 12,704
Post

Gwamp,
with the snarlin' thing your building you best go with Rockwells! Heck, keeps your center of gravity low right?
__________________
*** I am collecting pics and info on any factory Jeep Dually trucks from the J-Series at the new Jeep Dually Registry.
***I can set you up with hydroboost for your brakes: http://www.ifsja.org/forums/vb/showthread.php?t=106056
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:30 PM
Chero77 Chero77 is offline
Master Mechanic
 
Join Date: Jun 24, 2000
Location: Redondo Beach, CA USA
Posts: 1,214
Post

It really comes down to what are you going to use your Jeep for? Before this discussion can be meaningful I think you have to narrow down the "use" category. Pick a category like daily driver, mud bogger, rockcrawler, etc. 500 ft-lbs in a daily driver is probably counter productive. In a purpose built mud bogger (if that's your thing) its probably useful.
__________________
\'73 AMX Javelin 401 (work in progress), \'77 WT Cherokee.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:36 PM
Gwamp's Avatar
Gwamp Gwamp is offline
High Tech Redneck
 
Join Date: Mar 08, 2002
Location: Oregoon coast
Posts: 4,563
Post

Mine is going to be a MudPig so everyday I look at this project, I lean towards the Rockwells. The total cost is not that much greater and I can put some of these under there if I want to:

Big ol' tires
__________________
Roll up on you like Eastwood...
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:56 PM
Stuka's Avatar
Stuka Stuka is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 21, 2001
Posts: 13,743
Post

I dont see the caddy 500 breaking a 14 bolt unless your running 44's or something. The caddy 500 while having high displacement, it isnt a torque monger like some other V8's. A stock early 70's 401 almost has the same torque as a stock caddy 500. But if your gona be running 24" wide tires...I would definately go with rockwells. As you will have to have hydrolic steer anyways just to steer them ;p
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-28-2002, 01:32 PM
Stolen76 Stolen76 is offline
Master Mechanic
 
Join Date: Dec 13, 2001
Location: somerville, al
Posts: 976
Post

when it comes to laying out the cash you can build better torque out of diesel for less money. there's a lot that can be done with a 6bt cummins (the old mechanical style used in medium duty trucks) to pull up the torque rating fairly cheaply. inline will always build more then a v-block
__________________
76 Wag, 360, TH400, 3.55\'s<br />Q-Trac P/T, 16%OD, 2\" AAL<br />Uniroyal LT265/75-16\'s on 16x7\'s
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-28-2002, 02:19 PM
Gwamp's Avatar
Gwamp Gwamp is offline
High Tech Redneck
 
Join Date: Mar 08, 2002
Location: Oregoon coast
Posts: 4,563
Post

I dream of grooving a set of those 54X24 inch tires and blasting through the mud out here this time of year. As far as the caddy mill goes, Just opening up the flow of air and fuel by putting on a fresh carb and the Edelbrock manifold that is out there for the caddy mills does wonders for them. If I want to get exotic, I can stroke that block out to 552...
__________________
Roll up on you like Eastwood...
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-28-2002, 02:35 PM
Bob Barry Bob Barry is offline
Jeep Doctor
 
Join Date: Apr 09, 2000
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 8,315
Post

The stock FSJ drivetrain in all but the J-20's is good for up to about 35" tires and moderate wheeling.

A J-20 could go up to 37" tires or so, but those would strain any stock transfer-case. Not that they wouldn't work; just that the wear would be greater and parts would need more regular replacement.

I considered all this when I thought of going spring-over on my Cherokee. I wanted to run a 37"-38" tire for the trails around here, and eventually drop in an Olds 455. I asked here whether to keep my original QT, or to upgrade to an NP205. The unanimous consensus was that, while a QT *could* be made to work, it was much more practical to go with the NP205. Same thing with the axles; I decided to go with 3/4-ton GMC axles, while keeping an eye out for an affordable 1-ton front axle.

All this talk of torque, however, must take into account that those figures are all PEAK torque at WIDE OPEN THROTTLE. On most of the trails I do, I am rarely at wide-open throttle; in fact, if I can help it, I rarely go over 1/4-throttle. Even my 300ft-lb AMC 360 is feeding 750ft-lbs into the transfer-case in first-gear, and then putting 1800ft-lbs to the U-joints in low-range, and my poor front-axle u-joints are seeing 6300ft-lbs after the gear-multiplication of the differentials.

That is usually enough to get me through. Even with a bigger motor, however, that same amount of torque will be required to get me through, though I'd probably be able to use less throttle to achieve it.

Trouble is, the bigger tires will take more power to turn, and I'd be tempted to use the greater power of the bigger engine to try tougher obstacles. The trick will be to try and ease through obstacles, rather than hammer it and bounce all over the place, which is what really breaks things quick.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
corner corner