View Single Post
Old 11-17-2008, 11:12 AM   #9 (permalink)
zjrog
Ecomod noob
 
zjrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tooele, UT
Posts: 412

ZJ - '95 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo Upcountry
90 day: 20.57 mpg (US)

Neon - '03 Dodge Neon SE
90 day: 33.46 mpg (US)

S'Crew - '02 Ford F150 Supercrew XLT
90 day: 16.4 mpg (US)

Ranger - '90 Ford Ranger
Last 3: 28.02 mpg (US)

Not the Jeep - '03 Dodge Neon SE
90 day: 34.11 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7
Thanked 15 Times in 10 Posts
I've seen the 2000 intake both improve and reduce power/FE for folks. A lot depends on the vehicle and the driver. Just like everything else. The newer style intake will fit the older 87-90 4.0, but the ports are differntly shaped. This usually results in lower perf for folks. The best head for the 4.0 is the 91-95 head (theres a specific casting number but I can't find it at the moment...).

With the parts XJ I have, the motor was going to be stroked (4.2 crank and rods, 4.0 pistons, slightly thicker headgasket makes it a 4.5 liter motor...) and the HO head was going to be used. And then the 2000 intake and a larger throttle body. THat was my thought process, thinking even with performance upgrades, I could maybe get some better FE for my ZJ. Rethinking this. Might modify an exhaust manifold for a small turbo (like off a 2.2 Chrysler form the 80s) to help in low RPMs but bypass for higher speeds. I just want a little extra oomph off the line, or at slow offroad speeds. This is still in the thought process.

Doesn't help with your cam question...
__________________
When it comes to Heroes, RENEGADES are mine!
  Reply With Quote