nbesheer Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 It's a 4.0L strait six, would it be a good swap into a Z ? not sure what transmission options there are though. But looks similar to the L even the oil filter is in the same place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clifton Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 It's a horrible idea for a Z. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e_racer1999 Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 i would think it would be too tall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proxlamus© Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 why would it be horrible?? LOADS of torque!!! ok its heavy.. and big.. but other than that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 I had the 4.2 and it was nothing but problems. Always leaking oil. It had a lot of power at the low end but they don't rev very high. Also, I noticed that the factory spec for compression on this engine allows for as much as 20 PSI difference from one piston to the other which explains all the pinging I got on hot days. Another thing is that it gets bad blow by when the mileage starts getting above 80k. The oil scrapers wear out and you start burning a lot of oil. My oil was black in just a couple hundred miles. I know that you are talking about the 4.0 but I would guess that the same engineering went into that engine also. Just a heads up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clifton Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 why would it be horrible?? LOADS of torque!!! ok its heavy.. and big.. but other than that? For the last two reasons you put. It's not much larger, cc wise than an L, They don't make much power for there displacement, they don't rev, and they are heavy. Perfect for a Jeep though. Torque come from displacement, or boost. For n/a, you would be better off with an LS1 or even an regular 350. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobraz240z Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 i have a jeep and i would if my motor blew i wouldnt even replace it with a jeep 6 lol with the money its going to cost you to have that in there you could build a 3.2 storker im pretty sure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nbesheer Posted July 21, 2007 Author Share Posted July 21, 2007 Oh Well that answers that. Thanks guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Careless Posted July 27, 2007 Share Posted July 27, 2007 my friend just got a 2001 XJ and it's causing him problems with the computer malfunctioning, the transmission is crapping out, and all sorts of poo. another friend just got an older jeep with the same engine, and it was recently buttoned up with a rebuild of somesort, and it's running quite strong. but, my friend with the problematic one asked me what it would take to swap a GTR Engine in there. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cody 82 ZXT Posted July 27, 2007 Share Posted July 27, 2007 I got a 93 XJ and I love it. Loads of torque but, no revs. It's fun to drive but, I don't know aboout putting the motor into the Z. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jwink25 Posted July 29, 2007 Share Posted July 29, 2007 FYI...about 5 or 6 years ago, the company I was working for got a bid on rebuilding 90,000+ 4.0L. I did the machine work to several blocks...let me tell you...these engines came in with 0 to maybe 500 miles on them. The factory over bored them(piston slap). I don't know how you over bore 90,000 plus engines. Anyway, I took the blocks .005 over and then put in beefer cams and pistons with teflon coating I believe. After we finished the engines, I think they called them 4.0L H.O. I also believe they went back into new vehicles. We threw away thousands of flywheels, plug wires, ect most with almost 0 miles on them. We only kept the engine itself. We even built a performance trans for the son of one of Chrysler's Big Wigs. I got to test it on a dyno before we shipped it out. Jason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zgeezer Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 It's a 4.0L strait six, would it be a good swap into a Z ? not sure what transmission options there are though. But looks similar to the L even the oil filter is in the same place. If you are interested in domestic push rod six cylinder engines to swap into a Z, you have better choices. Ford 300 CI, lots of aftermarket parts, solid bottom end, forged crank in HD trucks, bolts up to almost any Ford transmission, heavy and cheap. Chevy 292 CI, ditto as same as Ford but I don't know if forged crank available. If you have access to salvage in Australia, the down-under Ford Falcon had a turbo charged dual or single overhead cammed six based upon Ford's later 6 [144, 170, 200 ci] that was mounted in 70's Mavericks . Jeep 6 does not seem to have a lot of aftermarket support that isn't directed to the off road crowd. I have a 96 ex Forest Service Cherokee with 125,000+ miles. I love it. Good torque and reasonable gas mileage. I wouldn't put it into my 240 though. What is a "good" swap is a personal choice. However, my personal take is if you are financially challenged or are just getting started, stick with rebuilding the L engine or think Chevrolet or Ford swap. Just like the rest of us. g Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jwink25 Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 There were some Maverick guys putting out around 300+HP from the 250 L6. I have a 74 Maverick that came with the 250, (302 now). The 250 had plenty of power. It has or had....not sure if it still does... some aftermarket support. You could get a 4 barrel intake for them. Small block V8 tranny blots up. But the 300 six would be a better choice I think. Newer engine plus lots of support, plus more power to start with. Mid 300 to 400 HP shouldn't be too much of a problem. Oh, what about the pontiac overhead cam 250. I think that was the size, but good luck finding one. Anyone know when they made them? 60s I think? Jason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jwink25 Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 Apparently the Aussies like the turbo inline 6. 4.0L plus turbo...hmmmmm We've already tested Holden's forced induction six-cylinder Commodore (supercharged VY S) and we quite liked it, so what of the XR6T? Is it head and shoulders above Holden's equivalent blown six, or even Holden's 351 cubic inch V8, or is it just another Falcon with a pretty paint job? Make: Ford Model: BA Falcon XR6 Turbo Price: $46,005 (as tested) Transmission: 4 speed auto, w/sports shift Engine: 4.0-litre, Inline six-cylinder, 24-valves, turbocharged/intercooled Fuel Consumption: City cycle - 12.5-litres/100km, Highway cycle - 8.0-litres/100km Seats: 5 Safety: Driver and front passenger SRS airbag, ABS, Traction control Drive 2003 BA Ford Falcon XR6 Turbo The turbocharged XR6 Falcon is fast, but one aspect of the car that really surprised me from the get-go was the fact that it's also very refined. The XR6T's power plant is truly a thing of beauty, but far from accepting an overheating, rattly and unreliable mill as part and parcel of significantly improved performance, the XR6T sets new standards for an Australian family car. This not only reflects on Ford Australia and its ability to build a world class inline six-cylinder mill, but the fact that it's turbocharged, and that the engine and gearbox and limited slip differential all work together in relative harmony is an altogether exciting experience. We tested the four-speed automatic model, replete with sports mode tip-tronic shift, and while I generally whinge and whine if I don't get a manual model, things were different here. The auto gearbox is streets ahead of the equivalent Holden slusher, though to GMH's credit a new five-speed automatic will be on offer by 2005. Anyway, Ford's new automatic gearbox contends brilliantly with the glut of torque early in the rev range, and has no quibbles with igniting the rear hoops and giving your fellow drivers a free gift of molten rubber particles if you forget to turn on the traction control. The motivation offered by the turbo mill is expectional. Never has a six-cylinder engine felt so powerful, and in the right hands this vehicle will give V8 Commodore's a real run for their pushrod-based money. The XR6T hits it's powerband very early in the rev range, and what a powerband it is: It begins @ 2000rpm, and with your foot flat to the floor you'll feel your torso being pushed slowly into the supportive seat cushions. By about 3000rpm the Falcon is really hitting it's stride and by now you're passengers will either be grinning malevolently, or screaming at you vociferously for upsetting their normally tranquil digestive processes. By the time the vermillion tacho needle has touched 4000rpm, your passengers won't be the only ones grinning and, when peak power kicks in @ 5250rpm, you'll probably be thinking "Is this legal?" And when you hit the redline in third gear and you're nudging 200km/h, no doubt someone will tell you that no, it is not legal. But the fact of the matter is, you'll be happy to do it all over again as the car's shifting computer decides it's time for another gear ratio and the build up of momentus torque pushes the car forward again, with seemingly more urgency than before. One of the things that had me a little baffled for the first few days was the car's weight: 1664kg ain't exactly what you'd call athletic. But in spite of its generous bulk, the XR6T will hit 100km/h in bang on 6.0 seconds, which is just about line-ball with Holden's SS Commodore (which incidentally has an almost 30 per cent larger engine and two extra cylinders). Ford has delivered the goods with this hi-po Six But more than just the latest Aussie muscle car, a trophy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Careless Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 so how much does one of these engines go for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.