End of an era

Sorry if this has been discussed in other threads.

"Kenosha Engine bids farewell to the 4.0 engine line
With a few tears and some fond memories, Kenosha (Wis.) Engine Plant employees had a retirement party last week for the 4.0-liter engine, which the plant has been building for 43 years. The engine has powered the American Motors' Rambler, Gremlin, Pacer, Hornet and then the Jeep® Wrangler and Cherokee models. Two of the engines were signed by all the 4.0-line employees. Eventually, these two pieces of history will be preserved at the Kenosha and Walter P. Chrysler Museums. Currently, they are on display at the Kenosha Engine Plant. Production of the engine officially ends in early June."

Yes DC is replacing the famed 4.0 with those shitty V6's from mini vans. What the fawk are they thinking. The 4.0 has proved itself, so why switch over to a POS?

Sad. i have had one of those motors around in different variations for 20 years. First was a yellow hornet, then a amc concord, then a cj7 and now a xj. i guess after the xj dies i will have to conform to the aluminum engine world.

x99j said:

i guess after the xj dies i will have to conform to the aluminum engine world.

Click to expand...

OR STROKE IT!!!

I think it's because the Germans never forgave us for winning WWII...

I found out about this sometime last year from a guy at the local dealership - apparently, Dammler/Benz has decided, in its rather finite wisdom, that it's more "cost-effective" to order additional new tooling for the 3.7L V6 than to refurbish existing tooling for the 242 I6. Go figure.

You are correct - the engine has proven itself time and again. The SBChevvy has a much longer production run, and is still in production - largely in its original form!

Why D/B would take out a perfectly good inline truck engine and replace it with a half-assed V6 eludes me - but so do most other decisions made by higher-higher. I'd keep the thing around - but then, I like things to work. I also would not have done NVH revisions to the engine either - people are just getting too soft. If you want a smooth, quiet ride - get a Caddy. If you want a truck - get a truck.

Frankly, I like a little engine noise. It lets me know I'm driving something...

5-90

it's a very reliable, sturdy engine - no question. but also a very old one. too big, too heavy, very bad fuel / power ratio... come on, guys. in any other case we'd be telling the car companies to get a grip and move forward...

and eagle,

we germans are really happy that you won the war back then. believe me.
and we never forgot how you helped rebuild germany after it, either.

daimler benz is one of the best engine builders - look at all the old mercs that are still around

Potentially true, but check out the market...

We're not overly concerned with P/W ratio - we're after brute reliability. That started going downhill when ChryCo did NVH updates to the casting, and thinned it in more than a few places.

If aluminum is used to cast an engine block, you still need iron sleeves. Iron sleeves can have coolant leaks into the oil - ever service a Waukeshaw engine?

Fuel/power ratios can be improved somewhat - as can VE and power output. However, with an inline and a V-block engine, the inline will make more torque off-idle and at low RPM than the V-block, all else being equal. V-blocks are good for cars, and inlines are good for trucks. That's why Chevvy is bringing back the I6 (and coupling developement of the I5) in VORTEC trim for their truck line. Ford kept their 300ci I6 around in trucks for a GOOD, LONG while. The I6 is also a fuel-efficient engine, for the power it makes and the displacement it is designed for. Revisions of the cylinder head would improve that somewhat, as well as revisions to the ignition system (I'd like to see more magnetos on car engines, myself. Damn things just WORK.)

D/B may build good Benz engines, but I don't suppose there are that many "old" Mercedes engines cast out of aluminum, are there? Just wondering...

Too big? Maybe - but what about the Dodge V10 and the Ford (I think) V12? Those are about as long as the inline six, and they're selling rather well. Heavy as Hell, too...

If we were concerned with "getting a grip and moving ahead," the Small Block Chevvy, Small Block Ford, and Small Block Chrysler engines would have disappeared about 20 years ago. They're still around, and still doing well - so why shoot a good horse that's got a lot of race left in him? Makes no sense to me...

5-90

There are a few reasons for the change, the primary of which is that it would be nearly impossible to make the 4.0 or variants meet new emissions standards due to a multitude of reasons. The new engine is the pushrod 3.8L as seen in mini-vans for a long while now. Is it reliable and somewhat powerful- yes it is. Is it torquy like the 4.0-no, it prefers a relatively high range of operation. This engine is NOT related to the 3.7 that is used in other Jeep products.

As to the comparision to the SBC mentioned above, the current Chevy v8 is a Gen 3 derivative, commonly known as the LSx series engines after the original LS1 that utilized the current design. The only commonality between the LSx style engines and the traditional SBC in either Gen 1 or Gen 2 form is bore spacing. Nothing, repeat, nothing is shared otherwise. GM was forced to redesign the small block in order to meet efficiency goals and emissions demands starting in the 1997 model Corvette, and they have since replaced the traditional SBC with the Gen 3 across the model line.

Greg


Edit- Ford and Chrysler have also phased out their traditional pushrod motors over the last few years. Ford went with the questionable modulars and Chrysler with the 4.7/Hemi. All of these motors are designed around higher temperature burns, oil control and other emissions related improvements.

For the 4.0 to stay viable it would have to be redesigned with a crossflow head with much greater flow numbers, better quench, and better/more even flow through the intake manifold. The Chevy Vortec I6 is a high reving DOHC design, it is NOT torquey like we think of, redline is at 6300rpm.

I like traditional I6 engines, but from an efficiency standpoint they don't hold a candle. As a point of comparision, the new Corvette Z06 with a 7.0L V8, which makes 500+ hp as rated by Chevy, gets over 25mpg on the highway.

Someone from DCX at the local auto show told me the 2 main reasons for the dropping of the 4.0 was new crashworthyness requiremnts were very hard to meet with an inline six in the new wrangler to come out... (the GM Atlas is an inline 6 and does it fine in the trailblazer) so im not really buying that.. and reason # 2 was it was impossible to tweak it to be an LEV engine for the envirionental folks

bmw builds the best straight six'es into their newest cars - so the crash problem is not a direct i6 issue, for sure...

Like other said the 4.0 would have to have some major improvements to continue on. It's cheaper to throw a V6 in then redo the 4.0, no arguing that. It's a decision I think they will regret though.

Its called "Planned Obsolecense"

The 4.0 like the Ford 300 I-6 and the Chrysler Slant six didn't die of "natural causes" quick enough for the big three to be able to "rape" us when we had to buy a new car or major engine parts every 2-3 years.

The next sad day will be when Toyota does away with the 22RE.

It angers me to think about it, but I'll enjoy my 3 XJ's as long as they are still running and I figure I've got another ten years or so on all 3 of them.

the 2000-01 Cherokee met LEV requirements. I'm pretty sure the Wrangler/TJ should be meeting them now, unless they've changed since 2000.

Edit: u have to remember too where jeep is going. Next year they come out with the Compass and Patriot which are AWD and based on the Dodge Caliber platfrom. I never thought I would say this but I'm going to be sad to see the KJ go (word on the street says that the Compass/Patriot are whats going to replace the KJ) that put together with a 4 door Wrangler power by a Cryco minivan V6 is enough to make me want to never buy a Jeep newer than 2001.

One day I found out that my neighbor was driving around in her late 80's Wagoneer (XJ, with the 4.0) with NO serpentine belt. Apparently, the water pump had seized and eaten the belt. So she drove the thing like that... That engine still runs! Goodbye, 4.0. :tears:

it is sad when the corporate man "the man" decides what we want? i guess it is a direct result of the majority not complaining enough? i think xjtrailrider is right, planned obsolecense is the plan. they don't want something easy to work on that lasts 300,000-400,00 miles. instead they want complex junk that will spur the next purchase when we get frustrated with all the electronic crap. hello obd 3. i guess the epa isn't innocent either. 4.0l R.I.P.

Its the case of a company building something to good (4.0) they have the plan that everyone should buy a new car every 3 to 5 years. These XJ's have messed up their plans, I don't think they thought these XJs would last for over 400K if taken care of.
I personally think I will start buying up 4.0 parts and make mine last till I die.
I'll show them.

I think if enough people bitch about it, a straight 6 could return to the Jeep lineup. DC dare not mess with the Wrangler basic design platform. The '07 stays true to its form with folding windshield, removable doors, removable top, etc. I remember when everyone cried 'heresey' when the '87 Wrangler replaced the CJ. Back to the topic, I still don't think it's cool to replace a 40 year old engine design with a 17 year old 'off the shelf' unit. I think if enough people send letters or emails to DC, there might be a new I6 on the horizon. I know I'll at least send 'em a nasty email!:sunshine:

The main reason DC is doing this is cost - it's the #1 reason that fuels executives' decisions. The motor won't meet stricter emissions that will be set and rather than try to revamp a motor that is only used in one vehicle (or can you still get it in the Grand?) it is cheaper and far easier to just put the V6 in. The V6 is a solid motor although it doesn't have the characteristics (low end torque, easy to work on, etc) that we all love about the 4.0. The Caravans (which houses these V6's) are used as taxis and we also use them at the post office - they take a lot of abuse in those lines of work and are very reliable. I've seen cabs w/ several hundred thousand miles and although none of our vans have that high mileage (I think the highest at our office is around 50k) it is a much tougher 50k than just about any personal owned vehicle I could think of.

Micha said:

it's a very reliable, sturdy engine - no question. but also a very old one. too big, too heavy, very bad fuel / power ratio... come on, guys. in any other case we'd be telling the car companies to get a grip and move forward...

Click to expand...

If it's such a crappy engine, why does my friend's V6 Liberty get significantly worse gas mileage than my I6 Cherokee?