• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

4.6 build starts today!!!

And my apologies to the OP and everyone else on this thread...I really did just want to see bigger HP numbers...wasn't trying to trash this awesome thread.
 
Jeep Driver said:
Your link went nowhere........just like you, nothing and nowhere.
Click to expand...



I don't know, it looks like it went somewhere lol
38dd8dd12f278a19f34303af77515330.jpg
 
Jeep Driver said:
Take your smartphone and run a vid, I want to see your tach run through 7200 with the speedo.


Do it or STFU.

Both of you.


You claim, now prove it.
Click to expand...

Not possible, started parting the car out about three weeks ago. Probably wouldn't bother if it were possible.

And yes, I did make it personal. You come here to our forums and make big claims about everyone but you not knowing what they are talking about. We have been working with and collaborating on these vehicles for 20 years. As a group we have plenty of experience to share and a strong idea who's talking out their ass, and who's so full of it there eyes are brown. My own build thread is one of the better documented builds in XJ history.

You sir are an ass. We all know it. None of us care.
 
Jeep Driver said:
Air flow, air flow, air flow.......these engines do not flow. Intake and exhaust limit you for one......cam choice would be another.......I don't recall you mentioning any of that, intakes suck for sure. If anything the intake is smothering any chance of making power above 3500rpm.

Guys expect something that is not there, will never be there.
Click to expand...

I tried multiple Strokers. I will never do it again. Not worth the uncertainty nor the cost. But I did notice decent feel of the butt power. Dyno was disappointing, but that likely was due to not able to Keep the 32RH in to 2nd gear. kept starting in 1st, and no way to hold in 2nd.

I do know my Aluminum Edelbrock head flowed more than my camelback SBC heads did on many of 68-72 cevelles, el caminos, and firebird I have owned and built over the last 30 years of building cars/jeeps/etc..

As well as from what I have seen, it outflowed many BBC oval port heads that were OE, or even aftermarket untouched... Including most OE and aftermarket SBC head out there.

And so that you dont go crying to momma about all lies....
http://users.erols.com/srweiss/tablehdc.htm#Chevy
Theres reference for head flows that I quickly found.
And here is MY head flow...
3RbJZZ-1EHmyBuq24HU0JfwRWTj2Ie3HFffsIdWtoodQi98ivIzzeGNwCAEGyGTR0_Rk5XR1Ki3A4PmedjoBNzsbUcHorsTIK7DUeBpdcDpKSeA6WN0K5ugof7IzxVE-G7wqqcHFnz-y_KjeHQdZMKlVWX6Tr7AAJHLfSIJRh77S9xJqkEqOpVbdI9qEKbPWkXUZWBs4i7hUjW6CGUtmFSgWiaZ6tXa8LVsVSuOGYMDMjWfQYuZzpBujHAGd-bhtKDgGNlY-HdgcPJ27CkLQmY5aVTYe036WVfamNi4W-q5MvuxXDh0REKVXrfa0PF22jc7IbFvo0B8LGOYj00j2brf2YUzyrdROVOrLeeQJEgSL9fv3uxC1vwZzgTvlyg_WZwp7H8XdD08Wvi-0MTTHRTvkPQEU0MVQGkgBAwv1H6u4lR1tHfFO6oa9Oq_1oKZmVMOGUZzK8TFjdZ8uFh5gEMLa5T5-qRexI9NWUzrRXn0KYxJjyRcvQeT8E1CSdGgWeMYVT5MR796VRIGYomc26oNW9KtdK-1wzrwuWePUkVftpSf1LYP7E1O-v39sqp0VLbFxCCobu03Y64eQd_qE6g8PFCQuy7gwy-Iw73QheBTZbJqxmpUpeQ=w480-h640-no



And what it looked like...
Lt0twPmfAHBLW5hb1drcEJiG1lsXXEl7w1j1tPCaHsrUrMUG0OiiZxYQGt3C5XUPdfXka-vqwJNBJKkViR6awo2AzfUoFm_LVeoMZ-oe-58t8zkwC0qKjsWBEMtM3KhJafOMTH2dMq4KiyQrGdVb9LXzDZuSRDjUxTrWqgt2e8wua4K70k1BDL7kT94CeNVGSkqvicordJdMS0R2btnFxYNxmv7J1feA6eyRL-bD4ttsdJkRzk6LQ3IdmPOmxnkE96W58Wvj-Spkdtf9qTuQ2xpfVxbnIUrbFIHgt_ikjqFr1kmrzZXk4Ou1853QkeA9XGPzkR0ME6eWzARn0sEhiShu3N9jDbks1BpCGv7K-CGk_jGx21ghOaIHGS8I7iRbRQQzcZnbKPqltf_iBCUsCJbGOKjMDioHeXJHyDzONwKGwE-pr4bXpwZRQdQsLx0zZDq7y-0Gkp_A1LQfWovt6W1BfCDnN6m9ZxHhutgnXVqzvBnymRrkwKDmJKgq2fy6la4I2UMP7DVmO3MiIOfpeZUrisJKA53MSibiWnwdmjzSQUDGjXiWBHLH8M4fzxPBBtVZjxF5E64I8_7vVJtph-PkIVJNPP0uRWqeV6KaeYqpGQ_9MPcy=s1152-no


Its the one in red...
WUCslsgccCu-d0G85mM-y_Na4-jpGX-pinRdi5q6YVGYCmY5-mFd6z_sZwDXNUMlFy_2-RmApjxS3fjIoBlb4qWJMeG4127x9wQ8JP-pbXtGvhr9tI1ellwUw9bWm0joXICWRuhxO8N8VsNYGaP_QBQbF3H5IX3r6YfRmzcTImJmP200EMsa24wcsuId7IlU2Oflnc6wRSQujWC41Wmk2xksUmd39e4Hr8p-s9Xcs-DaDleffuLo1j3GgatOGdqqKzFrzMuOf2i56tqmkU13VVXyivUn_pm_oaJOyjTZmIptt9ZqpIb8FLjUYccPF_PHG6xouk9wYq0tz2W1vf89pUzAS5Ga1Luwq60KfO4-8IVZ5aWwBCROuanfokBuLuy681mVFjpm0DwgVIH9Q_CNKW4WITdTlK7k_sW6_XzCCabf8IyN-TcgHSMRAWi9UYyTuKoMyI9xaaO-U9T_wIxjEnws1HIpGqnw0b8kfQ1yqmXNkHAUQckv4syRvDDMcvsMksOhXK-9JkHbu_0kCmpABYFPc81mZgVzLeKjJQXNhu9vxBCqSJSBbB2iv5WeUmmhAzfDhctMVmovint_-zLnh3Jyiq4SBmn0ZuC5vfNygiBvqres-8mE_A=w1024-h683-no
 
A few of my thoughts to hopefully add some clarity and address some misconceptions.

Ron contacted me and started this thread with the purpose of building a 4.6 stroker based off a late-model coil pack head with the goal of making good low-end torque with a emphasis on reliability and to easily pass smog.

The engine consists of a Scat 3.985 stroke Crankshaft with a set of my steel bushed connecting rods, Bishop-Buehl/RaceTec 4032 forged pistons. The 0331 head is fully ported with stainless Chevy LS valves and springs, Harland Sharp rollers along with a very conservative Comp cam grind. The iIntake is port matched and opened up to except a 62 mm throttlebody.

I spoke with Mike at Lopers Performance today to clarify questions that I had along with giving me some feedback. He said that Ron nailed it with the choice of 27 pound injectors and confirmed that he made a high gear runs that netted 227HP and 396TQ to the rear wheels putting flywheel horse power at just over 300HP without having to go to 4000 RPM.
Mike said with more pulls and trimming the fuel the power and torque would've increased further.

At this point Ron's objectives were met and no more pulls or changes needed to be made.
Ron is still running his stock exhaust pipe, catalytic converter and muffler.

Don't hesitate to call me if anybody has any questions or would like to discuss stroker kit packages

Russ Pottenger
Bishop-Buehl Racing Engines
531 N. Lyall Avenue
West Covina, California 91790
Work (626) 967-1000
Cell (626) 673-2203
Email/PayPal: [email protected]
 
I'll elaborate on that thought.........knowing that the basic math of the motor means almost nothing.......my original contact with Russ was about his headwork as I had heard so many good things about him. The numbers that were achieved were far from anything I imagined when I started and his professionalism and devotion to each project gets my highest respect.
 
RCP Phx said:
I got a call from Chris Monday afternoon to go over some fine points, I told him of my current plans. Well I received my new injectors today! They are sold as 27@49 psi. The only marking is XF1E-A5B that translates to (0 280 155 849). They are engraved with "27" which I assume is the tested flow rate @ 49psi. I will try to get them in tonight with results soon after.
I should add that they are going to replace some 0 280 156 077 injectors I bought last fall that are supposed to be 24@49.
Click to expand...

So these are the injectors I found.
https://fuelinjectorconnection.com/collections/jeep-rebuilt-injectors/products/jeep-stroker-4-0-99-2004-injector-27lb-set
FIC_1_Single.jpg
 
Russ Pottenger said:
A few of my thoughts to hopefully add some clarity and address some misconceptions.

Ron contacted me and started this thread with the purpose of building a 4.6 stroker based off a late-model coil pack head with the goal of making good low-end torque with a emphasis on reliability and to easily pass smog.

The engine consists of a Scat 3.985 stroke Crankshaft with a set of my steel bushed connecting rods, Bishop-Buehl/RaceTec 4032 forged pistons. The 0331 head is fully ported with stainless Chevy LS valves and springs, Harland Sharp rollers along with a very conservative Comp cam grind. The iIntake is port matched and opened up to except a 62 mm throttlebody.

I spoke with Mike at Lopers Performance today to clarify questions that I had along with giving me some feedback. He said that Ron nailed it with the choice of 27 pound injectors and confirmed that he made a high gear runs that netted 227HP and 396TQ to the rear wheels putting flywheel horse power at just over 300HP without having to go to 4000 RPM.
Mike said with more pulls and trimming the fuel the power and torque would've increased further.

At this point Ron's objectives were met and no more pulls or changes needed to be made.
Ron is still running his stock exhaust pipe, catalytic converter and muffler.

Don't hesitate to call me if anybody has any questions or would like to discuss stroker kit packages

Russ Pottenger
Bishop-Buehl Racing Engines
531 N. Lyall Avenue
West Covina, California 91790
Work (626) 967-1000
Cell (626) 673-2203
Email/PayPal: [email protected]
Click to expand...

Holy crap. In that case, well done to you and Ron! :cheers:

400ft/lbs out of a 4.6, in OD, and with a stock exhaust! Just sounds too good to be true.
 
RCP Phx said:
Well, today was the big day and it came off perfectly! The guys at Lopers said they hadn't seen such a strong motor!

Max rear wheel horsepower = 227hp
Max rear wheel torque = 396 ft/lbs

AFR's were great with just a slight fattening under 50% dyno load and WOT.

I think I'm done now!
Click to expand...

Good numbers but I am curious on how you got them.

What I mean is after reading and rereading the thread I cannot see where you show a pull in 1:1 gear ratio. Which typically is how engines are measured on a chassis dyno. Several others have bought this up and unless I am missing it the question has yet to be answered.

The wide difference in HP/TQ tends to point this out also. Not saying it isn't true but I am having trouble believing those numbers as shown.

I've run a number of strokers on the chassis dyno. Several with more compression/cam and the numbers fall a bit short of what your reporting.

If you take into account parasitic drag of say 20% than your engine is making ~273 HP and 480 ft lbs of TQ at the crank.

My runs with a manual trans with 1:1 typically show HP in the 225/235 but at mid 4`s for RPM. TQ is 245/255 lbs @ around 37/3900.

At the crank is calculated around 270`s HP and 310`s TQ. Which works out to about a 20% parasitic drag.

Don't think your torque numbers are based on a industry standard of 1:1. There has to be some gear multiplication involved.
 
Wednesday morning I spoke with Mike at Lopers Performance who personally ran the chassis Dino test on their Dyno Jet.
Because the numbers can be easily manipulated by gear reduction, my first question to him was his numbers generated at 1:1 . His answer was yes.
 
fzsk4p said:
Good numbers but I am curious on how you got them.

The wide difference in HP/TQ tends to point this out also. Not saying it isn't true but I am having trouble believing those numbers as shown.

I've run a number of strokers on the chassis dyno. Several with more compression/cam and the numbers fall a bit short of what your reporting.

If you take into account parasitic drag of say 20% than your engine is making ~273 HP and 480 ft lbs of TQ at the crank.

My runs with a manual trans with 1:1 typically show HP in the 225/235 but at mid 4`s for RPM. TQ is 245/255 lbs @ around 37/3900.

At the crank is calculated around 270`s HP and 310`s TQ. Which works out to about a 20% parasitic drag.

Don't think your torque numbers are based on a industry standard of 1:1. There has to be some gear multiplication involved.
Click to expand...

Russ Pottenger said:
Wednesday morning I spoke with Mike at Lopers Performance who personally ran the chassis Dino test on their Dyno Jet.
Because the numbers can be easily manipulated by gear reduction, my first question to him was his numbers generated at 1:1 . His answer was yes.
Click to expand...

All of my builds are with a 7120 or an 0630 head. Late model intake and a BBK 62mm TB. Several different headers but all are relatively the same. In addition the engines are OBD2 with aftermarket tuning support.

Not saying the numbers are wrong but I am really struggling to understand the wide difference between HP and TQ. Plus how this engine is making almost 500 ft lbs at the crank or 400 at the wheels. The efficiency numbers and airflow just don't add up.

If this was an LS series engine I could swallow the numbers but it isn't.

My next dyno session is on the 29th. This engine has a Clay Smith cam, 9.75 compression, 0630 head with stock valves with a little unshrouding. The head itself with a basic short side radius, cleanup and port matching.

Lets see how that setup works.
 
One factor that has not been touched is how the dyno is set up.

My testing is done with a 3300 lb. load roller.

If the OP's dyno was set up to a lessor value that would explain the higher TQ numbers. The ratio may have been 1:1 but if the load is reduced the numbers would be skewed. Sorta like how long it takes to rev in neutral vs. in gear.

This represents a classic example of not being able to compare numbers from one dyno to another.

Don't get me wrong. I really respect Russ's work but the numbers here just don't add up.
 
RCP Phx said:
It was done on a rolling dyno thru all gears and with different loads!
QUOTE]

I found the red herring in this data. There is no constant and likely torque was enhanced by gearing.


This formula is the accepted means of calculating HP based on physics.

Multiply torque by the engine speed (measured in rpm), then divide that by 5,252 to get the horsepower at that rpm level.

Boostwerks.com
user_offline.gif

NAXJA Supporting Vendor




in post #75 hit it on the head.

Your peak HP number was 227. Not knowing when this peak occured however, I'd have to assume the RPM. Just googling some graphs of 4.6L strokers it looks like peak HP is around 4500-5000RPM.

Plugging in for an assumed 4500rpm peak, I end up with about 265ft/lbs which sounds about right.

His findings are close to what I measure in a true 1:1 pull on a 3300lb load chassis dyno.

Anit no way in hell that engine is laying down close to 400 at the wheels in 1:1 ratio. Nor is it twisting close to 500 (480) at the crank based on a 20% parasitic drag factor.

Again, I want to stress that in no way am I trying to rain on the results. What I am trying to do is add some validity to the reported results.

Folks go off thinking they can duplicate these specs and build a package that is going to stomp higher efficiency engines. Then end up wondering where the power is........
Click to expand...
 
You guys in the biz of 4.0 stroker utopia need to clean up your mess.

This is my last post on this subject.

Below is a vid and FF for the NHRA record holding 4.0 Comanche.

New owner since out of storage.......he's gone through one AW4 and broke a cam already.
Note, custom long-tube header, you want RPM, long tubes, and you cannot have long tubes with 4x4. Also, note his trial and error with intake modification and experimentation.

You may very well get a head to flow, but it's the entire package. Stock intakes are where you stroker guys have missed the boat.

His shift point is 6K, he shuts it down at 6500.

There is no way you guys are building efficient, reliable, productive strokers that will run through 7K. Just like CobraMarty and his supercharger bullshit.........you guys need to put a stop to the propagation of lies.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMS9mK0H6sU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obYaYspo44A

https://www.facebook.com/SeitzRacingTeam/
 
Last edited:
RCP Phx said:
It was done on a rolling dyno thru all gears and with different loads!
Lopers is one of the best race shops in Phoenix, the shop has been here since 67 and John Loper has been winning drag races even before that!
Click to expand...

Man! I don't think some of you would buy the numbers if they were signed off by "NASA"!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Started my 4.7 Stroker build today.
4 5 6
Replies
101
Views
10K
sidewaysstarion
sidewaysstarion
redneck
Built 1995 Jeep Cherokee XJ in Arizona
Replies
1
Views
2K
redneck
redneck
T
Bombshell Betty Is for sale...
Replies
8
Views
2K
Team Willys
T
B
Newbie '92 Build
Replies
3
Views
364
bryanmcdan
B
Jeepedo129
Need some stroker advice!!!!
Replies
12
Views
474
Talyn
Talyn
Back
Top