• 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.

cherokee's gm v6 compared to jeep cherokee inlines

Root Moose said:
The T5 used in truck applications IS NOT the same as the "World Class" T5 used in the 80s muscle cars (WCT5, T5WC, whatever).

The T5 is not a strong transmission. The WC version is marginal at best.

I'd look for a different transmission as a long term goal. Run what you have for now if you have to but don't spend any money on adapters for it if you are somehow forced to do so. Move to an OEM transmission that doesn't need adapters or at least a tranmission that is worth spending the money on adapters for (AX-15? NV3550?).
Click to expand...
X2. The T5 basically sucks.
 
See second paragraph of post #9.
 
2.8 has a nasty habit of snapping the crank in two
 
FWIW, My dad bought a '91 S-10 with a 2.8L and a 5-speed. He drove the snot out of it (with probably 800 lbs of tools in the bed) for 8 years then gave it to my brother to drive to college. He also drove the snot out of it until a couple years ago when he gave it to his father in law. It's still running fine, body is starting to go though.
 
By `91 most of the 2.8 stuff was fixed.

Go on a online catalogue site that has rebuild kits for the 2.8... there are like 50 bazillion versions of this engine.

A 2.8 in front of a T5 is plenty fine, that's about the scale of engine that transmission is ok with.
 
:party:well heres my 2 cents worth. Ive got an 86 that came with the 2.8. I swapped in a 92 vortek 4.3 with a 700R/231 combo. by far this was the easiest engine swap ive ever done. I used advance motor mounts wich perfectly placed the engine. astro van rad, s10 exhaust the wiring for the fuel injection was easy. I love it I avg 22mpg running 33's and 4.10 gears and it will smoke the tires on dry pavement
 
This thread got me thinking; could i ever find a GM 60* tranny/transfer case stronger than the ax-5/np207/231? I'm interested because I know my 2.5 has the same GM bolt pattern, but the ax-5 is going out and I don't want to trouble myself only to drop in the same crappy transmission.

I have dreams to swap in an ax-15 with the Dakota bellhousing/slave setup, but the closest 96+ 2.5 dakota is in a junkyard 400 miles away! The cost of shipping (on top of initial) the huge chunk of aluminum would be outrageous...

So, anyone have solutions to this little problem? Would the tranny behind a 3.4L camaro (if I can find a manual) work? More importantly, would a proper t-case (s-10 231?) mate right up to it?

And yes, I can assure you the 2.5 has a GM 60* bellhousing pattern, my dad's suprise was evident enough when we swapped the clutch a while ago (he's worked on many a vehicle in his time).
 
jeepnleo said:
jeep 4.0l 1988- 177hp 224lb-ft
gm 3.4l 160hp 194lb-ft
Click to expand...

Damn, that doesn't seem right.

I've got a 94 Cutlass with that DOHC 3.4, and it'll flat scream. Not a whole lot of bottom end, but you wind it up to a 4300rpm and it will go.

Helluva lot faster than my XJ, and in a car that's 600-800 lbs heavier.

Maybe you're talking about a different 3.4. I dunno.

Robert
 
The DOHC 3.4 is nothing like the 60 degree 3.4 thats based off the 2.8 and the 3.1 engines.

The HP differences from the late model OHV 3.4 and the bulky 3.4 DOHC engines is negligible. I would take the OHV engine over the OHC due to reliability issues and availability of parts. The DOHC engines were ok, but once they hit high milage forget it.

If you could find a Pontiac Grand Prix with the 3.1 turbo engine you could build a nice combo. They would easily outrun the 3.4 DOHC cars any day.
 
Some good info here. 4.0 swap into pre 87 cherokees is possible, though it requires significant fabrication. I did it to my 85. If you have a donor XJ, (rolled 93 4.0/ax-15 in my case) it is more or less a parts swap until you start messing with the radiator, wiring, and fuel system. The firewall modifications were minimal, and basically meant a big freaking dent in my experience.
I have had good experience with the Borg-Warner T-5's. The WC version found in most v-8 mustangs and all camaros/mustangs after 1988 (when they were bought out by TREMEC) is pretty strong, and will stand up to decent amounts of horsepower. I absolutely PUNISHED a non-WC T-5 removed from a 2.8 powered camaro behind a ~400 HP 355ci sbc (not dynoed, but conservative estimate) for a few YEARS before it gave up. It was in an 88 camaro that weighed 3420 with me in it. Granted I never let myself put drag radials on the car, which would have most likely ended it quicker. I am sure there are some guys doubting my HP est. now, so I guess I'll throw some specs out there. About 10:1 CR, Dart Iron Eagle heads with 230cc intake runners, 2.05" intake valves, 1.68" exh valves. Can't remember the exact cam specs, but somewhere around 280ish seat to seat duration with 1.5 full roller rockers, .570 lift solid roller, Victor JR single plane intake. According to the DYNO 2000 program it was over 500HP, but I didn't really believe that. I kinda miss that car.
 
A 502 makes more HP stock for stock. But, LSx engines are so friendly to mods it's crazy. True the cost is higher but the weight savings and huge aftermarket and packaging ease might even it out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

98REDXJ2
1987 Jeep Comanche
Replies
10
Views
160
Bent
Bent
J
Help needed with nightmare XJ ABS to Non-ABS swap...
Replies
0
Views
79
JBinNY
J
Anak
Varmint #Last has been complaining that he wants to lift weights
Replies
4
Views
235
Bent
Bent
Anak
I was bummed John beat me to that Renix that wouldn't pass smog...
Replies
4
Views
107
Bent
Bent
ehall
steering overhaul
Replies
7
Views
145
Evan03
E
Back
Top