The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area General Truck Talk Jeep Six in a Stovebolt

GMCPanel was saying he likes to think of his Cherokee straight-six as a "Jeepbolt", haha...it got me to wondering whether anyone here has ever used a modern Jeep six in an old Chevy or GMC?

That is an interesting idea! I've got a 96 Cherokee and the 4.0 six is a very good engine. Lots of good ones around the wreckers too. Probably would have to use the Jeep transmission as well.4.0 with a 5 speed or OD automatic would make a nice powertrain in an old truck.

You know that's cross breeding don't you? It's almost as bad as putting a 350 under your hood (so some say).
Scott

this is true, but isn't America the great melting pot?

I'm gonna make believe I never read this!

Wasn't Jeep once owned by GM? and what motor did they use in it back then?
Jamo

I know before the 4.0 there was a 258 straight-six...I dont know who made it though...I'm answering your rhetorical questions because I dont think this idea is so sacreligious...There was a thread a while back in the big bolts forum about putting a diesel in a medium duty bolt, and some of the ideas there were even more outrageous...International T444s (can you say "powerstroke"?), 4 cylinder detroits, and Cummins diesels in a bolt...it makes a Jeep 4.0 seem downright at home under a chevy hood

My Cherokee is even a stick-shift...as most AD trucks were. Try finding a 4.0, 5-speed, late-model Cherokee - it's not fun.

Take a look at the YJ or TJ's..(wranglers in the south) they have sticks. My daughter's '87 Yj has a 4.2 litre 6.

The 4.0 is a de-stroked 258 which is an AMC (American Motors Corporation) design.

The AMC 232 and 258 cubic inch sixes were purchased from International. International also produced the AMC V-8's that were used in the cars and the Jeep, or at least they made the basic castings, etc. I knew an International foundry engineer who told me about the whole process. The V-8's were available as 290, 304, 343, 360, 390, and 401 engines, all on the same basic block, like smalllock Chevy engines. I ran the V-8's in Ambassador cars and wagons for many years. Good engines!
Jerry

That's interesting, Jerry. I didn't know 'bout the "binder" connection. I liked the 290 in my Javelin SST and my brother (the Bill in BillyBob) had a 304 in his Gremlin.

A Sonar Man and his Gremlin

AMC or really Rambler also had 327s in the Marlin. I think the jeep lineage was Willys, AMC, and then Chrysler. I have a 47 willys I am trying to do up.

Arnswine, you forgot two important companies; The American Bantam Car Company, and Kaiser. American Bantam of Butler, PA, designed and built the first US Army Jeep. Willys, and Ford Motor Company had the manufacturing capacity, so they were awarded the contracts to build most of them for WWII. Willys started production of the Civilian Jeep (CJ) ASAP after the war ended.

In 1963 Kaiser bought the Willys firm, and kept making the prime product, The Jeep. The Kaiser organization sold the firm in 1971 to Roy D. Chapin, Jr., the CEO of American Motors.

I have a 96 cherokee and think the 4.0 is great. I have considered one in my 52 dodge pickup and my 53 gmc pickup

I'm going with a 250 L22 6 in my panel, but I love the 4.0 in my Cherokee. Good power, decent acceleration, and good economy with a stick behind it.

I had a '67 Jeep Commando with the optional V6. It was a 225 Buick engine, and I think I recall that the Buick (350?) V8 was available in the full size Jeeps of that era.

When AMC took over they put in their bulletproof (7 main bearing) straight six, and the 304 V8. The six was available in displacements of 199, 232 and 258, but I think they only put the 258 in Jeeps. In the full size Jeeps you could get the 6, or the 360 or 401.

In 1980 they started offering the GM "Iron Duke" four cylinder in the Jeep and some of the cars. It was kind of gutless, but durable. In '82 they made some changes to the 6 cyl, lightening it up by 90 pounds. (Only available as a 258 by then...) I recall that we could never get that plastic valve cover to seal very well. It only had two screws to hold it on, located in the top of the valve cover, so we would pull it off, silicone the joined area, and the put the cover back on with very minimal torque on the two screws to avoid warping it.

I was not only an avid Jeeper back then, but actually worked at a dealership selling them. We used to have a lot of fun scouring the junkyards for parts to build Frankenstein six cylinders. There was one year, ('67 I think) that a six cylinder in an Ambassador had a two barrel manifold. That manifold with an adapter and a small 4 bbl carb, a split exhaust manifold (or a set of headers), 232 shortblock and 258 head (short stroke, big valves) was a gutsy combination.

Personally, I would look for an AMC six cylinder prior to the plastic valve cover model.

By the way, their automatic prior to the 1980s was a GM TH400. The trans was rotated slightly and redrilled to fit the AMC block. I put one in my '69 Javelin with a B&M shift kit and it was an entirely different car. Sometime in the '80s they switched to the Chrysler 737 Torqueflite. Another rock-solid automatic.

Advance Adapters in Pasa Robles CA may still be around. They used to make adapters for all kinds of engine/trans swaps for Jeeps. They may have a kit to put your preferred tranny behind a Jeep six. I used their stuff to put a Saginaw 4 speed from a Camaro behind the Buick V6 in my Jeep.

Afaik it's pretty easy to fuel inject a 258 using 4.0 parts, and the heads are somewhat interchangeable. However, it may be a step backwards in reliability over a 250 or 292. A lot of Jeepers put 292's in CJ's. The 258 is not known for fuel economy, either.

This is all interested stuff. BradB, I'm surprised to learn that the Jeep 258 had 7 main bearings, because I knew a kid in high school that drove an early wrangler with that motor, and the mains were so loud it sounded like a diesel. Unless it was the rod bearings. Either way, the low-end was pretty smacked up.

I've owned a couple of Cherokee 4.0's with 5 speeds bought used.The one we own now is a 96.Around here,about half the Cherokees are 5 spds it seems.The 96 is pretty snotty when ya rev it up,specially only pushing 3000 lbs of cheap Jeep,The engine is rated at around 190 HP,but doesn't feel stronger than my S10 4.3 5 spd with 160 or so HP..
I agree with Four on de Floor,why bother with non GM stuff in a GM,any Chevy part for a 250 6 is cheaper than AMC/Chrysler stuff.Since the engine is in an old truck,you can build reasonable power with a Chevy 250-292 without emission concerns.
The multiport Jeep injection sounds good,but it's a speed density system which doesn't lend it's self to modification easily(expensive)

Jeep was never owned by GM. Jeep, when produced by Kaiser and then AMC, used a combination of parts from the Big Three, plus in-house parts from AMC.

The AMC 327 (yes, it's an AMC-built engine!) came out in the 1956 Hudson and Nash cars, as well as the Ramblers sold by both companies. Nash bought Hudson in early 1954. The combined two were called American Motors Company. On 1 May 1954, Hudsons built after that shared the main body structures with the Nashes, but had unique interiors, engines, and body panels. Hudsons continued to use the Hudson 202 and 308 flathead Sixes, as well as the AMC 327 and the Packard 352 V-8 ('56 only for the Packard and the rotten UltraMatic). The last Hudsons and Nashes rolled off the line in Kenosha on 14 Oct 1957 as 1957 models. The Rambler was the only full-sized car sold by AMC after that. AMC contined to sell Metropolitans until 1962. Mets are often mistakenly called Nash Metropolitans for all years, though they wore Nash or Hudson badges from 1953-1957, then were just Metropolitans after that (though they say "American Motors" on the underhood VIN tag).

What does this have to do with Jeep sixes. Nothing. Just thought I'd share a little AMC history with ya!

It's OK Scott 'cause the offspring are sterile.

The thing that bugs me the most is putting a Chevy (350) in a Ford. GACKKK! [img]http://www.norcalspeedshop.com/oldtruck/forum/smilies/expression_yuck.gif[/img]

[img]http://www.norcalspeedshop.com/oldtruck/forum/images/chevydeuce.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.norcalspeedshop.com/oldtruck/forum/smilies/sign_nothatway.gif[/img]

I don't mind Chevy in a Ford so much. As a friend of mine once said while looking at a Chevy motor in a Jeep; "its been done so much its almost a factory option."

What I hate to see is a Ford in a Chevy! Why would anyone do that?

I'm agreeing with you, Oldsub...in fact, it's kinda cool to see a chevy drivetrain in a Ford...it means a F@rd lover is willing to concede the OBVIOUS superiority of chevrolet components

Hmm...I'm going to use a speed density injection system on my L22 250. Since I want to change the fuel maps, spark timing, etc. from the V6 programming in the computer, it's easier to use SD than mess with an expensive and rather fragile MAF.

I haven't looked much at the older Cherokees. The last two years of production had an improved transmission, but weren't built in great numbers.

this would be nice on one of those jeep motors:

http://sites.reachtheworld.tv/waterNew/default.asp?T=506254&DID=1225

Over-rev them in 4 low a few times and you can do that to them. I've seen very healthy engines of several designs fail to survive a driver who was not smart enough to realize that.

GMCpanel, about that improved transmission...they started using the high torque capacity trans used in the Grand Cherokee (for the 318 V8), probably to shut a factory down and save some money. My dad had an '87 Cherokee with a really tight 157,000 mile AMC designed automatic, and the two Jeep's I've known with later model high torque autos were slippery on the 1-2 shift

The AMC 327 predated the Chevy engine by 5 years, and the Studebaker 289 was developed WAY before Ford got the idea! Nothing new in the world, they just reinvent everything every few years!
Jerry

Sawby, this is a stick, not an auto. My old one was a 2001 automatic, and I didn't notice anything off with the shifting.

The 4.0 with a 5 speed had some tranny problems,the trans is a Japanese unit also used in some Toyota trucks.The 5 speed was upgraded in the mid 90's I believe.Both the 86 and 89 5spd Cherokees I owned at weak syncros,specially 2 nd gear.The 96 we have now seems to shift smoother,I use Redline oil in the tranny,made a big improvement.
GMC Panel,does your Cherokee suffer from what I call hyper throttle response? The low first gear with the quick throttle and rubbery motor mounts makes first to second smooth shifting a little difficult.Other guys with stick Cherokees have told me the same thing.
I'm also thinking,like many late model injected engines,the 4.0 has a computer controlled rpm governor,around 5200 rpm.I don't see over reving taking out main bearings.
About the speed density injection on 4.0 Jeeps:a few years back I put on a free flow Dynomax exhaust,seemed to be a little slower after the change.A few days ago I replaced the rusted out Dynomax exhaust with run of the mill parts store muffler and pipes.The Jeep now is faster with better throttle response with the more restrictive exhaust.The stock SD engine management doesn't have the ability to richen the mixture to cope with a better exhaust and or air induction changes.
I don't know all that much about computer remapping,but it seems it will take a lot of on the road testing or dyno work to get it right.

Has anyone measured the jeep motor to see if its about the same length as a 216 or 235,my 37 is going to get a newer six when it come out of hibernation in a couple of years. I decided to park it last night after I found out there is not too much clutch left due to the leaky rear main and I am tired of the original trans and torque tube rearend,if I am going to pull the motor to re seal it I will just put a newer six in its place along with a newer driveline and brakes. Since I am not a diehard chevy person I do not care what motor I put in as long as I dont have to cut it up to install the motor. Jeff

Jeff,the Jeep engine is about 32 inches long,pretty much the same as a 235 or 230-292 Chevy,the oil pan shape may or may not be an issue. The head has 12 ports,might be a better brether than a 250 Chevy.This model engine has a sheetmetal tube header from the factory.There is speed equipment available for the 4.0 engine,gotta be more expensive to build that a 250 Chevy 6 though.

These Jeep engines are everywhere. Good, strong reliable, cheap (in stock form - as Tony said).

Tony, I haven't noticed anything. When I was looking for a stick shift, everyone I talked to said that the 2000 and 01 models had an improved and stronger transmission...I guess they straightened out that shifting issue. It seems to shift fine between 1st and 2nd.

As far as remapping the computer specs, there is a lot of information out there for GM computers. Basically it's just a matter of tweaking the numbers for the slightly different displacement, and a lot of experimentation to get it the way I want.

my bad about the transmissions...a friend of mine blew a 1995 wrangler 5-speed about 100 miles short of the warranty cut-off of 36,000.

A T-5 will bolt right up to a Jeep 6, there is even a World Class version available from 4WD Hardware. There is also a Jeep to GM tranny bellhousing available.

The Chrysler TorqueFlite trannies are 727, NOT 737!!!

The only things common about the GM 327 and the AMC 327 is the number of cubic inches. Same with the Stude 289 and Ford 289.

OldSub, about that factory option quip, I think the 2.8 V6 used in early Cherokees (pre-1987, when the 4.0 was introduced) was a chevy motor...so, it was a factory option!