[HoleShot]

If you were a registered user, you would not be seeing this!

Let's see, there was the 4.0L which was a good inline six and then there was a 258 cu. in. inline six too back in the 70's-80's I think that was an AMC moptor I think. That's back aways! :unsure:

[My Wife Is A CJ]

Bigalexe, on Sep 9 2006, 05:07 PM, said:

My sister was told that Jeep produced an engine prior to 2000 that was nearly bulletproof in the reliability catefory. She was told that any vehicle she found one in may be a rustbucket but it was worth it for the engine and the guy who told her this said that he drove one to 500,000 miles (yes thats 1/2 million). Can anyone tell me what engine and vehicle this guy was talking about?

I believe your sister is talking about the 4.0 inline six found in several model Grand Cherokee's, Box Cherokee's, Wranglers, Commanches and so on. Anyways, I've witnessed many of these engines go hundreds of thousands of miles with simple maintenance. I highly recommend them.

[D100man]

Any jeep Inline model engines are VERY stout motors. the 4.0 FI, 258, 232, even the 2.5 4 bangers are solidly built IF taken care of. the 232 goes back to early 60's and was used in the early J series trucks, then the longer stroke 258 was made in early 70's. the 4.0 was issued in 1987 as a fuel injected model for the cherokee xj and later put into the wrangler in 1991. the 4.0 lasted untill 2004 or so in the grand cherokee and 06 in the wrangler. one of the best built engines due to 7 main bearings made them last forever. its too bad that DC discontinued the motor for a v6. but really all jeeps are reliable and American built goodness if taken care of, so i would recommend any jeep if looking for a 4x4 utility vehicle. I LOVE EM :P





D100man

[geeaea]

Yep ..very few design flaws in the 4.0. A diesel that runs on gas. Flat torque curve. They just aren't fuel squeezers ..nor exciting. They will last forever with good oil changes.

It's a shame that it ran into emissions issues. I think a 99 is the best all around. It's got the better intake manifold ..and doesn't have the intregrated pre-cats that the 2000 on up have. If that goes bad, you're looking at a grand to have someone else fix it.

[Bob_Sheaves]

D100man, on Sep 13 2006, 08:56 PM, said:

Any jeep Inline model engines are VERY stout motors. the 4.0 FI, 258, 232, even the 2.5 4 bangers are solidly built IF taken care of. the 232 goes back to early 60's and was used in the early J series trucks, then the longer stroke 258 was made in early 70's. the 4.0 was issued in 1987 as a fuel injected model for the cherokee xj and later put into the wrangler in 1991. the 4.0 lasted untill 2004 or so in the grand cherokee and 06 in the wrangler. one of the best built engines due to 7 main bearings made them last forever. its too bad that DC discontinued the motor for a v6. but really all jeeps are reliable and American built goodness if taken care of, so i would recommend any jeep if looking for a 4x4 utility vehicle. I LOVE EM :P

D100man

The early 1960's engines in Jeeps were the "Tornado 6" a 230CID overhead cam engine with 3 main bearings....my first experience was in the M714/715 series in 'Nam. NOT a good engine for durability, when compared to the 232 and up engines. Of it's own accord, it wasn't bad, even when compared to the Slant 6 of Chrysler.



Best as always...

ADDENDUM:

http://en.wikipedia...._Tornado_engine

http://www.film.quee...ings/Wagon.html

http://www.ifsja.org...rs/tornado.html

This post has been edited by Bob_Sheaves: 22 September 2006 - 02:15 PM

[Michael A. Stanhope]

the AMC designed inline 6 engine is one of the most durable and reliable engines of the 20th century, and it wasn't even made by one of the big 3 car makers!

Starting out at 199.6cid and finally ending in 242cid (4.0L) when Chrysler in yet another foolish move discontinued it for a V6 that probally will never make the torque the L6 did!

I have had 3 AMC's over the years with the inline motors. The 72 Gremlin had a 232cid in it. Rather underpowered, but good with the 3-speed. My 79 AMC Concord had a 258cid in it and its still running to this day with over 350,000 miles on it. Only problem was a stripped out rocker arm stud which was retapped and never gave a problem again!

they did have some head gasket issues, especially after AMC switched from the cast iron head to the aluminum head in 1987 for the 4.0L, and sometimes the cast iron heads on the 258/232 had a tendancy to warp if constantly overheaded, but otherwise they are very reliable, cheap to work on, and easy to fix!

[karlStolz]

Michael A. Stanhope, on Oct 6 2006, 11:30 PM, said:

the AMC designed inline 6 engine is one of the most durable and reliable engines of the 20th century, and it wasn't even made by one of the big 3 car makers!

Starting out at 199.6cid and finally ending in 242cid (4.0L) when Chrysler in yet another foolish move discontinued it for a V6 that probally will never make the torque the L6 did!

I have had 3 AMC's over the years with the inline motors. The 72 Gremlin had a 232cid in it. Rather underpowered, but good with the 3-speed. My 79 AMC Concord had a 258cid in it and its still running to this day with over 350,000 miles on it. Only problem was a stripped out rocker arm stud which was retapped and never gave a problem again!

they did have some head gasket issues, especially after AMC switched from the cast iron head to the aluminum head in 1987 for the 4.0L, and sometimes the cast iron heads on the 258/232 had a tendancy to warp if constantly overheaded, but otherwise they are very reliable, cheap to work on, and easy to fix!

The in line 6 was discontinued after 2001 due to the tougher emission standards that went into 2002 MY vehicles. The 6 could not meet the newer standards.

[alvin]

The last model year for AMC straight-six was 2004.

This post has been edited by alvin: 11 October 2006 - 04:37 PM

[mjd4277]

karlStolz, on Oct 7 2006, 12:57 AM, said:

The in line 6 was discontinued after 2001 due to the tougher emission standards that went into 2002 MY vehicles. The 6 could not meet the newer standards.

Actually the engine is still in use on the 06 Wranglers. When the TJ production is phased out, the 4.0 will be phased out with it. The last major changes to the engine were back in 1999,when it received coil-on-plug ignition in place of the regular plug/wire/distributor setup,and minor H.P./torque increases(depending on the vehicle).

[scook6]

I wouldn't be too tough on Chrysler here as far as the 4.0 is concerned. If it wasn't a good engine they would have replaced it years ago. I think the 20 yrs they kept it is testimony to the engines ruggedness. But like all things good nothing lasts forever and the 3.8 is also a very good engine.

[Voyager_Expresso]

Man, I can't believe I'm late to this conversation! The AMC "seven-main" six is one of my favorite engines of all time. The original 232 CID version was introduced mid-1964 in the limited production Rambler "Typhoon" model, which was a dressed-up Classic 2-door hardtop (all were yellow with black roofs & black interiors, if I remember correctly).

For '65, AMC brought out a shorter stroke version displacing 199 CID that was meant to replace the aging "Nash" 195.6 engine that had been around since God was a little boy.

The 199 continued through 1970 (it was the standard engine in the first Gremlins).

In 1971, AMC brought out a longer-stroked version of the six which displaced 258 CID.

The 232 lasted through the 1979 model year and the 258 soldiered on in cars through 1987 (the 4WD Eagle) and in Jeep Wranglers through 1990 (or even into 1991?).

One bit of trivia: The 199, 232 and 258 all used the same bore dimension of 3.75"; the different displacements were achieved by varying the stroke length (199 = 3.75" X 3.00"; 232 = 3.75" x 3.50"; 258 = 3.75" x 3.90").

The Jeep 4.0L six, introduced for 1987, was a modernized & updated derivative of the earlier AMC six. It featured a bore & stroke of 3.88" X 3.41", resulting in a displacement of 243 CID, or 4.0 liters.

Any and all of these engines feature truck-like ruggedness and durability. I've owned a bunch of them down through the years and never experienced any mechanical issues with them; the basic design was simple & sound. I've seen the bottom end of these things ang it was built to last.

The new 3.8L V6 being used in the Wranglers starting in '07 is more or less the same engine that's been used in minivans starting in 1994 (actually first appearing in the FWD Fifth Avenues/Imperials back in '91). It has proven to be durable as well, at least doing minivan duty (and those things ain't light)...

[skinpine]

I prefer the Rambler motor in my Jeeps and feel that DC messed up by not updating the head and continuing its use in Jeeps. I am afraid that the minivan engine will never develop the old six's loyal following that DC has squandered. I am tired of hearing DC say that it was because of frontal crash standands. BMW and GM still use a inline six in their SUV's.

A small displacement hemi V8 could catch my attention.

[Voyager_Expresso]

skinpine, on Oct 19 2006, 01:52 AM, said:

I prefer the Rambler motor in my Jeeps and feel that DC messed up by not updating the head and continuing its use in Jeeps. I am afraid that the minivan engine will never develop the old six's loyal following that DC has squandered....

I tend to agree with you. For some reason, a Jeep doesn't seem to be "whole" to me unless it has that big ol' inline six under the hood (I actually prefer it to the 304 V8).

Of course, the '48 CJ2 I learned to drive in had a puny little 134 CID flathead four :blink:

The minivan V6 is a pretty stout engine from my experience. I love it in the minivans--but it will take me awhile to get used to the idea of it powering Jeeps...

[alvin]

2004 was the last year for it in G. Cherokee, I forgot about Wrangler.