Power.....really looking for a change

[Weatherman]

Regarding the injectors: check the part numbers, and I think you'll find that ford put 19#/hr injectors in their cars but 21#/hr injectors in their trucks.

spdy0001 - I didn't think the acura sedans were speed limited. I've had my TL-S in the 140s but never had it cut off like my ford products used to. Although I avoid it mostly since the car eats a tranny every 50k miles and brake rotors every 15k.

Regarding the explorer: I was surprised how well my stock 91 explorer handled on I-81 at 100+ mph (estimated of course). It actually drove OK the few times I had it there.

Ben

 

[stang99x]

They still put 19# yellow/orange tops in up to the 2002 year model I know. I pulled the 19# units out of my 98 5.4

 

[410Fortune]

the only difference between a gen 1 ex suspension and a BII is the rear spring over and some wheel base.
You can more then make up for the disadvatages of the high center of gravity and the weak dana 28 front axle by building the BII.
Cj7 is a far better 4x4 from the factory in some ways, but 4 leafs and solid axles can also be a pita, at least the BII has a form of IFS and coils up front

I wouldnt call the 4x4 system crappy, its the same as an explorer and my 4x4 system is basically still stock even with a v8 and beefier axles

 

[stang99x]

The BII and the Explorer are just *******ized BI takeoffs. Borrowed parts that changed sizes to fit a new generation. Neither one has an especially wonderful 4x4 system, and I say this loving the gen 1 explorer.

Now, the CJ is far superior to both, in every way. I myself am a solid axle believer. Solid axle and four leafs are the only way I would build an offroad machine. There are no downsides. A SOA exempifies this in the articulation possible with 4 leafs. A jeep with a pair of dana (44 or 60) will leave a pair of fords well behind anyday. I have had several jeeps, and in stock form they can outperform many modified fords, but thats what the jeep was designed to do, and the ford has to be multipurpose/multifunction in order to be at the sales volume ford wants. The jeep had the distict advantage having a big brother cherokee to take care of the SUVite people, while the wrangler/cj (and I am by no means comparing the wrangler to the CJ, as there is no comparison IMO) could handle some on road duty with a comprimised ride quality but excel offroad. You also had a long standing choice of powerplants with the jeep, from an I4, I6, V6, and V8. (I dont' remember all the cubes, the there was the dauntless buick v6, the 252 I6, and the 402 I think V8) The 252I6 was all but indestructible.

 

[biggs92EB]

bronco II's are the ****, very capable, like a jeep, just itchin for the trail. 410's is badass. Got my explorer to 115 with a friend following. I drove 155+ in my aunts 92 vette, that was scary. K done hijacking. Dude put a 302 in it!

Hmmm far superior in EVERY way? then why do they keep stealing 8.8s out of explorers and putting them in their jeeps?

A jeep with a pair of dana (44 or 60) will leave a pair of fords well behind anyday. my bad just read this. hmmm (44 or 60) in my explorer....then i could keep up. I'll take a samarai haha

 

[stang99x]

My point was the the jeep cj was built for off road, hence the Civillian Jeep designation it carries, with military roots for its rugged, off road ability at war.

Samuri, ha. Equip it with the rainbow air freshener and it'll be perfrect:fire:

 

[410Fortune]

Jeeps have the low center of gravity and the simple powerful drivetrain this is true, but my BII is a Jeep eater in every way, where Cj's get stuck I pull them out But then my BII is not much like a stock BII, although I never had a problem hanging with Jeeps on the trail, even stock.

Apples to oranges really, Ford did some strange things and so has Jeep, I question the strength of some Jeep drivetrains, I mean a dana 35 rear axlein the grand cheorokee behind the 318? Hell even the D44 is questionable as a rear axle for the straight six wranglers, nothing but problems! The D30 fronts are WEAK too, teh Ford TTB D35 is as strong as a dana 44 and the 31 spline 8.8 is a stout rear end behind any 6 or 8 with up to 37" tires and a locker, I dont think the Jeep D35 or 44 are up to that challenge, at least not in stock form...

But my attitude is run what ya brung! They can all be built into awesome trail rigs! What I like about my BII is the wheelbase, where Jeeps have dug holes in the trails my tires fit right outside of them keeping me going.

And remember its always 70% driver, 30% vehicle on the trail

 

[stang99x]

Jeeps have the low center of gravity and the simple powerful drivetrain this is true, but my BII is a Jeep eater in every way, where Cj's get stuck I pull them out But then my BII is not much like a stock BII, although I never had a problem hanging with Jeeps on the trail, even stock.

Apples to oranges really, Ford did some strange things and so has Jeep, I question the strength of some Jeep drivetrains, I mean a dana 35 rear axlein the grand cheorokee behind the 318? Hell even the D44 is questionable as a rear axle for the straight six wranglers, nothing but problems! The D30 fronts are WEAK too, teh Ford TTB D35 is as strong as a dana 44 and the 31 spline 8.8 is a stout rear end behind any 6 or 8 with up to 37" tires and a locker, I dont think the Jeep D35 or 44 are up to that challenge, at least not in stock form...

But my attitude is run what ya brung! They can all be built into awesome trail rigs! What I like about my BII is the wheelbase, where Jeeps have dug holes in the trails my tires fit right outside of them keeping me going.

And remember its always 70% driver, 30% vehicle on the trail

I don't care for any of the cherokees myself, I think a unibody SUV sucks. I wouldn't own one. I also think that ford has two of the best axles ever built, the 9" and 8.8 I just still think that jeep cj's always outdid any ford of the time, and even the wrangler has carried on the tradition with the YJ (yuppie jeep) and TJ (Turd Jeep)

 

[410Fortune]

Come on the Early Bronco is as tough/reliable/capable....same era as the CJ5 and 7

but my blood runs blue so its all good

The new Wranglers are SICK for what you get right out of the box, I wish FORD would take note on how well they sell, the Ranger is basically the only Ford mid size truck left thats still tough and ready for action, but with IFS it cannot hold a candle to the coil sprung 4 link Jeeps, especially the Unlimited rubicon, geesh! What a wheeler you can buy for a great deal!!

 

[stang99x]

Come on the Early Bronco is as tough/reliable/capable....same era as the CJ5 and 7

but my blood runs blue so its all good

The new Wranglers are SICK for what you get right out of the box, I wish FORD would take note on how well they sell, the Ranger is basically the only Ford mid size truck left thats still tough and ready for action, but with IFS it cannot hold a candle to the coil sprung 4 link Jeeps, especially the Unlimited rubicon, geesh! What a wheeler you can buy for a great deal!!

Now, the 60's-early 70's bronco is a whole nother arguement. Thats a different beast. It was very close to being a jeep. Shame was it turned into the BII at some point. Ford should take note of several things, like releasing a 300HP navigator when cadillac has a 400+ HP escalade. Navigator had the advantage of the first true luxury fullsize SUV, but then they just handed the silver platter to GM when, as usual, they failed to compete in the HP wars. Jesus christ, the camaro/firebird stomped the piss out of mustangs forever. It took until 2005 for ford to finall hit 300HP with a GT!! Come on, chevy was doing that 10 years before. The one leg up I will give chevy though, is that they have remained true to the pushrod. Thats where the true power is, and these OHC and DOHC motors just don't pump it out like their OHV cousins did

 

[95offroadx]

went to local "ricer" shop to pick up a k/n cone filter and over heard a couple kids talking about removing there air conditioning system, and how it would add 30hp! now i know it wont add 30hp but would it add something?

 

[410Fortune]

yes hahahahahah VERY minimal gain
The serpentine belt travels over the pulley, the clutch on the compressor makes the pulley pretty much free wheeling when the compressor (AC) is not on, and every pulley the belt travels over takes a little bit of power.

You will not notice gainst from doing this if your AC compressor clutch works properly. Your engine would need to be like 4000 HP in order to get a 30 HP gain from removing one pulley.
An electric fan setup would be a FAR better idea.

The entire AC system on our trucks weighs about 40-50#, so removing te entire system would have some advantages in that department if you are building a track truck, but to me track and truck really dont go together.

besides AC KICKS ASS

 

[95offroadx]

yea i just have no need for my a/c, i rarely uses it, my truck gets like 8mpg when its on soo its never on

 

[stang99x]

Sure, you can get another 30HP, by turning the ac off when you're running it.
Thats ricers for you. They have like, 110HP and even if they spend 10 grand and double it they still haven't gotten to an 80's V8 power:

 

[marchre3]

ive been 115 im my moms 03 ex. scary stuff.. very sensitive

 

[marchre3]

i am looking into how to make a snorkel for my 92 ex. any1 got any suggestions would b helpful!! thankz
marchre3@hotmail.com

 

[Weatherman]

I think you need to ditch the power steering pump too. That thing sucks major HP. Seriously, anyone that ditches their air conditioning in a near stock vehicle either lives way up north or has no common sense.

My 46 CJ2A has a great powertrain, even though it's oddball in today's world. YJs and TJs are no where near that strength, nor are more recent CJs, and most are a lot weaker than an explorer. The ford 4.0L, manual trans, 1354 TC, and D35+8.8 make for a good powertrain. Yeah, the MT could be better (definitely the AT), and only the lever shifted 1354 is reliable enough for real use. However, look at the jeeps: a bunch of D30+D35 combos (and the TTB D35 is a lot stronger than the Jeep D35 in stock form).

Back to my injectors, when I bought stock replacement injectors from Accel, they listed 21# for my exp and a few trucks, but 19# for cars and some other trucks. I don't guess it matters either way, but I'd like to know the answer to it.

Ben

 

[410Fortune]

my 1993 BW 1354 with 1988 BII push button electric shift transfer case and shift motor are going fine after 295K miles and hard use.

Last time I was out I actually pushed the "touch drive" button through the plastic housing in the overhead console, it had finally been pushed on so many times it broke. It still switched the transfer case from low to hi to 2wd no problem and I have 3 spare overhead consoles I have picked up over the years from BII's in the junk yard.
I cleaned the brushes and rebuilt the stator in my shift motor about 75K miles ago.
To say the BW1350 and 54 e shift transfer cases are not reliable enough for real use is just not knowing better
It takes 2 minutes to remove the shift motor and shift the t case by hand with pliers if the e shift system ever does fail.

your 4.0L will use 19# injectors, even the 5.0L V8's use 19#

 

[marchre3]

snorkel

:roll: i am lookin to make a snorkel for my ex. but not sure how to go about it. if any1 has asny suggetions let me kno.. thanks
marchre3@hotmail.com

 

[410Fortune]

There are many snorkle build threads on this site.
You should try the search button
Also welcome to the forum!