Hemi for Wrangler? From the factory?

[cwsqbm]

As for being dangerous. how many of you know someone who has died in a JK or CJ type jeep? I personally know 4 and none of theirs were with a supercharged V8 with 425HP.

Died? None, but not for lack of trying. The better question is how many of us know someone that rolled a CJ? One neighbor in particular rolled two CJ5s, on the street. Of course, I've had friends killed in normal passenger cars too. There's a limit to how much we should be protected from our own stupidity.

 

[locrwln]

There is absolutley NO reason to have a 425hp supercharged motor in a JK of any kind.
Granted the JKU is longer but even then it could become very dangerous.
There is nothing you can't do in a 300hp jeep that you can in a 425 except go faster on straight aways. everything else is gearing.
As for being dangerous. how many of you know someone who has died in a JK or CJ type jeep? I personally know 4 and none of theirs were with a supercharged V8 with 425HP.
Sometimes Hp defeats the purpose of the ride guys. plain and simple.

Responding to your points.

1) I disagree, like I said in my original post, if you live at a higher elevation, load one down with all of your gear and armor, then that HP makes all kinds of sense. Not to mention getting into a muddy, sandy or just a steep hill climb.

2) Gearing, I had an 88 4runner with a 5spd, two t-cases (stock ratio and 4:1) with 5.29's. Trust me even with 20 forwards gears, there were times when the lack of HP could not be overcome. Gearing is nice, but like HP, it isn't the end all/be all. A nice combo of both is the key to vehicle happiness.

3) I have owned several higher HP vehicles (motorcycles, hotrodded built v8's and performance cars) and a couple of lower HP vehicles, I have NEVER, NEVER complained about having too much HP. I don't know of anyone else (besides you in this thread) that has either. Not a personal attack, JMHO.

I'm hopeful that Chrysler will give the JK the motor is should have, but I won't be surprised if they don't.

 

[john101477]

Responding to your points.

1) I disagree, like I said in my original post, if you live at a higher elevation, load one down with all of your gear and armor, then that HP makes all kinds of sense. Not to mention getting into a muddy, sandy or just a steep hill climb.

2) Gearing, I had an 88 4runner with a 5spd, two t-cases (stock ratio and 4:1) with 5.29's. Trust me even with 20 forwards gears, there were times when the lack of HP could not be overcome. Gearing is nice, but like HP, it isn't the end all/be all. A nice combo of both is the key to vehicle happiness.

3) I have owned several higher HP vehicles (motorcycles, hotrodded built v8's and performance cars) and a couple of lower HP vehicles, I have NEVER, NEVER complained about having too much HP. I don't know of anyone else (besides you in this thread) that has either. Not a personal attack, JMHO.

I'm hopeful that Chrysler will give the JK the motor is should have, but I won't be surprised if they don't.

Don't get me wrong here man I love Hp and have been lucky enough to drive or ride in some vehicles many only dream of both old and new. Comparing an extremely underpowered toy 22re with a 425 hp mega motor is apples and oranges. I actually agree with JPK on the 300hp jeep. It is more than enough Hp to do ANYTHING the jeep needs or can do safely. it is not limiting at all but rather putting the correct power plant for the application in. Quite honestly, often times I would rather an off road vehicle have more torque than Hp.

Died? None, but not for lack of trying. The better question is how many of us know someone that rolled a CJ? One neighbor in particular rolled two CJ5s, on the street. Of course, I've had friends killed in normal passenger cars too. There's a limit to how much we should be protected from our own stupidity.

I actually take offense to this. 2 of the mentioned deaths were good friends of mine who were NOT being stupid at all. They took a corner at recommended speed and the roll bar crushed both of them.

 

[Hilldweller]

My friend's 90hp machine.
14,000 pounds wet and 90 ponies.

Gimme torque. Just lots and lots of torque.

 

[stankfoot]

a small economical diesel is the way to go. torque, torque and more torque. i would rather have a small diesel than a hemi.

lets be real. we drive a vehicle with the aerodynamics of a brick. how fast are you really going to go?

 

[JPK]

Stupid people do stupid things with 200hp engines as well as 375hp engines. Its in the operator not the equipment. If you imagine that a 3.8l JKU can do on or off road what an otherwise similar Hemi JKU can do you are halucinating. As I've written before, if you haven't driven a Hemi powered JKU or a similar enough rig you just have no idea of how the additional power transforms the JKU.

As far as torque, yes that's a pretty big part of the improvement. Again, any Hemi makes more torque at 1200 rpms that the 3.8 does at max, near 4800rpms.

As for a diesel, its unlikely as heck that Jeep will put one worth a crap in the US JKU's. To make the same torque as the 5.7 Hemi - albeit at a prefered lower rpm, in fact from 1800-2800 - you would need to be looking at the no longer EPA compliant 3.0 and not the plant they put in the JK's overseas. That's a diesel alternative that I would like to see!

3.0L diesel (the previous GC engine, the quote is from 2006) : "The new 3.0-liter CRD engine , built by Mercedes-Benz, produces 215 hp (160 kW) @ 3800 rpm and 376 lb.-ft. torque (510 N·m) @ 1600-2800 rpm and gets an estimated fuel economy of 19 miles city and 23 miles highway."

But here is the diesel dream of most, also not emmissions compliant and unfortunately with our ridiculously contradictory emmissions laws we can't get this mill in a Jeep though it produces incredible fuel economy compared to the 3.8l. I guess the EPA thinks its better to burn twice the gas than half the diesel, eh? : "... brand new 2010 Jeep Wrangler with a 2.8 liter CRD four-cylinder turbo diesel. That engine sourced from Daimler has an impressive 174hp and staggering 339 lb-ft. of torque. That is plenty of grunt for crawling rocks, climbing hills and going to WalMart for dog food.

Sparking even more jealousy of our European Jeep enthusiasts, the diesel powered Jeep Wrangler gets 23.7 mpg in the city and 35.8 mpg on the highway."

I'd be happy with a good diesel in my JKU, like the 3.0, less happy with the 2.8l, which I understand is not a lot of fun to drive. Until hell freezes over though I'm very happy with the Hemi in my JKU, sure beats the heck out of the 3,8l, anyway you slice it.

JPK

 

[locrwln]

Don't get me wrong here man I love Hp and have been lucky enough to drive or ride in some vehicles many only dream of both old and new. Comparing an extremely underpowered toy 22re with a 425 hp mega motor is apples and oranges. I actually agree with JPK on the 300hp jeep. It is more than enough Hp to do ANYTHING the jeep needs or can do safely. it is not limiting at all but rather putting the correct power plant for the application in. Quite honestly, often times I would rather an off road vehicle have more torque than Hp.

Actually it was the mighty 3.slow with a bored throttle body, headers and free flowing cat and magnaflow muffler.:smiley_drive:

The problem still was that you had to drive it like you stole it just to get anywhere and that was exhausting and the slightest headwind and you were done. It was faster than my buddies Jeeps with the 4.0 at elevation, but I had to wring that thing out to do it. On the highway, I pretty much went from letting off for gear changes to floored. Not much in between.

And I wan't comparing them on a HP basis, merely the fact that you can have all the gearing and still not have the power you need to climb Donner Summit maintaining the speed limit.

I drove a stock JK Rubicon and it would only do 70 mph up US 395 out of Reno maxed out. That was at a run, the torque converter was unlocking and locking on even the slightest grade, so again, you would have to drive it aggressively to maintain speed, which means the mpg goes in the toilet. Whereas a decent v8 would/could be loafing along, not working that hard (or you for that matter) to maintain speed. Not saying it has to be the 425 version, but if given the option I would take it and you can choose a lower powered v6.

That is the great thing about options, you choose what you think works for you and I will always choose the biggest motor I can get in a particular platform. Again, I have never, ever felt like anything I have owned has had too much HP. And I am not a HP junky, both of my diesel pickups and my wife's G37 are stock, because they have enough, stock. Of course I grew up driving some very fast v8's. :sombrero:

My friend's 90hp machine.
14,000 pounds wet and 90 ponies.

Gimme torque. Just lots and lots of torque.

Yeah, and doing 55 on the flats and only going slower from there on any hill (and that is without a load). I had a friend with a Mog, it was "fun" to mess around in, but he sold it because it sucked to actually drive. I like Mogs as much as the next guy, but 90hp is not enough, unless you like getting passed by loaded semi's (everywhere):victory:.

Jack

 

[john101477]

Actually it was the mighty 3.slow with a bored throttle body, headers and free flowing cat and magnaflow muffler.:smiley_drive:

The problem still was that you had to drive it like you stole it just to get anywhere and that was exhausting and the slightest headwind and you were done. It was faster than my buddies Jeeps with the 4.0 at elevation, but I had to wring that thing out to do it. On the highway, I pretty much went from letting off for gear changes to floored. Not much in between.

And I wan't comparing them on a HP basis, merely the fact that you can have all the gearing and still not have the power you need to climb Donner Summit maintaining the speed limit.

I drove a stock JK Rubicon and it would only do 70 mph up US 395 out of Reno maxed out. That was at a run, the torque converter was unlocking and locking on even the slightest grade, so again, you would have to drive it aggressively to maintain speed, which means the mpg goes in the toilet. Whereas a decent v8 would/could be loafing along, not working that hard (or you for that matter) to maintain speed. Not saying it has to be the 425 version, but if given the option I would take it and you can choose a lower powered v6.

That is the great thing about options, you choose what you think works for you and I will always choose the biggest motor I can get in a particular platform. Again, I have never, ever felt like anything I have owned has had too much HP. And I am not a HP junky, both of my diesel pickups and my wife's G37 are stock, because they have enough, stock. Of course I grew up driving some very fast v8's. :sombrero:





Yeah, and doing 55 on the flats and only going slower from there on any hill (and that is without a load). I had a friend with a Mog, it was "fun" to mess around in, but he sold it because it sucked to actually drive. I like Mogs as much as the next guy, but 90hp is not enough, unless you like getting passed by loaded semi's (everywhere):victory:.

Jack

hahahahaa x2 on the mog.

The 3.slow was a POS. I have a lot of buddies that still run them and I will walk away from them on every trip. That is one toyota motor I hate with a passion. All I am saying is that in a serious off road vehicle, there is a point where to much is to much. I am not talking about these King of the Hammers rigs either they pour the power to them just so they can break them and thats not how I treat my rigs. I think a good solid 300ish Hp in a jeep is more than enough with the right gearing. You can have all the Hp you want but on 35-37 inch tires, you aint doing nothing without a re-gear. Toyota and jeep enthusiast have known this for many moons. you know what I mean. I think anyone who has built a rig has driven a toy or jeep that had a useless 4th or even 5th gear lol. HP will only help a little before stuff starts breaking. drivelines, axels, etc all suffer when a build is "incomplete".

 

[JPK]

My Hemi Jeep has 4.88's. 4.88's are fine but 5.13's might be be better.

The lowest you can go in the current Rubicon D44 is 5.38's, 5.13's in non-Rubicon D44's. That is not enough to make up for the 175hp, 135lbs' defecit, and not nearly enough considering the even larger torque differential at lower RPM's. Remember, any Hemi has more torque at 1200rpm's than the 3.8 puts out at max.

Re-gearing only makes up for so much hp/torque defecit, it can't cure the 3.8's woes, especially since the 3.8 is an engine that likes the rev's rather than one that puts out at lower rpm's.

As far as loosing top gear, only if the Jeep is woefully underpowered to begin with. If the engine has enough torque and the re-gear is approriate for the tires/engine combo than there is no loosing top gear. For example, my Jeep turns 2150rpm's at 70mph in top gear. It will maintain that speed with minimal downshifting through rolling country. The 3.8 set up similarly will be downshifting at every highway overpass, slight grade or even when bucking a head wind. (On top of that, the leap from the 1:1 third gear to the top .67:1 O/D makes every downshift an overwrought and dramatic event, whereas the five speed 5-45rfe which the Hemi mates to has a third speed 1:1 and and O/D fourth and fifth, eliminating the drama on downshift.)

Here is an example of what adequate and more torque can do: I visited River Raiders' Off Road in PA to have them install their aluminum skid package and to fab an aluminum skid for my Long Ranger Auxilliary gas tank - extends range to almost 500 miles, great tank! I had an evening to kill and visited Getttysburg Battlrfield, had dinner in town and headed to my motel about 30 miles west, over a relatively low range of mountains where the Appalacian Trail runs along the top ridges. The road was empty and speed limit was 45mph. I set the cruise control at 50mph, which gives a mere 1500rpms. Through the rolling countryside, over the low mountain and across more rolling countryside. The Jeep maintained 50mph, never downshifted, never lugged or bogged... The drama with a 3.8l would have made the drive a pita rather than a peaceful, quiet opportunity to ponder the great courage and the great loss, Lincoln's fantastic address that the battle and its magnitude in scale and importance to our history requires.

Rumbling along without issue or drama at 1500rpm's and at 50mph might seem to have on-the-road-only relevance, but its illustrative of the huge benefit of torque off road as well. For example if the engine has enough torque at 1500rpm's to push the "flying brick" along at 50mph over hill and dale without complaint or downshift or drama imagine what would be possible at 4mph, which is 1500rpm's in 4low and first gear.

BTW, my wife has a pretty stock '08 four door Rubicon still running its oem tires. It has 4.10 gears. I can be reminded of the 3.8l's shortcomings compared to the 5.7's benefits whenever I want.

JPK

 

[1leg]

I think the reason you will never see a V8 in a wrangle is the tow rating. I can see some guy trying to tow a 35 ft travel trailer with a hemi wrangle."it has the power to tow it, it must be safe". I see it everyday on the freeways in SoCal. guys towing huge toy hauler with 1/2 ton trucks.

I allready saw someone towing a car on a open car trailer with a 4dr X. had to be at the max rating.

I like the idea of a V8 wrangle but it will never come from Jeep that way.

 

[john101477]

JPK, thats what I was saying, almost everyone has driven a Jeep or Toy with over sized tires that has NOT been regeared. I would also agree that 175hp in a jeep is not adequate for many applications and possibly one reason the gas milage is so horrific. A non supercharged 5.7 found in many dodge pickups would be more than enough at 340hp there is a huge difference between that and a 425hp supercharged srt8 that chirps the tires every time you let out the clutch lol.

 

[JPK]

The 5.7 truck Hemi actually makes but few HP 425hp and few lbs' less than 425lbs'. Mine is the de-rated Jeep Hemi or the car Hemi, not sure which. The truck Hemi front end is too long for the AEV conversion. (But Burnsville Offroad instals the truck Hemi now at ~425hp/torque.)

The earlier Jeep non-VVT engines made 357hp and about the same number torque.

After having driven both the 375HP/375lbs' and the 425/425 versions, it still comes down to the driver... The power is there, you can use it if you want to but you don't have to if you prefer not to.

JPK

 

[willh]

Speaking of a 392 Hemi, my brother Ben, owner of Hedrick Speedsports, http://hedrickspeedsports.com/, has been working with AEV on the install of a 392 in his 2011 Rubicon. See link below for the build-up:

http://www.wilsons4x4.com/Hemi.html

The Jeep should have arrived at AEV today for final tuning. This is one of several Hemi Jeeps he's built, and they are very excited about this one. Enjoy!

Will Hedrick

 

[JeepinJon]

AEV has already said that the 6.4 will not be happening from the Jeep factory.

 

[JPK]

No, not the factory, but AEV is installing 5.7 VVT's, 6.1's and is getting ready to offer to the public 6.4 VVT's. Ben Hedrick's will be one of the those done before offerring instals or kits to the public.

Burnsville Offroad is also installing 5.7's, 6.1's and 6.4's.

I wouldn't imagine the 6.4 VVT being offered from the factory, but the 5.7 VVT would make sense, since Chrysler doesn't have a smaller V8 meeting current emmissions standard, at least that I know of.

JPK