Max HP & Torque for a wagoneer

[81waggy]

So I just acquired my 3rd Wagoneer...a 1970 1414x that will eventually hit the build page of the forum. Until then I've been doing some thinking. It has the amc 360 in it which puts out a decent ~230 hp & 350 ft.lbs. However, I may or may not decide to upgrade the engine. If I do, I'll either rebuild the 360 or swap in either a 5.7 Hemi or a gm 5.3/6.2. Either way its getting a significant upgrade in HP & Torque.

In my current daily driver, an 81, I have a TBI 5.7 putting out ~250 hp & 325 ft.lbs. and It seems to do just fine with that. So. how big has anyone gone with the stock frame before you start boxing the frame in, or just swapping a frame altogether, or something else?

I've seen write ups for c-10 swaps, and dodge swaps, but I'm curious. The torque isn't much much of a jump so much as the HP is. Torque = twist. but that much HP gain has to mean something.

Thoughts?

[SJTD]

Torque x RPM x some other stuff = hp. So to get more hp at a given RPM you need more torque. If you have more hp but less torque that means a higher RPM where the peak hp is reached. So from that standpoint the frame would be fine.

However, some would argue that the frame is too weak for the stock torque.

[Stuka]

Well, FSJ's have the front half of the frame boxed from the factory, unlike GM's and dodges of the era (Which were open C channel). Boxing the back half certainly adds rigidity, but you would have to add a LOT of power (and traction) to start twisting it.

Unless you plan on running stickies and going to the drag strip, the frame isn't where I would put my time.

[RamJetFSJ]

I run 350 HP/400 TQ and not at all concerned about the frame twisting. Now the AMC 20 rear on the other hand...

[81waggy]

I run 350 HP/400 TQ and not at all concerned about the frame twisting. Now the AMC 20 rear on the other hand...

That I think was my bigger concern. I assumed, especially since the rear axle is 50 years old and sitting still for the last 25, that it would need swapped out.

[dodgerammit]

Why swap. Why not rebuild? Sitting doesn't make them a weaker axle. New bearings and seals along with fresh fluid would make it new.

[81waggy]

Why swap. Why not rebuild? Sitting doesn't make them a weaker axle. New bearings and seals along with fresh fluid would make it new.

I'm sure I could. It was more the thought of:
1. I have no idea what condition it is in now
2. Im not sure what rear end is even in it.
3. Would the potential engine upgrade warrant a new rear end anyway

[dodgerammit]

Check out the hellwagon.

[Stuka]

A 1970 will have a D44 in back. But that is right during the switch over between the 2-piece axles, and single piece axles. If they are 2-piece, a new rear axle is pretty much a requirement if you go with more power. If they are single piece, you should be fine for the street. The front axle is a potential weak link, but that depends on usage.

[ghinmi]

The stock frame is more than strong enough for anything you are going to do. I ran a 700 hp nitrous fed 401 for a long time then a ???? hp turbo 401 for a while after with no frame mods. If it's a 1 piece Dana 44 rear, I started running into reliability issues with breaking good aftermarket gear sets around 550 hp. No idea on the 2 piece stuff.

[PNW69Waggy]

Are there any differences in the construction / strength of the frames between different year ranges? I’ve got a ‘69 Wagoneer and honestly the frame looks a bit ‘light duty’ to my eyes.

I have the two piece D44 as well. Is it a simple upgrade to swap in one piece shafts or would someone be better off just swapping the whole rearend out for a later one? Obviously the later D44’s are six lug and that would need to be addressed.

[Stuka]

Are there any differences in the construction / strength of the frames between different year ranges? I’ve got a ‘69 Wagoneer and honestly the frame looks a bit ‘light duty’ to my eyes.

I have the two piece D44 as well. Is it a simple upgrade to swap in one piece shafts or would someone be better off just swapping the whole rearend out for a later one? Obviously the later D44’s are six lug and that would need to be addressed.

There are some frame differences, but its mostly related to the body and bumper mounts, and one of the cross members farther back.

The good part of an FSJ frame is that the front half is full boxed. Most vehicles from that era were not. So, they were strong for their time, but obviously not comparable to more modern frames on full size trucks, or even a 07+ wrangler.

[mud89]

If the 360 is original (6xx xxx in the VIN ) , and if the interior is still original too, i would keep the engine.
These 1414X are rare and guys like me can pay more for it than a standard wagoneer if the rig is still original

[81waggy]

If the 360 is original (6xx xxx in the VIN ) , and if the interior is still original too, i would keep the engine.
These 1414X are rare and guys like me can pay more for it than a standard wagoneer if the rig is still original

It is. I think the big thing in my mind was the cost to potentially rebuild the entire drive train or just swap in a 5.3/4l60 blah blah. Junk yard swap would be a few grand with fuel injection reliability.