400,000 miles.. original drive train

Area for General NON-Jeep related chat. Topics are typically not moderated, but must fall within the Use Guidelines.
Post Reply

Topic author
candymancan
Posts: 3652
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:32 pm

400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by candymancan »

So my 98 Grand Cherokee. 4.0 laredo made it to 400,000 tonight.. original drive train.. trans included.

Still going strong :-)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee 5.9L Limited 219k
1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee 4.0 I6 laredo 430k
1990 Jeep Grand Wagoneer 155k
1976 Jeep J10.. 85k(repaired)

Theodore
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2018 5:26 pm
Location: East Tennessee

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by Theodore »

Very nice; fingers-crossed for 500K.

personally have never made it out of the 150’s before wrecking, trading, loss of interest, etc. Am at 152K on our GW - hoping to break the cycle & blow past 200K.
1990 Grand Wagoneer - "Theodore" - AMC 360, fuel-injected, TF727, NP229 - Sand Metallic - restoring to stock - Build Thread
User avatar

Scotty54
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2022 6:08 pm

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by Scotty54 »

I purchased a 81 Wagoneer with 350,000 miles on it. Of course everything had been rebuilt (engine and trans twice) but everyone thought I was nuts. It turned out to be a great Jeep. I had to wrench on it quite a bit but the engine, trans, t-case and axles never gave me any trouble. Most of the miles were between Florida and Alaska towing a travel trailer.

I think the 4.0 can be regarded as one of the best American engines ever built.
1977 Cherokee Chief 401 QT
Northeast Tennessee

sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by sierrablue »

Scotty54 wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 4:45 am I purchased a 81 Wagoneer with 350,000 miles on it. Of course everything had been rebuilt (engine and trans twice) but everyone thought I was nuts. It turned out to be a great Jeep. I had to wrench on it quite a bit but the engine, trans, t-case and axles never gave me any trouble. Most of the miles were between Florida and Alaska towing a travel trailer.

I think the 4.0 can be regarded as one of the best American engines ever built.
Snort. From my experience that engine will only be regarded as a "meh" engine that came stock in some nice Jeeps. We've had some bad luck with ours and from an engine design perspective, it's not impressive. A different bore/stroke on a '60s engine designed by a small-scale American company, with a different American company's multiport fuel injection bolted on it.

It's ok for what it is but you'll never convince me that it's a "best of all time" engine.

Congrats on the 400k tho. Clearly you got a good one and it's been taken care of.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
Online

Srdayflyer
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:08 pm

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by Srdayflyer »

the amc 258, is regarded as 1 of the 3 best 6cyl engines ever built, with a high nickel block, 7 main bearings it cannot be beat, the other 2 engines are the ford 300c.i. 6 banger, and the chrysler 225 slant 6 it makes for a good read on these engines

sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by sierrablue »

Yes, by AMC and Jeep guys it is. Other people just know the AMC/Jeep guys love them and think they're great.

Some will say they've never had issues with Fram filters, either...

The Ford 300 is bulletproof. Very solid engine that lasts forever and can be rebuilt/woken up, and continue to do its thing.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.

SJTD
Posts: 1924
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 12:02 pm
Location: Lompoc, Sunland or somewhere between

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by SJTD »

So what do you find unimpressive about the 258 design?

You know the meaning of "anecdotal"?
Sic friatur crustulum

'84 GW with Nissan SD33T, early Chev NV4500, 300, narrowed Ford reverse 44, narrowed Ford 60, SOA/reversed shackle in fornt, lowered mount/flipped shackle in rear.

sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by sierrablue »

The oiling system leaves the lifters wanting more oil, the head isn't a cross flow, making it a PITA to work on, as well as killing power and hurting mileage, and it's as heavy as my B350, which makes similar power and torque out of the box than a BUILT 4.0, with similar mileage as a stock 4.0. Nobody makes chips for them to deal with mods to the engine, and the modded parts don't tend to last. Additionally, it's not an OHC, which while it's not a deal-breaker nec., that would be a better engine design.

I'm sure others have had different experiences than us but we've gotten top-end cams/lifters/roller rockers/etc. for it and something always goes out after about 20k miles. Stock it was good but we can't make that thing right again. The only thing that we never had an issue with was the Edelbrock head.

Anecdotal...what AMC/Chrysler kept doing with that I-6 to keep it alive because it's what they had so short term it was cheaper. Very similar to the 350 to the LS evolution, but GM has done a better job with it.

They do fine especially stock and our ZJ still has one. It just makes zero sense to me when people start worshipping them like they're a bulletproof, perfect design.

IMO the Kaiser Tornado (that Kaiser/Renault Argentina adopted and turned into a 500 hp n/a monster in the '70s) with the block-mounted motor mounts is a far superior engine to the AMC-6.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.

SJTD
Posts: 1924
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 12:02 pm
Location: Lompoc, Sunland or somewhere between

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by SJTD »

Anecdotal... Basing your opinion on your single experience. Especially since you have another that's fine.

Note the 240/300 you praise is not an OHC either. Complaining about lack of aftermarket support for the 258 says nothing about the basic design.

I'm not arguing that it's a great engine, just that your arguments are weak.

I agree on the Tornado, an engine way before it's time. At least in the U.S.
Sic friatur crustulum

'84 GW with Nissan SD33T, early Chev NV4500, 300, narrowed Ford reverse 44, narrowed Ford 60, SOA/reversed shackle in fornt, lowered mount/flipped shackle in rear.
Online

Srdayflyer
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:08 pm

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by Srdayflyer »

thats the beauty of this forum, everyone has their preferences to powerplants, ive had great luck with the 232/258's over the years along with the amc 360's, ive built mine to what i believe to be bullet proof, and they have never let me down but i build mine for torque , and not wheel spinning ,launch yourself into a place you dont want to be horsepower, but again this is the beauty of this forum exchange ideas and learn from others and have a little fun while doing it

sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by sierrablue »

Oh you meant the OTHER definition.

I didn't say the 300 was an OHC, but I have friends and so does my dad who've tried to blow them up using 1/2 a quart of oil in the pan and such (dad told son he'd get a 460 if he blew up the I-6), and they've just kept going.

If we didn't keep having the same problem over and over again rebuilding it, I would say it was just a dud. But since we've rebuilt the stupid thing 4-5 times in the past 8 years, and had the same thing come up every time, and even rebuilt it ourselves so we'd know it was done right, I blame the design. And the whole reason we rebuilt it was that it was making a little noise--that noise never went away with rebuilds where we replaced EVERYTHING. This The one that's in it currently is a 130k mile junkyard engine, which hasn't been rebuilt, which is why it's still going...not making the noise (yet). Rebuilds don't seem to agree with those things well.

We weren't building it to spin the tires, or pin you in the seat; we built it such that on trips to Colorado, it flows well enough that we can make it through on all the roads maintaining the speed limit. This stock engine does not have anywhere NEAR the torque or hp of the other one. Has decent torque right away...and that's all she's got. I've never seen the point of building a Jeep engine for HP; Jeeps aren't really meant for going fast enough to take advantage of it.

The weight, poor oiling system, and the non-crossflow head are what really kill me on it. The pushrod is annoying but not a killer. And the computer not really being tunable to better deal with modifications to the engine is incredibly irritating. I know there's stuff out there but there's no GOOD way to easily tune it as you change stuff.

The AMC V-8s are ok, again on the heavy side and not the most efficient design in the world. Not really any worse than any other V8 of the time; just a little harder to find parts for.

Anyway I'm sure I'm ticking people off because they love their AMC engines...I'll stop now.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.

SJTD
Posts: 1924
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 12:02 pm
Location: Lompoc, Sunland or somewhere between

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by SJTD »

I didn't know there was another definition.

Come on. You can't bitch about the 258 not being cross flow while praising the 300 which isn't either. The 300's not heavy? Granted it's 16 percent bigger but prolly more than that much heavier.

Again don't complain about the design based on poor support. Stick to the facts.

You're not ticking people off. They're just rolling their eyes.
Sic friatur crustulum

'84 GW with Nissan SD33T, early Chev NV4500, 300, narrowed Ford reverse 44, narrowed Ford 60, SOA/reversed shackle in fornt, lowered mount/flipped shackle in rear.

sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: 400,000 miles.. original drive train

Post by sierrablue »

I didn't say the Ford wasn't heavy, nor did I say that it has a cross-flow head. I just said that it was a better, more reliable engine. The Ford is ~500 lbs vs. the AMC's 400-450...not a huge difference in weight there in reality, with the Ford putting out more power.

Also the Ford has equally spaced exhaust ports rather than the pair in the middle next to each other, improving flow and power. Some regard them as better for towing than the 302 even (which I'd say depends a lot on the 302 given how many options there are).

What good does a mediocre design do you if you can't rebuild it, even rebuilding it stock, and expect it to last more than 20-25k miles, if you're lucky? That's half the problem with them is that they're already a cheap design that was just passable, and then with new, cheaper built parts (lifters come to mind), whether made in the USA or not, it just doesn't last anymore. An OK design doesn't do you any good if the parts to make it run again and/or make it run better are junk. Poor support IS a fact, just not a design flaw from AMC/Chrysler.

Additionally if you want to make the AMC 6 keep up with modern vehicles, or at least maintain the speed limit on super hilly/mountain roads, you have to be able to give it more umph. It runs out of breath in a relatively stock ZJ; I can only imagine how they do in a lifted FSJ.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
Post Reply