4.0 HD where does the power come from? - JeepForum.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 12:57 AM Thread Starter
cl700
Registered User
1989 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 88
Garage
4.0 HD where does the power come from?

Okay so I have an '89 Laredo, it's a little tired and could use some help. I recently got the intake of a 1993 4.0 HD. Is this where the power comes from in these? Or is it other parts or the head? Or a combination of parts? Doing a cold air intake this weekend and did spark plugs and wires today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Ride like its your last
cl700 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 02:15 AM
Timo_90xj
Web Wheeler
 
Timo_90xj's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland - on the European side of the Atlantic
Posts: 9,442
HO (= high output), not HD It's basically the intake manifold and cylinder head that does it.

There really isn't much real-world performance difference between a Renix and a HO 4.0 engine.

1998 Grand Cherokee 5.9 LX daily driver, 1.75" BB, 32" KM2s, HPD30 Eaton e-locker/D44a stock LSD, 4.56 gears, custom- fabbed tube bumpers and tube fenders,...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



1990 XJ Limited (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, ***rolled and totalled @ 165k miles***

***Under construction***
1990 XJ (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, PBR 42" tires, Unimog 404 portal axles, 110" WB, full cage + uniframe completely rebuilt, front 3-link + panhard / double triangulated 4-link rear,... ***SOLD***
Timo_90xj is offline  
post #3 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 05:22 AM
75SV1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,825
The torque is about the same on these. I think only 8 hp difference. Also, have to consider at what rpm they are making the max HP. I thought my '88 Renix had more power or as much as either of my '98 4.0s. There are upgrade option with the RENIX as with the HO. If your looking for an upgrade in a manifold, you might look at the 99+ (00-up) intake. I do not know if it will fit. I'd only expect 5 hp gain with that. Think more exhaust upgrade. I will have to say my '88 was manual. In that era a manual usually felt like it had more power.
75SV1 is offline  
 
post #4 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 07:37 AM Thread Starter
cl700
Registered User
1989 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 88
Garage
So really not worth all the work involved to put the new one in huh?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ride like its your last
cl700 is offline  
post #5 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 08:22 AM
Timo_90xj
Web Wheeler
 
Timo_90xj's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland - on the European side of the Atlantic
Posts: 9,442
There is absolutely no point in doing that. Also keep in mind Renix 4.0s have the peak torque at aslightly lower RPMs, so an older 4.0 as long as it's in good shape will actually feel a bit more powerful under normal driving.

I had a stock 4.0 Renix on both my XJs, and I could fairly easily smoke 35 x 12.50 Maxxis Creepy Crawlers in dry pavement - with a Detroit locker, on 4.88 gears. If you want more power, either stroke your current engine or swap in an LS- series V8.

1998 Grand Cherokee 5.9 LX daily driver, 1.75" BB, 32" KM2s, HPD30 Eaton e-locker/D44a stock LSD, 4.56 gears, custom- fabbed tube bumpers and tube fenders,...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



1990 XJ Limited (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, ***rolled and totalled @ 165k miles***

***Under construction***
1990 XJ (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, PBR 42" tires, Unimog 404 portal axles, 110" WB, full cage + uniframe completely rebuilt, front 3-link + panhard / double triangulated 4-link rear,... ***SOLD***
Timo_90xj is offline  
post #6 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 08:27 AM
75SV1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by cl700 View Post
So really not worth all the work involved to put the new one in huh?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you replace the header, then maybe. Some have loss HP with the latter intake. It looks good in there though. I just installed one in a '98 XJ. Can't confirm anything. I made a bunch of changes. The '95 intake, No. To my understanding, replacing the down pipe is one of the more effective HP increases. Getting rid of the dent in it. Can't confirm as I've upgraded to a Thorley header and 2.5 exhaust. Haven't done the down pipe to 2.5. Next week maybe.
Also, what cold Air intake? The stock box is suppose to be able to supply enough for this engine. A lot of 'Cold Air' intake are taking in engine compartment air. Not the best. I am looking at the Thor or Spectrum. Down the road a bit, and don't know if they would do anything. I'd look at the +25 MPG thread or Dinos 4.0L page for ideas. Also, see Cruisers54 tips on the Renix, for Ideas and maintenance. Don't expect huge gains. I think Renix might get a bit better MPG than HO's and latter ones.
75SV1 is offline  
post #7 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 09:48 AM
Timo_90xj
Web Wheeler
 
Timo_90xj's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland - on the European side of the Atlantic
Posts: 9,442
Stock airbox with a good filter will supply plenty of air to your engine. Original intake manifold should be able to outflow the requirements of the engine, even a stroker. Throttle body plate may be a slight restriction, but not really an issue.

Downpipe dent shouldn't actually cause a very drastic horse power loss. Ee. Motortrend channel did an exhaust manifold dyno-test where they smacked in the primaries and collector REALLY badly (on a V8 engine though), and they had to very severely dent them to actually loose any noticable power. Downpipe is a bit further down on the exhaust, but it's not really that far from the collector.
A 2.5" exhaust with a free-flow cat and a good muffler that flows well will give you better readings. It sure won't hurt to get rid of the downpipe dent.


Many of the cold air intake setups are waste of money; they either don't suck in cold air at all, or they won't increase hp much at all.

1998 Grand Cherokee 5.9 LX daily driver, 1.75" BB, 32" KM2s, HPD30 Eaton e-locker/D44a stock LSD, 4.56 gears, custom- fabbed tube bumpers and tube fenders,...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



1990 XJ Limited (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, ***rolled and totalled @ 165k miles***

***Under construction***
1990 XJ (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, PBR 42" tires, Unimog 404 portal axles, 110" WB, full cage + uniframe completely rebuilt, front 3-link + panhard / double triangulated 4-link rear,... ***SOLD***
Timo_90xj is offline  
post #8 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 11:00 AM
75SV1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,825
It depends on what you are trying to achieve. The OP said it seems 'tired'. I'd start with basic maintenance. O2 sensor, TPS, plugs, wire, spark plugs, brass insert cap and rotor. Possibly see the condition of the distributor. Check the timing chain's condition. OP didn't say if manual or auto. Still, check the condition of the tranny. The engine could be good, but loosing power at the tranny. I think the power for the 4.0L is good for size and weight of the XJ/MJ platform.
75SV1 is offline  
post #9 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 11:36 AM Thread Starter
cl700
Registered User
1989 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 88
Garage
It's a auto. But I just replaced the transmission. And I just did spark plugs and wires the other day. Rotor seemed fine as well


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ride like its your last
cl700 is offline  
post #10 of 16 Old 06-06-2017, 02:56 PM
75SV1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,825
My view is if it isn't running right or normal, Performance mods won't help or not much. I'd check for vacuum leaks, also, check the trans cable and adjust it. Do a check on the TPS. I might unplug the tans computer and see if the performance improves. If that does anything, then it would be electrical for the trans. I do suggest you look for Cruiser54's tips. They are RENIX based tips.
75SV1 is offline  
post #11 of 16 Old 06-07-2017, 03:17 AM
BagusJeep
Registered User
 
BagusJeep's Avatar
1981 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bali
Posts: 6,395
"cold air intakes" and "performance filters" are an unknown quantity. Even K&N filters are criticised because they do not stop dust very well (how do they get greater flow - guess) and if you use your XJ very much the ordinary stock paper element will keep your engine running for years without harm at a low cost.

BagusJeep lives in Bali.

1981 CJ7 258ci - Bagusjeep
1984 CJ7 258ci - Puthijeep
1981 J20 258ci - Gladys
1951 Willys CJ3A/MB/M38 - Little Willy
1995 Cherokee 4.0 - CHEROKEE
BagusJeep is offline  
post #12 of 16 Old 06-07-2017, 05:06 AM
75SV1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,825
I might look into replacing the injectors. Do a search for Volvo injectors. I think there was a thread a month or so back. The Renix are suppose to run a bit better with the Volvo injectors. Do a compression check. Then look at more basic maintenance. If you replace your TBS, only use MOPAR part. Other more knowledgeable people here recommend that. My limited experience confirms that.
75SV1 is offline  
post #13 of 16 Old 06-07-2017, 07:52 AM
cruiser54
Web Wheeler
 
cruiser54's Avatar
1990 MJ Comanche 
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Prescott
Posts: 11,903
First off as others have hinted at:

HO myth buster


Renix in 90 made 182 HP. HO in 91 made 190 HP. That's 8 HP difference.

HO only made more HP than Renix at higher RPMs and not a bit more torque. HO had a 58 mm throttle body versus a 52 mm throttle body on a Renix. That’s 20% more air available through the HO throttle body. The HO also had a better design header. See where I'm going with this?

It’s only a 4% horsepower increase…..

The whole 8HP was not mostly from the head, but from the bigger TB and better exhaust manifold.

Put a 60mm TB from www.strokedjeep.com on your present manifold using the Renix head, eliminate the "crush" in your headpipe with proper re-routing, and go for it.

HO stands for Highly Overrated.


Secondly, here is a handy dandy guide to do what needs done to put that 93 engine in your 89.

http://cruiser54.com/?p=100
__________________

If you own a Renix Jeep, you must check this out:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


My Jeep technical photos:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
cruiser54 is offline  
post #14 of 16 Old 06-07-2017, 09:02 AM
75SV1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,825
Also, how long has it been since the O2 sensor has been replaced? Mopar or NGK (NTK).
75SV1 is offline  
post #15 of 16 Old 06-07-2017, 10:47 AM Thread Starter
cl700
Registered User
1989 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 88
Garage
honestly dont know how long its been. I got the jeep used, have done a ton of work to get it the way it is and I guess I was expecting more out of it since my last truck was a 4 cylinder. It also has a rough time starting now. almost like it isnt getting fuel but i know it is because the fuel rail release has fuel that comes out.

Ride like its your last
cl700 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.



Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome