Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing chain

Performance mods and Advanced Stroker discussion.
Post Reply
Brandon_K
I think I'll order a "tab"
I think I'll order a "tab"
Posts: 40
Joined: February 24th, 2009, 3:18 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 1999
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler

Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing chain

Post by Brandon_K »

The last of my parts will be arriving this week and it's brass tack time on final decisions before it gets rebuilt. Nearly everything will be here today from Summit, except for the Perfect Circle moly rings (Summit doesn't stock apparently, said it would be a week for dropship, Falcon had them in stock, though a bit more $, and the proper locks (I didn't realized I installed 1-groove locks on the stock 3 groove valve stems when I built in in 09! Thanks to SilverXJ for pointing that out to me. FWIW the 1-groove locks held fine for the ~15k miles that it ran, before the cam lobe was wiped on #5 intake).

So anyhow, I have a CC 68-231-4 coming my way today. I did more searching and reading last night and now I'm waffling on the CC. It seems as though the Lunati 63500 might be a better choice?

My rebuild is consisting of the following;
  • 4.2 12wt crank .010/.010
  • 4.2 rods
  • NVH block from a 99XJ, .030 but otherwise untouched
  • H825CP-030 pistons, stock @ 15.8cc
  • Perfect Circle 40514CP030 moly rings
  • 99+ intake, currently a stock TB. I'll probably go to a 62 or 63mm from Leigh once I get it broken in. I'll probably machine a 1" TB spacer for it as well, maybe for nothing more than just to play with the mill.
  • Stock injectors*
  • New Clevite mains
  • New Clevite rods (some of the mains and rod bearings were gouged, assuming from bits of the cam getting in)
  • Old Clevite cams from 2009 (no damage, babbit is all still beautiful)
  • New Victor Reinz gaskets all around
  • Melling M-81A standard oil pump. Reusing from the 2009 build, I opened it up to check for damage, none found, will reassemble when I can find a thrust plate gasket for it.
  • PureOne PL-30001 filters
  • Brad Penn (2 cycles of break-in, then 10W30). I'll probably run CompCam EOS on top of that. Still no issues with the now ~150k mile catalytic, even after running Brad Penn for the last 15k.
  • Cloyes C-3053 "link" non-roller type timing set**
  • Stock pushrods
  • Stock rockers
  • Crower Cam Saver lifters
  • Mopar Performance P5249464 springs (0.400 / 0.525)
  • Mopar Performance P4452032 retainers
  • Mopar Performance P4452030 locks
  • Stant "Super" 195 t-stat
  • OEM water pump from 2009
  • New Felpro headbolts
  • eBay OEM-style radiator
  • Taurus electric fan
  • New reman distributor (after hearing stories of chewed up cam gears, I thought it better to start with fresh)
  • New AC Delco "stock" 7mm wires
  • Champion RC9YC's or NGK ZFR6F-11's. I have both, haven't decided which ones it will get for initial start.
  • Stock coil
  • "Accordion" style cheap header. Other than a very minor crack that I stop-drilled and welded, it's holding up far better than the OEM garbage


TJ is sitting on 35x12.5's wrapped around alloys, ~4.5" of suspension, 1" of body, 1" motor mount lift, NV3550, 4.11's, 8.8 in the rear, alloy'ed LP 30 in the front (building a HP30 for it), super short SYE, blah blah blah. Driving style is heavily varied. I drive "spirited" around town, I do a ton of ~75mph highway driving and fairly often pull a ~2000-3000lb trailer. Off road I'm pretty mild on it, I'll take it to the redline if I'm trying cleaning the tires out or if I'm having a bitch of a time getting up a waterfall.

So, first things first;

* Yes, I'm aware that with my past build (mostly the same, stock cam, OEM engine driven fan), from everything that I've read, I should be in ping city. Stock injectors, high SCR, high DCR. According to the calculator, SCR is 9.8, DCR is 8.47, quench is 0.0645 with the stock cam that I was running. Initially I ran it on 93 due to my fear of the DCR. It never once pinged, so I ran that tank dry and went to 91, never pinged. Dropped it to 87. Even in mid July heat, pulling the trailer, AC on the entire way, cruising 70+mph across I-70, I never heard or felt any ping or detonation. Why? I have no idea. Stock injectors, no MAP mod, stock IAT location. With the CC 68-231-4, DCR goes to 8.57, a 0.10 increase over the OEM cam. Will this cause me problems? I don't know. The Lunati 63500 puts the DCR at 8.52, right in between stock and OEM. I don't think I'm overly concerned with pinging or detonation right now. I was ok with 87, so even with the increase of DCR, I think going to 91 or 93 will fix that. If I need to go to a Ford 24# injector, I will. I'm also planning on moving the IAT and getting a Leigh MAP modifier (if he doesn't have any, I'll build my own). I'll also drop the t-stat to 180 if need be.

** The stock style, "link" timing chain, P\N C-3053. All I see everywhere is that you need to run the dual roller JP or Cloyes chain. Why? My (albeit stock) 4.0L went 130k on the OEM chain before the skirt on #5 broke, sending the rod through the block. The Cloyes stock chain that I just pulled off of this motor, 15k miles of wear on it, was still tight (though not reusable as it's the 4.0L set). I'm not arguing that you shouldn't run the dual roller, but is the only reason that everyone recommends it is because that's what the performance guys do? I have only seen one stock timing chain failure on this site and the pictures show it was clearly due to a lack of lubrication. I did just notice that Cloyes makes a single roller chain, P\N C-3062, which interestingly is 25% cheaper than the non-roller I already bought. Is that going to be any better or worse than the non-roller chain? Both the non roller and the single roller have no options for advance or retard, they have to be installed straight up. The dual roller 9-3127 allow for -4, 0 and +4, but I have a feeling that will be to much either way, so again, straight up. The JP chain is nice, multiple timing options. And it's all billet, but that goes back to, I've only ever seen one chain fail on these boards and I believe any of the 4 chain options would have failed under those circumstances. I just have a hard time coughing up another $100 for something that works the same way the $100 cheaper version does. Thoughts?

Lastly, the cam. The original build back in 09 was set to run the 68-231-4. Due to a failure of research on my part and a time crunch, I didn't and slid the stock cam back in. A week or so ago, I called Comp, they recommended the 68-232-4. I posted about it, the 68-231-4 was again recommended by you guys. I have more faith in your opinions than that of Comp's to be honest. But then I do what I probably shouldn't and I search some more. Then I see Dino and a few others recommend the Lunati Voodoo 63500 over the 68-231-4. Hmm. Now, my problem is, I understand what a cam does and sort of how it works. What I don't understand is lobe separation, ATDC, BTDC, etc. The Lunati seems to be favored due to it's less aggressive ramp (which I do understand), not as noisy, not as much wear on the valve seats. The only bad thing seems to be that the journals are junk on the Lunati's and need to be polished. Shouldn't be overly expensive at my machine shop. So at this point, I think I'm going to order the Lunati from Summit, unless anyone has any thoughts on why I shouldn't.

I could have sworn I read it here (but unfortunately can't search, since the forum refuses to search "68-231-4"), but can you use stock springs on the 231-4 or the 63500? As I said, I could have sworn I read it was doable, but then again, I've also read that the springs will bind at that lift (.484 in the case of the Lunati). I already have the MP springs, retainers and (soon) locks, but I'm also trying to do what I can to reduce the chances of wiping out another cam. Reducing the seat pressures would seem to help that. In this past build, I believe it was a lifter failure that cause the cam lobe to wipe, but I'll never know that for sure.

So, that's it, hopefully for questions before final assembly. I'll start a new thread once I get it assembled to update progress on things.
Brandon_K
I think I'll order a "tab"
I think I'll order a "tab"
Posts: 40
Joined: February 24th, 2009, 3:18 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 1999
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler

Re: Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing c

Post by Brandon_K »

And before anyone asks, no, I don't have a wideband. Yes, I do plan on picking one up when funds allow. Currently looking at the Innovate LC-1 kit and the AEM kits. It looks like the Innovate is a few bucks less, plus it's PC loggable. I think between that and Torque on my Android, I'll have a good monitoring package. I just wish I could log both the OBD2 data and the AFR in a single package so the timeline stays the same. Oh well.
CobraMarty
BANNED
BANNED
Posts: 297
Joined: December 3rd, 2011, 2:01 am
Vehicle Year: 1998
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee

Re: Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing c

Post by CobraMarty »

Maybe you can have the spring pads machined and install springs at 1.7" instead of 1.6" and that would lessen the seat pressures of the MP springs yet still allow the lift you need without binding.
1998 XJ 2D AW4 32"MTR 3.55 4.5"RC JCR Slider Magnaflow 150rwHP/174rwTQ=> Sprintex SC Gibson Header 6lb 120-140*IAT 211rwHP/274rwTQ WasherFluid Inj 70mmTB 7.5lb 100-120*IAT=>Now 12 pounds Boost=> +BV ported head
99 XJ M62 S/C
User avatar
SilverXJ
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5790
Joined: February 14th, 2008, 7:14 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 2000
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Radford, Va

Re: Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing c

Post by SilverXJ »

Brandon_K wrote:** The stock style, "link" timing chain, P\N C-3053. All I see everywhere is that you need to run the dual roller JP or Cloyes chain. Why? My (albeit stock) 4.0L went 130k on the OEM chain before the skirt on #5 broke, sending the rod through the block. The Cloyes stock chain that I just pulled off of this motor, 15k miles of wear on it, was still tight (though not reusable as it's the 4.0L set). I'm not arguing that you shouldn't run the dual roller, but is the only reason that everyone recommends it is because that's what the performance guys do? I have only seen one stock timing chain failure on this site and the pictures show it was clearly due to a lack of lubrication. I did just notice that Cloyes makes a single roller chain, P\N C-3062, which interestingly is 25% cheaper than the non-roller I already bought.
The single roller is the one with the majority of the failures. I have seen 2 or 3 fail by shearing off the teeth. I remember the thread about the silent link chain and its perhaps oil related failure. I believe that the silent link style chain is stronger than the single roller style. I'd take the silent link over the single roller.
CobraMarty wrote:Maybe you can have the spring pads machined and install springs at 1.7" instead of 1.6" and that would lessen the seat pressures of the MP springs yet still allow the lift you need without binding.
IIRC that will drop the seat pressure from 110 to 100#.
Brandon_K
I think I'll order a "tab"
I think I'll order a "tab"
Posts: 40
Joined: February 24th, 2009, 3:18 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 1999
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler

Re: Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing c

Post by Brandon_K »

CobraMarty wrote:Maybe you can have the spring pads machined and install springs at 1.7" instead of 1.6" and that would lessen the seat pressures of the MP springs yet still allow the lift you need without binding.
I thought about that, but as Silver said, that drops the closed seat to 100#. Then again, I'm not convinced yet that the MP springs are 110# to bein with on the 4.0 heads. I'm taking the head and valves to the machine shop tomorrow to have hot tanked and checked for flat (if it's warped or otherwise unusable, I'm lighting the whole project on fire, tired of dumping money into the motor). I'll take a set of springs, retainers and keepers with me and have them check it out and see what it is. I'm not against machining the pads, but A) I'm tired of dumping money in it, B) Lunati specs that they want 105# on the seat. I don't know enough about valvetrain to know if that will be an issue. I'm assuming that they want higher pressure to prevent floating, but it rarely sees the redline. Of course my luck, the one time it does, it will find interference. I'll have them check the pressures and report back the numbers, along with what they think those springs will do at 1.7" or even 1.65".

That reminds me, I need to order new valve seals. I wasn't planning on the head coming apart, hot tanked, etc.
Last edited by Brandon_K on June 5th, 2012, 9:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Brandon_K
I think I'll order a "tab"
I think I'll order a "tab"
Posts: 40
Joined: February 24th, 2009, 3:18 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 1999
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler

Re: Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing c

Post by Brandon_K »

SilverXJ wrote: The single roller is the one with the majority of the failures. I have seen 2 or 3 fail by shearing off the teeth. I remember the thread about the silent link chain and its perhaps oil related failure. I believe that the silent link style chain is stronger than the single roller style. I'd take the silent link over the single roller.
Exactly the type of post I love. Thank you.

In my searching, I found the same evidence as you. The single roller just looks like a terrible setup, not much more than bicycle gears. I can't find anywhere that Cloyes ever called for the single roller setup on any 6cyl, only for the 2.5L, which makes sense. 4 less lifters, one less bearing journal, the kit doesn't need to be as strong. I think I'm going to stick with the non-roller at this point and check it every 5k miles or so. If it's anything like my last motor, I'll only have to do it 3 times! :doh: If it seems like it's wearing unusually bad or stretching, then I'll put a double roller on. With the electric fan setup, I can have the rad and fan out in 10 minutes, making a little more room to get to the timing cover.

Speaking of timing cover, I neglected to mention that I'm going to run a solid pin, care of dwg86's awesome tutorial here; http://www.jeepstrokers.com/forum/viewt ... lug#p28055 I wonder what kind of bitch it would be to turn the 4.2L performance cams down to be able to use the thrust plate of the 4.0L. My buddy is an excellent machinist, but not local, I'll have to give him a call.

Silver, what wideband system are you running?
User avatar
Cheromaniac
I live here
I live here
Posts: 3252
Joined: March 8th, 2008, 12:58 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4563cc
Vehicle Year: 1992
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Cyprus
Contact:

Re: Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing c

Post by Cheromaniac »

SilverXJ wrote:I believe that the silent link style chain is stronger than the single roller style.
Yes, it's definitely stronger. If you compare the '94+ OEM silent link style timing set to the '93 and earlier OEM single roller timing set, you'll see that the '94+ is much beefier and the silent link style chain is less likely to stretch. Jeep use the same silent link style chain in the transfer case.
Then I see Dino and a few others recommend the Lunati Voodoo 63500 over the 68-231-4.
I can't recall where I said that but which cam is best for you depends on the rest of the engine combo. You already have the CC so I suggest you keep it.
1992 XJ 4.6 I6 - 5MT - Stroker build-up, Stroker "recipes" Sold
1995 Mustang GT - 4AT - Modded Sold
2006 Mustang GT - 5MT - Modded Midlife Crisis Car :lol:
Retlaw01XJ
Movin on up ^
Movin on up ^
Posts: 307
Joined: November 23rd, 2011, 10:40 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 2001
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee

Re: Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing c

Post by Retlaw01XJ »

Sufficient valve spring seat pressure is important on cams using fast ramps to prevent the valves from bouncing on the seats when the valves close. Spring open pressure is more rpm related to prevent valve float. Or so I've read. :D
Walt K
Eastern Pa
2001 Cherokee 4.6 stroker 90 day build
Buick GS's and Saab turbos for other days...
User avatar
SilverXJ
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5790
Joined: February 14th, 2008, 7:14 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 2000
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Radford, Va

Re: Decisions- Lunati 63500 or CC68-231-4, springs, timing c

Post by SilverXJ »

Brandon_K wrote: Speaking of timing cover, I neglected to mention that I'm going to run a solid pin, care of dwg86's awesome tutorial here; http://www.jeepstrokers.com/forum/viewt ... lug#p28055 I wonder what kind of bitch it would be to turn the 4.2L performance cams down to be able to use the thrust plate of the 4.0L. My buddy is an excellent machinist, but not local, I'll have to give him a call.
There is some info on here about doing just that. I can't remember who posted it but you would have to search.
Silver, what wideband system are you running?
Its a Dayton sensors unit.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Semrush [Bot] and 4 guests