Is this block normal or ruined? Pic.

[CandyCaneXj]

Block casting is 53020569. Made in april 1996. This is the cylinder wall right behind the water pump. Bought this engine at a junkyard. The waterpump was nice and clean looking so I assume it was not on long before jeep was junked. The waterpump fins looked fine though. The clearance between the pump and shaved part of cylinder wall is only about .04ish. Just guessing about .03 was shaved off from the wall. Was this block made like this or could it have been ruined from a previous waterpump? Not sure if it's safe to overbore at all now.

[SilverXJ]

Normal. Its a little more than I have seen but it wouldn't be hard for the machinist to check the bore thickness in that area.

[Frankenstien]

Depends on the amount of overbore. sleeve it. I have runny several blocks with one cylinder replaced no worries and not expensive either.

[SilverXJ]

No reason to sleeve it with out even taking a measurement first.

[Retlaw01XJ]

That looks like factory machining done at the factory for water pump clearance.
Are you guys saying it's caused by a bad water pump wearing against the cylinder?

There are going to be variations between one block to the next due to the casting process.... specifically, core shift. This will make the various wall thicknesses vary from one block to the next.

[SilverXJ]

That looks like factory machining done at the factory for water pump clearance.
Are you guys saying it's caused by a bad water pump wearing against the cylinder?

No, I'm saying its normal machining done at the factory. Not water pump wear. If it was from a lose impeller on the water pump it wouldn't be that nice looking.

There are going to be variations between one block to the next due to the casting process.... specifically, core shift. This will make the various wall thicknesses vary from one block to the next.

Correct. As I said its is probably fine, but its deeper than I have seen in the past. Might want to have the wall thickness checked to be on the same side though.

[6TIME]

Unless your taking it past .060 don't sweat it, they are all like that from the factory. All of the older renix and HO blocks I've fiddled with have the same impeller relief cut in #1. Run it

[CandyCaneXj]

Update! Did NOT pass sonic check for 060 bore in my opinion. Showed .102 on the #1 cylinder front wrist pin side. other side of the cylinder showed .134. Thats some major core shift going on? Only reason I will not use this is because of that #1 cylinder I will just be so frustrated if the front would crack or blow out. All other cylinders were between .112 and .129 on wrist pin sides and between .213 and .237 on thrust sides with no specific pattern of thin spots in certain areas. I highly suggest folks to pull water pump off and check how much metal was ground off from the factory when choosing a junkyard block for an overbore. This should give a good estimate on front to back core shift should it not??? I don't understand how these blocks can vary so much! Next block getting checked out is the 1998 zj cast # 53020515

[6TIME]

Do you have a reason to go .060" over? If not, why don't you just take the minimum off to clean the bores up? That block is just like all of them.. They will be thinner at the machined impeller relief cut in the #1 cylinder. Unless you're running high hp, boost, or some type of high rpm race setup.. it shouldn't be an issue regardless. I've ran two of these block at .060" and never worried about it....No problems. I can't say I've ever heard of a failure in that specific area you're worried about either.

[Russ Pottenger]

I wouldn't have a problem running your block.

Those numbers are normal. If you were under .100 on the thrust side of the bore, different story.

Inline up and down engines are easier on cylinder walls than a typical V-6 or V-8
You'll do a tear down on Grandmas 200k V-8 and typically see some ring ridge, while after a billion miles
on our Jeep/Tractor engines you hardly see anything.

Russ

[CandyCaneXj]

I already have 060 pistons I bought through 505 performance's stroker kit when I was young and dumb. So I will be using those along with the chevy 6 inch h beam rods and 4.2 offset ground crank(Journals 1.98). Im selling that block to a buddy who wants it for a 030 over build so it all works out. I didnt prefer to sleeve it if I had another option. Both blocks had the original hone marks even at 170000 miles so that was cool. Here is the block I'm going to use. Obviously it's not ground as much. Filled it in with a marker for better illustration.

[Cheromaniac]

This is how my 2000 block looked when I was building my stroker 11 years ago.

[jeepxj3]

This is how my 2000 block looked when I was building my stroker 11 years ago.

Interesting, Did you use the cam retaining plate on your 2000 block? Or did you reuse an older style cam?

[jsawduste]

I already have 060 pistons I bought through 505 performance's stroker kit when I was young and dumb. So I will be using those along with the chevy 6 inch h beam rods and 4.2 offset ground crank(Journals 1.98). Im selling that block to a buddy who wants it for a 030 over build so it all works out. I didnt prefer to sleeve it if I had another option. Both blocks had the original hone marks even at 170000 miles so that was cool. Here is the block I'm going to use. Obviously it's not ground as much. Filled it in with a marker for better illustration.

How are you making up the big end width on the Chevy H beams ? Any worries about piston engagement at BDC ?

[Cheromaniac]

Interesting, Did you use the cam retaining plate on your 2000 block? Or did you reuse an older style cam?

Older style cam with recessed bolt/spring/pin. Approacking 80k miles with 34k miles on the Crane 753905 that I originally used in the stroker build, and the last 46k miles on my old '92 OEM cam.