Jeep Strokers

Is there any gain to running the higher lift vs the regrind other than upgrading to the beehives?

Higher lift does have the potential for more flow, however, its not really worth the effort now that you have the other cam on the way.


I was only suggesting it, because most of the cams out there *ARE* higher lifts to start with.

Please somebody chime in and tell a success story with MP sprimgs.... I cannot believe these springs are crap....I won't.

I bought the MP P5249464 springs because Mopar recommended them to be used with the p4529230ab cam(if I can't trust the performance division of the company that made the cam and my whole vehicle. . .). Use stock springs for cams w/ lift under .43" and use the P5249464 springs for cams with lifts up to .525". I recently changed out the valve cover gasket from cork to the rubber and found that two of the d/s springs were rubbing on the 94 valve cover(I'll get a pic up sometime)--I switched to the thinner 96 valve cover. I haven't had any experience with other springs, other than stock, so I can't really chime in. These springs are good enough for lifts up to .525" on big 360s, so if they can handle that power and loads, why wouldn't they do well in ours? I must say I'm baffled every time I see a "what spring do I use" thread(other than newbies that need info) for such and such a cam and the lengths and trials&errors people go through to make other springs work. Kudos to making it happen, and saving money with chevy parts, but IMO the P5249464s are "no brainers" and should be the go-to spring.

gradon wrote: I must say I'm baffled every time I see a "what spring do I use" thread(other than newbies that need info) for such and such a cam and the lengths and trials&errors people go through to make other springs work. Kudos to making it happen, and saving money with chevy parts, but IMO the P5249464s are "no brainers" and should be the go-to spring.

Having different spring options is a good idea, you don't want to be locked into only one choice, and basically that is what is being done for off the shelf springs. Also, the MP springs are just big and bulky and use huge retainers, where on lafrad's set (for an example) there are much smaller, lighter retainers, and the springs are much smaller and fit under the valve cover better. MPs also coat and arm and a leg, and are getting hard to find.

Also, MP springs are not crap, that is just a load of BS. As I said I spoke with two of comp's techs and they said the load numbers were fine, as did isky, my machinist and yet another person.

And, in my case, I wanted to use the stock 3-groove valves.

there AREN'T any mopar parts hat would work with those valve locks in any sort of reliable way. WAY cheaper for me to machine the head run a purchased set of springs, use the retainers I had on the shelf, stock locks, stock valves, etc etc etc.

lafrad wrote:And, in my case, I wanted to use the stock 3-groove valves.

Why can't a single groove lock be used on a 3 groove valve? You would just be using one of the grooves, would it be an issue with it not being stable because of the material lacking in the valve stem?

I forgot about the 3-groove valves--what year did Jeep start using those?

Well, they were there in '98/99

beyond that I don't know how far back they go. They still use the *exact* same part in most of their engines... (new HEMI has the same part)

I would NOT use a single groove lock on a 3 groove valve. CHances of breaking the valve tip are HIGH. (if you could even get the single groove to fit in the narrower, rounded, grooves)

The single groove is rounded, but I didn't know they were narrower.

By chance does anyone know of a good establishment you can send a set of pistons off to to get coated?

I just recieved my 802's back from Oleshot. They came out awesome and now I am ready to assemble the engine.

If you click the link it will still let you view the picture.

Oleshot does AWSOME work!

I forgot to ask this one in hindsight. When any of you had your block decked did the machine shop report that there was a difference in the deck on different areas of the block on the factory deck? Also how much did they deck off of your block on a short rod stroker to reach 0 deck?

MarineJRM wrote:I forgot to ask this one in hindsight. When any of you had your block decked did the machine shop report that there was a difference in the deck on different areas of the block on the factory deck? Also how much did they deck off of your block on a short rod stroker to reach 0 deck?

No difference in the block but there is a slight difference in the length of the rod and piston combos, not enough to worry about though. Not sure I understand what the short rod stroker is but I have the 4.2 rods in mine. The shop said they had to remove about .060 to get to the 0 deck height.