Question about TB
- brokenujoint
- Making Progress
- Posts: 61
- Joined: July 1st, 2009, 1:56 pm
- Stroker Displacement: 4.6
- Vehicle Year: 1997
- Vehicle Make: jeep
- Vehicle Model: Tj
Question about TB
im building a 4.6 stroker bored out 0.020 over with a banks header and the head is port and polished with 24 lb injectors. Porting head for 120dls. i recently did a 99+ intake manifold upgrade with a dodge dakota 68mm tb. my question is, do you guys think that 68mm is going to big? most of you guys are going to 62mm.
- Muad'Dib
- Site Admin / Owner
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: January 8th, 2008, 10:55 am
- Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
- Vehicle Year: 1990
- Vehicle Make: Jeep
- Vehicle Model: Cherokee
- Location: Bend, Oregon
- Contact:
Re: Question about TB
I would think the big downside to that would be breaking your neck everytime you barely press the skinny pedal! LOL
If it feels right, then STROKE it!
You're lucky that hundred shot of CAPS LOCK didn't blow the welds on the forum!!
- AGRESIVE
- Donator
- Posts: 7
- Joined: February 14th, 2008, 3:42 am
- Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
- Location: Stouffville, ON
- Contact:
Re: Question about TB
I did the same swap, but I used a Fastman ported Dodge 68.5mm TB. I did this for two reasons; the swap is just cool and if you want the most out of your "air pump" you need to get as much air in and out as possible. Keep in mind what the Dodge engineers did for the 4.7L V8...
http://www.thefastman.com/Throttlebodies47.asp
http://www.thefastman.com/Throttlebodies47.asp
History:
Dodge introduced the 4.7 engine and started with a 65mm Throttle Body. In 2001 Dodge enlarged the Throttle Body to 68mm and is the size still used today.
IMPORTANT!
Both the 65mm and 68mm TB's are really 3mm smaller than advertised because of the restriction above the throttle blades.
The Fastman 4.7 TB's remove this restriction and are a True 68.50mm bore all the way through.
Recommended sizes:
Working with the 4.7 motor has shown 68mm to be the optimal size for street performance use. This is the size I recommend. I can machine both the Dodge 4.7 99-2000 65mm and 2001-present 68mm TB's to a True 68.50mm bore.
"No good deed goes unpunished!"
-
- Movin on up ^
- Posts: 357
- Joined: February 25th, 2009, 10:40 am
Re: Question about TB
is the IAC with this motor plug and play with the Jeep TB?
- brokenujoint
- Making Progress
- Posts: 61
- Joined: July 1st, 2009, 1:56 pm
- Stroker Displacement: 4.6
- Vehicle Year: 1997
- Vehicle Make: jeep
- Vehicle Model: Tj
- AGRESIVE
- Donator
- Posts: 7
- Joined: February 14th, 2008, 3:42 am
- Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
- Location: Stouffville, ON
- Contact:
Re: Question about TB
Only up to 2002. After that it's entirely different IAC and not compatible at all.lafrad wrote:is the IAC with this motor plug and play with the Jeep TB?
"No good deed goes unpunished!"
- brokenujoint
- Making Progress
- Posts: 61
- Joined: July 1st, 2009, 1:56 pm
- Stroker Displacement: 4.6
- Vehicle Year: 1997
- Vehicle Make: jeep
- Vehicle Model: Tj
Re: Question about TB
thats ok, i have a 97
- Cheromaniac
- I live here
- Posts: 3190
- Joined: March 8th, 2008, 12:58 pm
- Stroker Displacement: 4563cc
- Vehicle Year: 1992
- Vehicle Make: Jeep
- Vehicle Model: Cherokee
- Location: Cyprus
- Contact:
Re: Question about TB
The throttle response on my Jeep is neck-snapping enough with the modified Mustang 65mm TB so I can imagine with a 68mm TB, it would be doing rodeo when feathering the throttle.Muad'Dib wrote:I would think the big downside to that would be breaking your neck everytime you barely press the skinny pedal! LOL
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
1995 Mustang GT - 4AT - Modded Sold
2006 Mustang GT - 5MT - Modded Midlife Crisis Car
-
- Donator
- Posts: 60
- Joined: July 15th, 2009, 9:32 pm
- Vehicle Year: 1992
- Vehicle Make: Jeep
- Vehicle Model: Wrangler
Re: Question about TB
How did you mount the TB? Been searching the google machine for this upgrade and found another guy who ghetto fabbed his own tb spacer/adapter using a 8''x8''x1/2'' thick piece of aluminum.
Essentially he cut the 68mm hole, templated the '99 intake manifold, counter sunk the bolts, then used the tb for a template on the spacer etc...
Do you like the results of this mod? Thanks for the info/idea.
Essentially he cut the 68mm hole, templated the '99 intake manifold, counter sunk the bolts, then used the tb for a template on the spacer etc...
Do you like the results of this mod? Thanks for the info/idea.
-
- Noob
- Posts: 11
- Joined: May 21st, 2008, 5:53 am
- Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Re: Question about TB
don't mean for this to sound like a contest, but i modified a 70mm ford TB off a 5.4 triton, more as an experiment than anything. it's on a 99 intake, heavy porting, custom cam, roller rockers, deck block, 24 inj and banks headers bla bla bla. it's in a trail XJ. it's a little touchy, i've gotten used to it but the power after 3k rpm is stupid.
- amcinstaller
- I love JeepStrokers.com!!
- Posts: 608
- Joined: May 22nd, 2008, 11:57 pm
- Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
- Vehicle Year: 1980
- Vehicle Make: AMC
- Vehicle Model: Spirit
- Location: Red Deer, AB, Can
Re: Question about TB
is there much gain past 62mm anyway? i mean besides throttle response.
1980 AMC Spirit Restomod in Progress
SilverXJ wrote:Roller rockers won't help that mess you have created. Nor will God for that matter.
-
- Noob
- Posts: 11
- Joined: May 21st, 2008, 5:53 am
- Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Re: Question about TB
good question. i should throw the stock one on there just to see.
- Muad'Dib
- Site Admin / Owner
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: January 8th, 2008, 10:55 am
- Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
- Vehicle Year: 1990
- Vehicle Make: Jeep
- Vehicle Model: Cherokee
- Location: Bend, Oregon
- Contact:
Re: Question about TB
amcinstaller wrote:is there much gain past 62mm anyway? i mean besides throttle response.
Probably not .. plus you will lose more vacuum.
If it feels right, then STROKE it!
You're lucky that hundred shot of CAPS LOCK didn't blow the welds on the forum!!
- amcinstaller
- I love JeepStrokers.com!!
- Posts: 608
- Joined: May 22nd, 2008, 11:57 pm
- Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
- Vehicle Year: 1980
- Vehicle Make: AMC
- Vehicle Model: Spirit
- Location: Red Deer, AB, Can
Re: Question about TB
i was wondering that because im building a racing stroker for my spirit. not a 10 second monster like turbo tom, but if i can get 300 hp ill be happy. just like a throttle body spacer, id like to know what makes a difference and what doesnt
1980 AMC Spirit Restomod in Progress
SilverXJ wrote:Roller rockers won't help that mess you have created. Nor will God for that matter.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 60
- Joined: July 15th, 2009, 9:32 pm
- Vehicle Year: 1992
- Vehicle Make: Jeep
- Vehicle Model: Wrangler
Re: Question about TB
It seems like a few companies support the idea of a 68mm tb for jeep and especially the stroker...painless and f&b. Here is a web page of an install (i'm sure you guys have read this as we all are slight google freaks).
http://www.off-roadweb.com/tech/0907or_ ... index.html
what would be the issues with loss of vacuum and is this further complicated by running a more aggressive cam with longer valve overlap?
if one has an adjustable map sensor is it easy to correct the effects?
and braking...if you do hydro boost upgrade or a double vac booster (using the '95 yj brake booster for earlier vehicles) are you able to get buy with lower vacuum?
http://www.off-roadweb.com/tech/0907or_ ... index.html
what would be the issues with loss of vacuum and is this further complicated by running a more aggressive cam with longer valve overlap?
if one has an adjustable map sensor is it easy to correct the effects?
and braking...if you do hydro boost upgrade or a double vac booster (using the '95 yj brake booster for earlier vehicles) are you able to get buy with lower vacuum?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests