Jeep Strokers

Hypothetical question.....

If the aftermarket was to introduce a new head casting at a competitive price point what features would you like to see ?

Out of the box gains would be AT LEAST on par with a ported factory head.

Now,
If that new head offered the use of a different intake/exhaust manifold/header to "optimize" the gains would you still be interested ?

I don`t want to read about the expense side of things. As mentioned, "offered at a competitive price point" with potential extra cost upgrades available.

A different intake would be a good idea as all we have now are the factory offerings.. maybe a "builder" style with a lower profile and a blank plate on top.. lol. And optimized exhaust header would be good as well. Although there are plenty of headers available, but probably wouldn't be optimized with a different head. A cross flow head would be ideal just to get the intake manifold away from the exhaust heat, but that would probably be complex and expensive. Perhaps a modified cooling system that diverts some coolant to the back of the head

A more common valve would be good as there would be more options. A good spring package in either cone or beehive style that can be used with most after market cams. Of course smaller, light retainers, locks, etc.

Good port and chamber design are over my experience so I don't have an opinion on that.

To take a few notes from Hesco's head. 1) larger push rod holes to clear the lifters 2) either shorter valve lengths, and rocker pedestals, or a raised valve cover rail so those with roller rockers wouldn't need the spacers, 3) bosses for those with the coil rail

Might as well make the combustion chambers bigger too, that way you could use economical pistons to get a reasonable compression ratio.

? Raise the intake and exhaust ports- but can only go up so far as elbow for TB would hit hood
Bigger valves, behive/cone springs good to 0.550", 100lb seat and 240lb at 0.525", and modern combustion chamber.
Use stock intake manifold and headers, maybe offer high flow intake manifold, curved runner style.
Thicker head deck.
Aluminum of course.

That ain't right to ask a question like this n exclude exspense recommendations. That is by far the main factor in most people's decision making, but hey it's your question.
I'm assuming by the competitive pricing quote its gonna cost around $2000 so..........
1) MADE IN USA. most important it be cast in an American foundry........
2) Being there are millions upon millions of stock head castings still around. This should be a high performance item with improvement in flow potential taking TOP priority.
3) shaft mounted rockers would be sweet
4) provision for an external oil line to feed a spray bar and the shaft mounted rockers.
5) enlarged pushrod holes

SilverXJ wrote:A cross flow head would be ideal just to get the intake manifold away from the exhaust heat, but that would probably be complex and expensive. Perhaps a modified cooling system that diverts some coolant to the back of the head

A more common valve would be good as there would be more options. A good spring package in either cone or beehive style that can be used with most after market cams. Of course smaller, light retainers, locks, etc.

Good port and chamber design are over my experience so I don't have an opinion on that.

To take a few notes from Hesco's head. 1) larger push rod holes to clear the lifters 2) either shorter valve lengths, and rocker pedestals, or a raised valve cover rail so those with roller rockers wouldn't need the spacers, 3) bosses for those with the coil rail

Agree with all of the above. One problem with a crossflow design in a pushrod engine is that the pushrod holes would protrude into either the intake or exhaust ports (depending on whether you move the intake manifold or header to passenger side) and reduce port flow. It also isn't feasible to move either the intake manifold or header to the passenger side 'cause the distributor (or cam position sensor) would be in the way, and moving the header to the passenger side would bring the collector right next to the starter so you'd need to cover the starter with a heatshield to prevent it from failing prematurely due to heat soak.

MAKE IT A HEMI DIRECT INJECT IT Or, a cross flow design with the header on the stock side and the intake/plugs on the passenger side. Should work for 96+ engines with a CPS I would think. I just dont see the starter lasting very long with the header that close to it. But it has been a while since there has been an engine under my hood so what do I know.

You all, are not demanding. If the cost does not matter, then I would I want 24 valves, triflux og cross-flow head, and of course two OHC with VVT.

Cheromaniac wrote:One problem with a crossflow design in a pushrod engine is that the pushrod holes would protrude into either the intake or exhaust ports (depending on whether you move the intake manifold or header to passenger side) and reduce port flow. It also isn't feasible to move either the intake manifold or header to the passenger side 'cause the distributor (or cam position sensor) would be in the way, and moving the header to the passenger side would bring the collector right next to the starter so you'd need to cover the starter with a heatshield to prevent it from failing prematurely due to heat soak.

Yeah, I know.. thats was more like a pipe dream.

I know this thread is hypothetical. But....the problem, for 95% of people who build strokers is not in the head.

Most full-ported 4.0 heads flow in the neighborhood of 240-270 cfm. Even by conservative estimates, that's enough for roughly 500hp and change. How many strokers do we know of that reach this point? Not many, that I know of.

The greater issue IMHO lies in the TB/intake manifold. Too often have I been approached to tune strokers with STOCK or 62mm TBs that are marginal for a 4.0, much less a 4.6, etc etc etc. This is a school of thought that desperately needs to change. Cant make power sucking through a straw!!!!

I would love to see a intake manifold that has more plenum volume and a larger opening for a TB. Kind of like going from the beer keg manifold on a 318/360 Magnum to a M1 single plane and a big TB....transforms the truck, big time.

Beyond that, the camshafts most use are WAY too small. By a good 20* @.050. Go bigger, and go tighter on the LSA....trust me!!!!

Agreed i would love to see a real intake manifold and im thinking a 72-73mm throttle body would be just about right.

FlyinRyan wrote:I know this thread is hypothetical. But....the problem, for 95% of people who build strokers is not in the head.

Most full-ported 4.0 heads flow in the neighborhood of 240-270 cfm. Even by conservative estimates, that's enough for roughly 500hp and change. How many strokers do we know of that reach this point? Not many, that I know of.

The greater issue IMHO lies in the TB/intake manifold. Too often have I been approached to tune strokers with STOCK or 62mm TBs that are marginal for a 4.0, much less a 4.6, etc etc etc. This is a school of thought that desperately needs to change. Cant make power sucking through a straw!!!!

I would love to see a intake manifold that has more plenum volume and a larger opening for a TB. Kind of like going from the beer keg manifold on a 318/360 Magnum to a M1 single plane and a big TB....transforms the truck, big time.

Beyond that, the camshafts most use are WAY too small. By a good 20* @.050. Go bigger, and go tighter on the LSA....trust me!!!!

Agree. The heads have plenty of airflow once ported but the stock cam/intake manifold/TB are a major bottleneck. There are plenty of performance cams to choose from, there's a 68mm TB available, and you can even enlarge the intake manifold opening to 68mm, but you're still stuck with long runners that have a small cross-section to restrict high rpm breathing.
That said, the stock bottom end is only good for 5600rpm before harmonics come into play so you'd have to address that too if you want an engine that'll safely make power up to, say, 6000rpm. Otherwise just try to set the engine up to make as much torque as possible from 750-5250rpm and leave it at that.

FlyinRyan wrote:I know this thread is hypothetical. But....the problem, for 95% of people who build strokers is not in the head.
Most full-ported 4.0 heads flow in the neighborhood of 240-270 cfm. Even by conservative estimates, that's enough for roughly 500hp and change. How many strokers do we know of that reach this point? Not many, that I know of.
The greater issue IMHO lies in the TB/intake manifold. Too often have I been approached to tune strokers with STOCK or 62mm TBs that are marginal for a 4.0, much less a 4.6, etc etc etc. This is a school of thought that desperately needs to change. Cant make power sucking through a straw!!!!
I would love to see a intake manifold that has more plenum volume and a larger opening for a TB. Kind of like going from the beer keg manifold on a 318/360 Magnum to a M1 single plane and a big TB....transforms the truck, big time.
Beyond that, the camshafts most use are WAY too small. By a good 20* @.050. Go bigger, and go tighter on the LSA....trust me!!!!

So use a 68-70mmTB and port/hog out the intake runners?

What size cam would you recommend for a 4.6?
Most use a Comp 231 250/258 206/[email protected]" 0.462"/0.485" LSA 111 Overlap 32 ** or there abouts.

F&B throttle bodies also make you a 70mm tb.

The problem with modifying the intake manifold runners is that they are a) very long and b) on the later manifold too twisty. You could use a long tool on the earlier manifolds, but you are stuck on the later ones. One option is .... heck.. can't recall the name.. but they use a sort of sand slury to run through then manifold to open it up. But its a very uncontrolled processes.

I'm more interested in the AL head for the ability to run higher compression on pump gas.

As for what cam.. if you want a cam to fit your vehicle, engine and personal wants I recommend going to a good custom cam grinder and get a custom grind. I'm not talking the likes of Comp Cams though.

jeepxj3 wrote:

FlyinRyan wrote:I know this thread is hypothetical. But....the problem, for 95% of people who build strokers is not in the head.
Most full-ported 4.0 heads flow in the neighborhood of 240-270 cfm. Even by conservative estimates, that's enough for roughly 500hp and change. How many strokers do we know of that reach this point? Not many, that I know of.
The greater issue IMHO lies in the TB/intake manifold. Too often have I been approached to tune strokers with STOCK or 62mm TBs that are marginal for a 4.0, much less a 4.6, etc etc etc. This is a school of thought that desperately needs to change. Cant make power sucking through a straw!!!!
I would love to see a intake manifold that has more plenum volume and a larger opening for a TB. Kind of like going from the beer keg manifold on a 318/360 Magnum to a M1 single plane and a big TB....transforms the truck, big time.
Beyond that, the camshafts most use are WAY too small. By a good 20* @.050. Go bigger, and go tighter on the LSA....trust me!!!!

So use a 68-70mmTB and port/hog out the intake runners?

What size cam would you recommend for a 4.6?
Most use a Comp 231 250/258 206/[email protected]" 0.462"/0.485" LSA 111 Overlap 32 ** or there abouts.

Yes, at minimum.
Comp 239 or similiar (or bigger) custom cam, and tighten up the LSA to 106-110.