Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Newbies, and basic Stroker Recipes... Get started with your first stroker here!!
User avatar
emberglo
Posts: 6
Joined: June 2nd, 2021, 9:39 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
Vehicle Year: 2002
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler

Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by emberglo »

Hey all,

I'm new to the forum but not Jeeps. My 02 Wrangler has a really worn out 4.0 and since it needed a rebuild anyway I decided to go with a stroker rather than an LS swap.

I've got a 4.7L stroker kit on order from Russ but I have some questions and don't want to pester him too much! haha It includes the oil pump and timing set along with the internals and parts for the head.

I haven't rebuilt an engine in years and nothing newer than about a '65. I'm curious what as far as engine accessories and peripherals you'd all recommend replacing while I have the motor out to do the build?

I was thinking about a set of oversized battery cables (current ones are shot), flowkooler water pump, high flow 195 degree thermostat and housing, replacing any sensors that I haven't done in the last couple years (O2 mostly I think).

Is there anything else I should replace/upgrade while the motor is out?

I am tempted to upgrade the exhaust but I'm not sure what to go with. I already have a cold air intake. I'm not really sure what to do about tuning the ecu or if it's necessary.

I appreciate any help and advice!
- Ryan
User avatar
Cheromaniac
I live here
I live here
Posts: 3180
Joined: March 8th, 2008, 12:58 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4563cc
Vehicle Year: 1992
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Cyprus
Contact:

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by Cheromaniac »

You can keep the existing intake and exhaust manifolds. Just upgrade the TB to 62mm and the exhaust from the cat backwards to 2.5". You'll need bigger injectors and the ECU will definitely need a tune (Christuned or FlyinRyan).
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 :mrgreen:
Unclewolverine
Posts: 6
Joined: May 12th, 2021, 7:44 pm
Vehicle Year: 1995
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by Unclewolverine »

I dont know about wranglers, but on xjs the high volume water pumps tend to cause more problems than they solve so i would skip that. A 195 stant super stat is the recommended thermostat. Definitely upgrade your battery cables. Only replace sensors with mopar. Cheap sensors are cheap for a reason.
Randy Bobandi
I made it to triple digits!
I made it to triple digits!
Posts: 152
Joined: December 22nd, 2020, 8:50 am

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by Randy Bobandi »

Cheromaniac wrote: June 4th, 2021, 3:17 am You'll need bigger injectors and the ECU will definitely need a tune (Christuned or FlyinRyan).
Yes, this is the most crucial part of any engine swap or performance rebuild. If you keep the factory tune, you will be leaving 10 degrees of timing and 10% injector duty cycle on the table. That can be worth 100 HP depending on your fuel system. Have to upgrade the fuel system. Walbro makes plug n play 255 LPH and 350 LPH fuel pumps. 255 LPH pumps are good for 300 HP. 350 LPH pumps are good for 500 HP. 27 LB/HR injectors is the minimum injector rate for these engines. It's about time we shit can the 24 LB/HR injectors, IDK who TF thought that they were a good match. 24 LB/HR injectors are only good for 250 crank HP. You can make that with the stock 4.0L engine. Our Jeep drivetrain is much more parasitic than the typical street car and almost always feature tires over 31". 30 LB/HR (315cc) are what basic Jeep stroker engines call for and can get you over 300 HP to the crank.
User avatar
emberglo
Posts: 6
Joined: June 2nd, 2021, 9:39 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
Vehicle Year: 2002
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by emberglo »

Cheromaniac wrote: June 4th, 2021, 3:17 am You can keep the existing intake and exhaust manifolds. Just upgrade the TB to 62mm and the exhaust from the cat backwards to 2.5". You'll need bigger injectors and the ECU will definitely need a tune (Christuned or FlyinRyan).
I was thinking about having the TB bored out or going DIY on that. Does a cat-back really help with the same restriction at the manifold and mid-pipe? And a tune is definitely in the plan.
Unclewolverine wrote: June 4th, 2021, 5:32 am I dont know about wranglers, but on xjs the high volume water pumps tend to cause more problems than they solve so i would skip that. A 195 stant super stat is the recommended thermostat. Definitely upgrade your battery cables. Only replace sensors with mopar. Cheap sensors are cheap for a reason.
That's good to know. It's the same motor so I imagine I should steer clear of it. From what I was reading on Hesco's site after about 99 or 2000 the stock pump was a higher flow model. Some of the sensors I have put in are non-mopar. I should probably replace them all with mopar ones while it's out.
Randy Bobandi wrote: June 4th, 2021, 8:37 am
Yes, this is the most crucial part of any engine swap or performance rebuild. If you keep the factory tune, you will be leaving 10 degrees of timing and 10% injector duty cycle on the table. That can be worth 100 HP depending on your fuel system. Have to upgrade the fuel system. Walbro makes plug n play 255 LPH and 350 LPH fuel pumps. 255 LPH pumps are good for 300 HP. 350 LPH pumps are good for 500 HP. 27 LB/HR injectors is the minimum injector rate for these engines. It's about time we shit can the 24 LB/HR injectors, IDK who TF thought that they were a good match. 24 LB/HR injectors are only good for 250 crank HP. You can make that with the stock 4.0L engine. Our Jeep drivetrain is much more parasitic than the typical street car and almost always feature tires over 31". 30 LB/HR (315cc) are what basic Jeep stroker engines call for and can get you over 300 HP to the crank.
I'm guessing the motor will be somewhere in the 250-275HP range. The pump might be a good idea or at least a new mopar pump. Which 27 or 30 lb injectors do you suggest? Russ was saying that he thought the stock injectors might be alright since we're not doing anything besides a basic valve job and possibly a little clean up to the head.
- Ryan
User avatar
Cheromaniac
I live here
I live here
Posts: 3180
Joined: March 8th, 2008, 12:58 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4563cc
Vehicle Year: 1992
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Cyprus
Contact:

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by Cheromaniac »

The stock '02 exhaust manifold with twin downpipe doesn't present much restriction and is quite well designed.
I've used two Flowkooler water pumps over the years and each one lasted 60k miles. The OEM pump is absolutely fine and my original one had lasted 112k miles.
My rule of thumb for injector size in the Jeep I6 is simple:

Flow rate per injector (at actual fuel pressure) = Target Crank HP level/10

Therefore a 270hp engine would require 27lb injectors.
Ford 24lb injectors worked for me 'cause my stroker was at ~245hp.

The stock 90lph fuel pump is maxed out at 300 crank HP so if you're aiming for anywhere near that, upgrading to a 255lph pump is a no brainer.
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 :mrgreen:
KarmaKannon1
Making Progress
Making Progress
Posts: 63
Joined: May 21st, 2020, 10:13 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.7
Vehicle Year: 2000
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Utah

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by KarmaKannon1 »

When I had my engine out I pretty much assumed everything that had to come off and could normally wear out would need to be replaced or at least checked. If you have a manual trans that includes clutch and related things.

Not to crap in your parade. I'm just sharing my experience. I had a nice low mileage 5.3 sitting in the shop and decided not to go through the work of putting it in my xj. I sold it to justify a couple extra dollars into my stroker build. I had some issues that I believe are cam bearing related. I reused the stock cam because the cam upgrades start to open some big money holes with springs and head work. When it was running it ran pretty good. It wasn't exactly fast, but it was pretty strong. I kick myself every day for not going with the ls engine. We are talking about a jeep stroker making up to 300hp realistically or a 5.3 with a cam making similar power with a lot more room for head work and such.

It all depends on your goals. If you are working towards your goals then you should be happy. If your goal is a quick jeep with more effort outside the engine, then v8. If your goal is a quicker jeep with more work inside an engine, then stroker sounds right.
User avatar
emberglo
Posts: 6
Joined: June 2nd, 2021, 9:39 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
Vehicle Year: 2002
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by emberglo »

Cheromaniac wrote: June 5th, 2021, 3:58 am The stock '02 exhaust manifold with twin downpipe doesn't present much restriction and is quite well designed.
I've used two Flowkooler water pumps over the years and each one lasted 60k miles. The OEM pump is absolutely fine and my original one had lasted 112k miles.
My rule of thumb for injector size in the Jeep I6 is simple:

Flow rate per injector (at actual fuel pressure) = Target Crank HP level/10

Therefore a 270hp engine would require 27lb injectors.
Ford 24lb injectors worked for me 'cause my stroker was at ~245hp.

The stock 90lph fuel pump is maxed out at 300 crank HP so if you're aiming for anywhere near that, upgrading to a 255lph pump is a no brainer.
That's good to know about the manifold. I may just start with a cat back then and go from there.

Hmm. I'll see if I can find a Mopar pump, if not I'll look at the flowkooler. 60K miles isn't terrible.

Definitely food for thought on the fuel system. I'm not pushing for 300 crank HP, so the stock fuel pump would likely be fine, but I'll look into larger injectors.
KarmaKannon1 wrote: June 5th, 2021, 10:14 am When I had my engine out I pretty much assumed everything that had to come off and could normally wear out would need to be replaced or at least checked. If you have a manual trans that includes clutch and related things.

Not to crap in your parade. I'm just sharing my experience. I had a nice low mileage 5.3 sitting in the shop and decided not to go through the work of putting it in my xj. I sold it to justify a couple extra dollars into my stroker build. I had some issues that I believe are cam bearing related. I reused the stock cam because the cam upgrades start to open some big money holes with springs and head work. When it was running it ran pretty good. It wasn't exactly fast, but it was pretty strong. I kick myself every day for not going with the ls engine. We are talking about a jeep stroker making up to 300hp realistically or a 5.3 with a cam making similar power with a lot more room for head work and such.

It all depends on your goals. If you are working towards your goals then you should be happy. If your goal is a quick jeep with more effort outside the engine, then v8. If your goal is a quicker jeep with more work inside an engine, then stroker sounds right.

Kinda what my plan is. My motor is worn out and needs a rebuild/refresh anyway so I decided I might as well turn it into a stroker since I was going to replace the rotating assembly and everything anyway. And my transmission is an automatic and going in for a complete rebuild as well. I have a Mustang that is my go fast car. The extra power in the Jeep will be nice for dealing with bigger tires and the mountains around here but I'm not trying to make HP for the purpose of making HP. I'm guessing it will be in the 250-275 range and that's a healthy bump over stock as well as having basically a brand new engine and transmission.

The cam that Russ included for me is meant to work with the stock valves/springs/rockers but just help it breath a bit better. I'm just doing a standard valve job, no major head work.

The biggest turn offs to the V8 swap was the electrical (I'm terrible with electrical) and dealing with getting it registered and smogged afterwards.
- Ryan
KarmaKannon1
Making Progress
Making Progress
Posts: 63
Joined: May 21st, 2020, 10:13 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.7
Vehicle Year: 2000
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Utah

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by KarmaKannon1 »

emberglo wrote: June 5th, 2021, 1:45 pm
Cheromaniac wrote: June 5th, 2021, 3:58 am The stock '02 exhaust manifold with twin downpipe doesn't present much restriction and is quite well designed.
I've used two Flowkooler water pumps over the years and each one lasted 60k miles. The OEM pump is absolutely fine and my original one had lasted 112k miles.
My rule of thumb for injector size in the Jeep I6 is simple:

Flow rate per injector (at actual fuel pressure) = Target Crank HP level/10

Therefore a 270hp engine would require 27lb injectors.
Ford 24lb injectors worked for me 'cause my stroker was at ~245hp.

The stock 90lph fuel pump is maxed out at 300 crank HP so if you're aiming for anywhere near that, upgrading to a 255lph pump is a no brainer.
That's good to know about the manifold. I may just start with a cat back then and go from there.

Hmm. I'll see if I can find a Mopar pump, if not I'll look at the flowkooler. 60K miles isn't terrible.

Definitely food for thought on the fuel system. I'm not pushing for 300 crank HP, so the stock fuel pump would likely be fine, but I'll look into larger injectors.
KarmaKannon1 wrote: June 5th, 2021, 10:14 am When I had my engine out I pretty much assumed everything that had to come off and could normally wear out would need to be replaced or at least checked. If you have a manual trans that includes clutch and related things.

Not to crap in your parade. I'm just sharing my experience. I had a nice low mileage 5.3 sitting in the shop and decided not to go through the work of putting it in my xj. I sold it to justify a couple extra dollars into my stroker build. I had some issues that I believe are cam bearing related. I reused the stock cam because the cam upgrades start to open some big money holes with springs and head work. When it was running it ran pretty good. It wasn't exactly fast, but it was pretty strong. I kick myself every day for not going with the ls engine. We are talking about a jeep stroker making up to 300hp realistically or a 5.3 with a cam making similar power with a lot more room for head work and such.

It all depends on your goals. If you are working towards your goals then you should be happy. If your goal is a quick jeep with more effort outside the engine, then v8. If your goal is a quicker jeep with more work inside an engine, then stroker sounds right.

Kinda what my plan is. My motor is worn out and needs a rebuild/refresh anyway so I decided I might as well turn it into a stroker since I was going to replace the rotating assembly and everything anyway. And my transmission is an automatic and going in for a complete rebuild as well. I have a Mustang that is my go fast car. The extra power in the Jeep will be nice for dealing with bigger tires and the mountains around here but I'm not trying to make HP for the purpose of making HP. I'm guessing it will be in the 250-275 range and that's a healthy bump over stock as well as having basically a brand new engine and transmission.

The cam that Russ included for me is meant to work with the stock valves/springs/rockers but just help it breath a bit better. I'm just doing a standard valve job, no major head work.

The biggest turn offs to the V8 swap was the electrical (I'm terrible with electrical) and dealing with getting it registered and smogged afterwards.
That makes perfect sense. I would rather work on electrical than engine internals, but it all kinda sucks and all engines need work sooner or later. Sounds like you are realistic and will meet your goals. Russ is good people and if he's influenced any of your decisions then you are likely on the right track.
jasonb
Making Progress
Making Progress
Posts: 52
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 5:59 pm
Vehicle Year: 1996
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by jasonb »

I'll give you my $.02 on the flowkooler pump. I have had two of them, one on my 4.0 and another on the stroker I have sitting on an engine stand waiting to get put in. Obviously the latter I have no comments on other than that it looks to be a Gates pump - let me back track a little. I have realized that flowkooler doesn't make their own pumps, they just put their impeller on other's pumps, and the pump supplier changes over time. The original one I had on my 4.0 appeared to be a GMB pump, it lasted about 30k miles before it wept. Unhappy with the short life, I purchased a Gates pump, carefully removed the impellers of both, and pressed the flowkooler impeller onto the Gates pump. The reason I went to all this trouble is that I like the results that the flowkooler provides. There are a lot of opinions about it, but for me it lives up to the claims in theory and in practice so I'll keep using them.
rlinares40
Where's the "any" key?
Where's the "any" key?
Posts: 27
Joined: December 3rd, 2020, 9:38 am

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by rlinares40 »

Cheromaniac wrote: June 5th, 2021, 3:58 am The stock 90lph fuel pump is maxed out at 300 crank HP so if you're aiming for anywhere near that, upgrading to a 255lph pump is a no brainer.
Any recommendations on which 255lph pump would be best?
jsawduste
My keyboard is getting warn out
My keyboard is getting warn out
Posts: 1032
Joined: February 28th, 2008, 3:13 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.9
Location: Michigan

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by jsawduste »

Geez this Randy Bobandi guy sure comes up with some interesting comments.

Ahhh, when it was said and done my stroker and a number of others I`ve built have reached 300hp+ running OBD1 SBEC factory tune with 24 lb injectors and a stock pump. It ran ok but there was a bit of room for improvement. Such as pulling fuel on a open loop cold start. According to the AFR gage it would drop to low 13`s in WOT so I guess that inferior stock pump was somehow magical ?

In the end I converted mine to OBD2 JTEC and Chris flashed the ECM. The improvements were more for reliability. Like zeroing out the trim delay and changing the timing maps for example. Running the same 24 lbers and the factory Bosch replacement pump. Now I can see mid 12 AFR`s. Far as timing goes Chris actually pulled a bit of total timing out.

Guess I have unicorn and every stroker I`ve built is a unicorn also.

If a sensor is known to be working good. Why would you chance changing it to a sensor that you don't know is good ?

There is only one stat I trust and that is factory OEM. Again, if yours is working than leave it alone.
Randy Bobandi
I made it to triple digits!
I made it to triple digits!
Posts: 152
Joined: December 22nd, 2020, 8:50 am

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by Randy Bobandi »

jsawduste wrote: June 8th, 2021, 6:34 am Geez this Randy Bobandi guy sure comes up with some interesting comments.

Ahhh, when it was said and done my stroker and a number of others I`ve built have reached 300hp+ running OBD1 SBEC factory tune with 24 lb injectors and a stock pump. It ran ok but there was a bit of room for improvement. Such as pulling fuel on a open loop cold start. According to the AFR gage it would drop to low 13`s in WOT so I guess that inferior stock pump was somehow magical ?
C'mon dude. What you typed up there is factually impossible. 300 wheel HP with 250cc injectors and a 200 MAX LPH fuel pump. I don't even know where to begin with that. Is that 300+ HP on the butt dyno? Do you have 8 inch radio flyer tires on that Jeep?

Newcomer just built his daily driver Cherokee to 350 wheel HP. He needed a 350 LPH fuel pump and 535cc Injectors (51 #/HR).
jsawduste
My keyboard is getting warn out
My keyboard is getting warn out
Posts: 1032
Joined: February 28th, 2008, 3:13 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.9
Location: Michigan

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by jsawduste »

Randy, your a classic example of "knowledge does not equate to understanding". Meaning you think you know more than you do. Several of your comments are glaring examples. Also the type that is closed minded and unable to logically reason with factual data.

My dyno runs are on a Dynojet brand chassis dyno. I also have access to a engine dyno with an eddy current load simulator. Over the years both have been valuable tools.

Keith may have used a 350 LPH pump but if your talking about his latest Cherokee project you missed the fact that it also features a turbo. Slightly different than a NA application.

My apologies to the OP for cluttering up his thread.

Randy, don't bother responding. You've proven beyond a doubt there is no hope in changing how you think.
Randy Bobandi
I made it to triple digits!
I made it to triple digits!
Posts: 152
Joined: December 22nd, 2020, 8:50 am

Re: Some Stroker Adjacent Questions

Post by Randy Bobandi »

jsawduste wrote: June 8th, 2021, 4:12 pm Randy, don't bother responding. You've proven beyond a doubt there is no hope in changing how you think.
This is very important information. It's very important for new engine builders to understand that they can never have enough fuel system. This stock pump + 24 #/HR injector thing has to go. You see it constantly on every Jeep forum, folks complaining about the power of their new Jeep stroker engine. They all run stock pumps and 24 #/HR injectors. It's a wildly inadequate combination.
jsawduste wrote: June 8th, 2021, 4:12 pm Randy, your a classic example of "knowledge does not equate to understanding". Meaning you think you know more than you do. Several of your comments are glaring examples. Also the type that is closed minded and unable to logically reason with factual data.
You have presented zero data. All I do is present facts that are standard for internal combustion engines.
jsawduste wrote: June 8th, 2021, 4:12 pm My dyno runs are on a Dynojet brand chassis dyno. I also have access to a engine dyno with an eddy current load simulator. Over the years both have been valuable tools.
Show us. That would be excellent information. An engine making 400 crank HP with a 200 LPH fuel pump and 250cc injectors. That would literally be groundbreaking and it would have the SAE baffled by your accomplishment. Elon Musk would give up on his EV marketing.
jsawduste wrote: June 8th, 2021, 4:12 pm Keith may have used a 350 LPH pump but if your talking about his latest Cherokee project you missed the fact that it also features a turbo. Slightly different than a NA application.
It's very simple actually. It's called the rising rate and it's 1:1, manifold pressure:fuel pressure. So an engine at 15 PSI manifold pressure needs the fuel pump/regulator/injectors to overcome 15 PSI. So that 350 wheel HP turbo 4.0L for example, with 525cc injectors. MAX crank HP it can make @ 50 PSI fuel pressure with a 350 LPH pump is 536 HP. Max crank it could make NA is 643 HP. Difference of 107 HP or 16.5%. So you see it's typical to run 15% more fuel pump @ 15 PSI of boost. It's been made simple for us as injectors and pumps have been studied for a long time. 24#/HR injectors are only good for 300 crank HP NA @ 50 PSI. The stock 190 LPH pump produces 132 LPH @ 50 PSI which again is only good for 300 HP NA.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 15 guests