Non-EGR VM Motori install?

Sir Sam · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2008 12:16 am

tjkj2002 wrote:

Quote:

I am just trying to make a point that you sound like a HUGE douche-bag right now telling me that my Jeep and what I do and what I use my Jeep for is somehow less worthwhile than yours.

I never said anything about you or your Jeep in anyway so a mute point.

Quote:

Simple fact of the matter is that you expressed your opinion and made it sound like no other way was an acceptable way, and in doing so you stepped on some very offense toes.

I never phrased anything like that,"shouldn't" is just a referance since most mods commonly done to a Jeep always reduce mpg's.And opinions were wanted in this thread and I gave mine.Not everone is after mpg's but rather bettering there Jeeps(and not always better mpg's) and opinions are calculated from prior experiances which everyone will have different ones.

*******BACK ON TOPIC**********

Putting a non-EGR 2.8 in a gasser KJ would be a easy swap due to all the parts needed for the swap are already made and can be bought and rather zero fabbing would be needed.Plus the non-EGR 2.8 would be less complicated and would respond to aftermarket mods better,and of course be less prone to the problems the EGR 2.8 has been prone to.Of course a built tranny would be in order anyway,maybe that manual some of you wnat would be a good way to go.As far a the electronics go that can be dealt with from poeple like Dan at Burnsville offroad since he has vast knowledge of doing engine swaps of all kinds,most good hot rod shops can also get the electronics figured out also.

Ok, your mute point. My moot point.

tjkj2002 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2008 12:18 am

Quote:

http://www.toyota.de/cars/new_cars/hilux/specs.aspx

Is 35mpg an arbitrary figure or are you somehow implying that a 4BT powered vehicle achieves those consumption figures?

1st that is not offered in the states.And no I was never referring that the 4bt would get better mpg's,just it's a overall better engine then the 2.8 for reliability and ease of maintaining,but the 4bt is not a good option for a KJ anyway because of the weight,now transplated in a old F-350 the 4bt is a real nice mod,makes it a real workhorse truck( I grew up on a farm so being able to tow more is always nice).

dieseltoyz · **Joined:** Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:28 pm **Posts:** 64

I'm afraid I'm not following your argument here. You make the bold statement that the 4bt is a vastly superior engine to the CRD, yet the 4bt is only suitable for use in a small handful of vehicles (delivery trucks) due to it's excessive weight, heavy vibration, and poor fuel economy. So instead of buyers wanting a fuel efficient off-road capable vehicle, they should just chalk it up to "part of the deal"? Just because the CRD is not a water wheel with a few ropes and pulleys doesn't make it inherently difficult to maintain nor unreliable. A perfect example of this is the ALH TDI engine. It's a fantastically efficient engine, dead reliable, and excellent torque band. Not a very fun engine to work on and parts are expensive. But for one to argue that one engine is superior to another based on it's maintainability speaks more of the mechanic than the engine.

onthehunt · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2008 1:21 am

As a tech I would rank maintainability over efficiency. Normal Joe's paying someone $100's to find their "ghost in the machine" problems rank them the same. Ask around shops and see how many want their "old" engines back.

dieseltoyz · **Joined:** Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:28 pm **Posts:** 64

A normal Joe will not we performing engine swaps.

tjkj2002 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2008 9:45 am

dieseltoyz wrote:

A normal Joe will not we performing engine swaps.

That depends on how you define a "normal joe".I consider myself a "normal joe" and I have done engine swaps,so what that I am a mechanic,we can be "normal" also.

Quote:

onthehunt

As a tech I would rank maintainability over efficiency. Normal Joe's paying someone $100's to find their "ghost in the machine" problems rank them the same. Ask around shops and see how many want their "old" engines back.

Exactly.....

But you also need to weigh the options of what is the best choice for the swap your doing.A Detroit 8V92TA is not a good choice for a KJ,nor is a 2.8 CRD engine a good option for a Ford F-750.

dieseltoyz · **Joined:** Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:28 pm **Posts:** 64

I was referring to onthehunt's description of a guy who pays $100's to a shop to figure out a problem. This person (with obvioius limited mechanical ability) should not swap out their powertrain for something else. Leads to poor results

flash7210 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2008 12:14 pm

Not to stir up the pot again but...

I like the 4BT. Had I known then what I know now I would have kept my
'92 F150 and put a 4BT 3.9 in it.

Whether or not this is a good motor is really up to the person driving it.
I like its relativly small size, simplicity, and durability. Perfect for a medium
to large size truck or SUV.

Some people will say that putting a 500ci big block in a small car (like a
Mustang) is a great idea. I on the other hand will tell them that its a stupid
idea. It is just way too much motor, disrupts the weight balance, makes
the car handle poorly and causes the chassis the twist and distort from
excessive torque and weight.
Hey, whatever, its not MY car. :wink:

dieseltoyz · **Joined:** Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:28 pm **Posts:** 64

An FJ40 landcruiser (which is a real popular vehicle for the 4BT) the front axle assembly is normally swapped for a Dana 60 due to the weight of the 4BT. This causes the front end geometry to change substantially. Makes for a stiff ride. Engine mounts are tough to keep from cracking due to vibration in such a small frame. The FJ40 also has a riveted frame which I'm sure doesnt help.

Non-EGR VM Motori install?

Who is online