From owner-xj-digest-at-digest.net Tue Apr 28 21:31:48 2009 From: xj-digest xj-digest Wednesday, April 29 2009 Volume 01 : Number 2997 Forum for Discussion of XJ cherokees and wagoneers Brian Colucci Digest Coordinator Contents: xj: RE: fsj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? xj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? xj: RE: fsj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? xj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? xj: Cummins 6AT compared to Nissan SD33 (and 4.2) XJ Digest Home Page: http://www.digest.net/jeep/xj/ Send submissions to xj-digest-at-digest.net Send administrative requests to xj-digest-request-at-digest.net To unsubscribe, include the word unsubscribe by itself in the body of the message, unless you are sending the request from a different address than the one that appears on the list. Include the word help in a message to xj-digest-request to get a list of other majordomo commands. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:56:26 -0700 From: Jim Blair Subject: xj: RE: fsj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? Yup. The 6 cyl is too heavy, even for an FSJ (-at-300 lbs more than the GM diesel IIRC). 4BT has been put into at least one Comanche and since it moves big box vans around it should be fine in an FSJ with the tall gears. Jim Blair, Lynnwood, WA '87 Comanche, '83 Jeep J10, '84 Jeep J10 > Subject: fsj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 07:44:55 -0700 > From: landon.tesar-at-freescale.com > To: john-at-wagoneers.com; bennell-at-mts.net > CC: fsj-at-digest.net; diesel-benz-at-digest.net; xj-at-digest.net > > Too heavy me thinks, tell me I'm wrong? > > - Landon > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-fsj-at-digest.net [mailto:owner-fsj-at-digest.net] On Behalf Of > john > Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 10:21 PM > To: Randy Bennell > Cc: full size jeep list; diesel-benz list; xj-list > Subject: fsj: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? > > thinking of putting a Cummins 6AT in my '83 J10 stepside, > or into a late model XJ. > > john > > > > ----- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold > http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org > http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > On Sat, 25 Apr 2009, Randy Bennell wrote: > > # > # what did you want to know about a Chevy 292? > # > # Randy > # > # > # -----Original Message----- > # From: owner-diesel-benz-at-digest.net > [mailto:owner-diesel-benz-at-digest.net]On > # Behalf Of john > # Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 4:10 PM > # To: undisclosed-recipients: > # Subject: [db] assorted geek news > # > # > # no response yet on the Chevy 292 vs. Cummins 6AT vs. Jeep 4.0L... not > many > # folks seem > # to know about either of the first two... _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live^Y Hotmail.:^Emore than just e-mail. http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_more_042009 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:24:24 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: xj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? ok, you're wrong. actually jim blair was saying it's about 50lbs more than a 4.0L, he bases that on tactile feel, but I'll wait for specs. the 6at was designed to drop in place of a chevy 292, NOT built by cummins, but FOR cummins... much different than a 6Bt. john ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Tesar Landon-R16884 wrote: # Too heavy me thinks, tell me I'm wrong? # # - Landon # # -----Original Message----- # From: owner-fsj-at-digest.net [mailto:owner-fsj-at-digest.net] On Behalf Of # john # Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 10:21 PM # To: Randy Bennell # Cc: full size jeep list; diesel-benz list; xj-list # Subject: fsj: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? # # thinking of putting a Cummins 6AT in my '83 J10 stepside, # or into a late model XJ. # # john # # # # ----- # ------------------------------------------------------------------------ # Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold # http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org # http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us # ------------------------------------------------------------------------ # # # On Sat, 25 Apr 2009, Randy Bennell wrote: # # # # # what did you want to know about a Chevy 292? # # # # Randy # # # # # # -----Original Message----- # # From: owner-diesel-benz-at-digest.net # [mailto:owner-diesel-benz-at-digest.net]On # # Behalf Of john # # Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 4:10 PM # # To: undisclosed-recipients: # # Subject: [db] assorted geek news # # # # # # no response yet on the Chevy 292 vs. Cummins 6AT vs. Jeep 4.0L... not # many # # folks seem # # to know about either of the first two... # ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:29:12 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: xj: RE: fsj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? Jim, we're not talking the 6BT, that is too heavy, we're talking the 6AT. We talked about this over the weekend, didn't we? :) john ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Jim Blair wrote: # # Yup. The 6 cyl is too heavy, even for an FSJ (-at-300 lbs more than the GM diesel IIRC). 4BT has been put into at least one Comanche and since it moves big box vans around it should be fine in an FSJ with the tall gears. # # Jim Blair, Lynnwood, WA '87 Comanche, '83 Jeep J10, '84 Jeep J10 # # # # # > Subject: fsj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? # > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 07:44:55 -0700 # > From: landon.tesar-at-freescale.com # > To: john-at-wagoneers.com; bennell-at-mts.net # > CC: fsj-at-digest.net; diesel-benz-at-digest.net; xj-at-digest.net # > # > Too heavy me thinks, tell me I'm wrong? # > # > - Landon # > # > -----Original Message----- # > From: owner-fsj-at-digest.net [mailto:owner-fsj-at-digest.net] On Behalf Of # > john # > Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 10:21 PM # > To: Randy Bennell # > Cc: full size jeep list; diesel-benz list; xj-list # > Subject: fsj: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? # > # > thinking of putting a Cummins 6AT in my '83 J10 stepside, # > or into a late model XJ. # > # > john # > # > # > # > ----- # > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ # > Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold # > http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org # > http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us # > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ # > # > # > On Sat, 25 Apr 2009, Randy Bennell wrote: # > # > # # > # what did you want to know about a Chevy 292? # > # # > # Randy # > # # > # # > # -----Original Message----- # > # From: owner-diesel-benz-at-digest.net # > [mailto:owner-diesel-benz-at-digest.net]On # > # Behalf Of john # > # Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 4:10 PM # > # To: undisclosed-recipients: # > # Subject: [db] assorted geek news # > # # > # # > # no response yet on the Chevy 292 vs. Cummins 6AT vs. Jeep 4.0L... not # > many # > # folks seem # > # to know about either of the first two... # # _________________________________________________________________ # Windows Live(TM) Hotmail.:...more than just e-mail. # http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_more_042009 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:01:58 -0700 (PDT) From: diesel john Subject: xj: RE: cummins 6at in an xj or my j10? http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/enginePwrSpecs.htm excellent link! thanx john ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Jim Blair wrote: # http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/enginePwrSpecs.htm # # Jim Blair, Lynnwood, WA '87 Comanche, '83 Jeep J10, '84 Jeep J10 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:31:07 -0700 (PDT) From: diesel john Subject: xj: Cummins 6AT compared to Nissan SD33 (and 4.2) have some reliable specs on the Cummins 6AT, seems that engine was made by Onan. however, have heard that parts are hard to come by... (same as for the Nissan SD33/t), and that the 6AT is not extremely durable, but the folks that have them seem to like them. question for me is it worth a swap in the tug, or is it even in the ballpark for use in my '83 J10 Stepside... the SD33 is amazingly gutless, but economical and cruises fine on the freeway. for 26 HP and 60 ftlbs of torque I'm sure it's NOT worth a swap in the tug... HOWEVER, as far as my J10, it came this way: 83 - J10 4.2L - 115 hp -at- 3,200 - 210 ft lbs -at- 1,800 <-- original the SD33 has 94 hp and 160 ftlbs... the 4.2 wasn't all that impressive, so an SD33 in it would be disappointing, but probably faster than in the tug... the J10 weighs in at around 4,100, the tug at 4,400. of course adding the SD33 engine to the J10 would make it about the same, in other words... NO way am I using the SD33 in my J10. And I really don't think going to an SD33T is a good long term solution either... parts issues mainly, I might have better luck tracking down Onan/Cummins 6AT pieces if needed... thoughts? Question is will the 6AT really be worth the trouble, it's pretty close to the 4.2, and if could mate to my AW4 transmission it might just be the ticket... or if it would mate to my T-5 I'd probably see better economy and it would probably drop right in the engine bay... hmm.. comparable specs and size... just need to see if I can find a Chevy adapter for my T-5 and it'll all just drop in place, no driveline changes... sounds good... would be a quick way of getting SuperDawg into the Diesel world... QUESTION: Is there a front adapter on my Jeep T-5 that could be swapped for one that would mate the Chevy adapter on the 6AT? If I recase the T-5 it'll have to have the Jeep output on the other end to mate to my NP205 or it gets expensive quickly. :) You know... the specs match up nicely... have access to a known good 6AT, and my J10 is still not reassembled... if we can drop the 6AT into the same hole as the 4.2 this should go rather smoothly. Then I can get all the bugs worked out of the dawg and part ways with the tug... john SPECS: - ------------------------ 6AT Diesel, 3.4L, 6 cyl , turbo 120hp -at- 3,600 RPM 220 lbft -at- 2000 RPM 665 lbs dry (no flywheel or trans adapter) SD33 Diesel 6 cyl, no turbo 94hp -at- 3600 RPM 160 lbft -at- 1800 RPM 672 lbs dry SD33T Diesel 6 cyl, no intercooler 141 hp -at- 3800 RPM 188 hp -at- 2000 RPM 673 Lbs - ------------------------------------------------ the 6AT has 26 more HP than my SD33, but 21 HP LESS than an SD33T. (SD33T has 47 more HP than the non-turbo version). the 6AT has 60 ftlbs more torque than the SD33, and 32 ftlbs MORE than the SD33T. - ------------------------------------------------ - ------------------ other specs: - -94 - GM 6.5L TD - 215 hp -at- 3,200 - 440 lb-ft -at- 1,800 - -87 300d 3.0L chassis 124.133 /engine 603.960 143 hp -at- 4600 rpm, 195 ftlbs -at- 2400 rpm - -91 300d 2.5 Turbo Diesel chassis 124.128 /engine 602.962 121 hp -at- 4600 rpm, 165 ftlbs -at- 2400 rpm - -88 - GM 6.2L Dsl- 130 hp -at- 3,600 - 240 ft lbs -at- 2,000 - -99 - WJ 4.7L - 235 hp -at- 4,800 - 295 ft lbs -at- 3,200 <-- WJ (GAS... :( also from: http://wagoneers.com/FSJ/engines-comparison-October-2008.txt year - engine - HP -at- rpm - torque -at- rpm - -------------------------------------- 83 - J10 4.2L - 115 hp -at- 3,200 - 210 ft lbs -at- 1,800 <-- original 97 - ZJ 4.0L - 185 hp -at- 4,600 - 220 ft lbs -at- 2,400 99 - WJ 4.7L - 235 hp -at- 4,800 - 295 ft lbs -at- 3,200 <-- WJ 99 - WJ 4.0L - 195 hp -at- 4,600 - 230 ft lbs -at- 3,000 83 - J10 360V8 - 129 hp -at- 3,700 - 245 ft lbs -at- 1,600 <-- Old Blue 88 - XJ 4.0L - 177 hp -at- 4,500 - 224 ft lbs -at- 2,500 <-- little wagoneer 91 - XJ 4.0L - 190 hp -at- 4,750 - 225 ft lbs -at- 4,000 97 - ZJ 5.2L - 220 hp -at- 4,400 - 300 ft lbs -at- 3,200 78 - SJ 401V8 - 215 hp -at- 4,400 - 320 ft lbs -at- 2,800 <-- 401 V8 88 - GM 6.2L Dsl- 130 hp -at- 3,600 - 240 ft lbs -at- 2,000 94 - GM 6.5L TD - 215 hp -at- 3,200 - 440 lb-ft -at- 1,800 john ----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://AMSOIL.com/redirect.cgi?zo=283461 http://creationwiki.org http://johnmeister.com http://wagoneers.com http://fotomeister.us - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ End of xj-digest V1 #2997 *************************