4 Door or Extended Cab J Series Truck?

[Stuka]

OK that would be an awesome trip ngl.

Personally I think the I-6 just doesn't have the breath for that but otherwise that would be awesome!

If you're retired you could just take your time and it takes however long it takes lol

Sure, an i6 may suffer on the HWY with a big load. But offroad, they are fine. My J10 never lacked for power on the trail, and that great off idle torque made climbing things easy. Parts availability for the 258 is also really good.

On the HWY, it would not pull grades at altitude at the same speed that an LS swapped FSJ would by any means. Though not that far behind a stock 360. But it never had cooling or vapor lock issues, and never had issues with running at a higher RPM to get the work done. Now, I did have it over geared (4.56's with 33's), but if I one day get another J-Truck, I would be very happy if it was a 258. Even more happy if it was a 4.7L stroker as they can make great power.

[sierrablue]

Yeah I realize the I-6 has plenty of low-end torque, and like no horsepower. My issue with it is, at least what I've noticed with the ZJ, is it takes off about the same speed no matter how much gas you give it, and then that's all it's got. Not bad but if you're on the highway or you need it to give a little more part way up something, you're out of luck. A bigger cam and the Edelbrock head help a lot with that, don't get me wrong, but that starts to get expensive and does hurt the low-end a little bit.

It can be made to work but it certainly wouldn't be my top choice for that, is all I'm saying. Also that I-6 is heavy for its output (albeit not compared to the AMC V-8 or a Ford FE), so that's gonna be hurting your weight.

I wonder if the people saying high HP doesn't work well are saying that not because the HP isn't good, but because it hurts their low-end torque and moves it up in the curve, and thus it feels worse because that's where most of their driving is overlanding? Just a theory

[tgreese]

I would not assume anything about engine weights. Numbers I've seen suggest the small block V8s from the same era are all about the same weight. The AMC sixes are lighter than all of them, and a few sixes are considerably lighter (Ford 144/170/200 and Buick 225/231 for example).

Casting technology of the age seems to be the main factor. The oldest inline sixes as well as the first generation V8s were anchor heavy compared to even the '70s era engines. As technology progressed, cast blocks got thinner and lighter, due to the better core alignment plus design and materials improvement I presume. Less material used. The later AMC sixes (the last 258 and the 4.0L) are said to be some 80 lbs lighter than the '70s 258 due to improved castings and lighter components. What I've read is the AMC V8s are similar to the Chevy at around 550, while the 258 is 450ish. Hard to be exact here, since the numbers come from lots of different sources, and it's hard to determine what parts were left off and what were included.

[sierrablue]

This is just what I've found about engine weights--could be wrong but this is what the chart said.

The SBC is around 550 lbs stock, and a lot of V-8s from the time are too. An AMC 4.0 is about 450 lbs, with the 258 being heavier, and the Ford I-6 is about 500 lbs.

However, the Buick 350 has a lot of zinc in the block, putting it right around 450 lbs stock. And installing the T/A Performance aluminum intake drops ~50 lbs off that, plus if you did aluminum heads... Anyway, the Windsor Fords are 450 for the iron 302-down (plus they make an aluminum 302 block/heads/everything), and the iron 351W is under 500 lbs.

I say the AMC 6 is heavy because the Buick V8 is just as easy to get parts for, weighs the same, gets the same or better mileage (assuming equivalent--ie both have to run the same transmission/vehicle), and more torque/hp. And the 302 can EASILY be made lighter and make better power/torque, as well as being a piece of cake to get parts for (and cheaper!), and being a nice compact design.

I mean there's obviously way worse out there. The FEs for instance weigh 700 lbs, which is more than some DIESELS. They are reliable and make lots of grunt, but they are NOT light.

Of course if you've got room, an aluminum Coyote or 4.6 DOHC is about 500 lbs and the '96-98 4.6 block can hold up to about 800 hp...

[Stuka]

This is just what I've found about engine weights--could be wrong but this is what the chart said.

The SBC is around 550 lbs stock, and a lot of V-8s from the time are too. An AMC 4.0 is about 450 lbs, with the 258 being heavier, and the Ford I-6 is about 500 lbs.

However, the Buick 350 has a lot of zinc in the block, putting it right around 450 lbs stock. And installing the T/A Performance aluminum intake drops ~50 lbs off that, plus if you did aluminum heads... Anyway, the Windsor Fords are 450 for the iron 302-down (plus they make an aluminum 302 block/heads/everything), and the iron 351W is under 500 lbs.

I say the AMC 6 is heavy because the Buick V8 is just as easy to get parts for, weighs the same, gets the same or better mileage (assuming equivalent--ie both have to run the same transmission/vehicle), and more torque/hp. And the 302 can EASILY be made lighter and make better power/torque, as well as being a piece of cake to get parts for (and cheaper!), and being a nice compact design.

I mean there's obviously way worse out there. The FEs for instance weigh 700 lbs, which is more than some DIESELS. They are reliable and make lots of grunt, but they are NOT light.

Of course if you've got room, an aluminum Coyote or 4.6 DOHC is about 500 lbs and the '96-98 4.6 block can hold up to about 800 hp...

An AMC 6 has way better parts availability than the Buick V8. The Buick 350 was only made for 12 years, and only came in lower production number vehicles. The AMC i6 (232, 258, 242) were made for 42 years and came in a huge number of vehicles. Now yes, the early engines can be tossed out as they had a lot of differences. But that still leaves 35 years of usage. And the 258 was used in other countries, which is good if traveling out of the US.

As for horse power, that's actually pretty easy to fix. The 4.0 HO has 195, with a cam, intake, exhaust and some mild porting, you can easily get to 250. If you are doing a stroker, 300 is doable and stay reliable. The extreme end is turbo setups putting out 800+. But that's strictly for drag racing, and not a reliable driver setup.

But really, I don't think the engine weight matters until you get to really heavy engines, such as iron big blocks or diesels.

Plenty of arguments for a V8. I am just saying he doesn't need a V8 for what he is thinking of. Its a gravel highway, and people have done it in Model T's with 20hp.

[Yeller]

Weight is a killer.... my RTT is not necessary, but makes it comfortable, which keeps my wife involved too. We've gotten pretty good at keeping it light, all of our gear, including spare parts, tools, camping stuff, water, fuel, rack and RTT is right at 560#. I also have a build goal of staying under 5300# fully loaded with everything, so far I believe I've maintained that. I have a thing about weights, I weigh everything Lol

[sierrablue]

This is just what I've found about engine weights--could be wrong but this is what the chart said.

The SBC is around 550 lbs stock, and a lot of V-8s from the time are too. An AMC 4.0 is about 450 lbs, with the 258 being heavier, and the Ford I-6 is about 500 lbs.

However, the Buick 350 has a lot of zinc in the block, putting it right around 450 lbs stock. And installing the T/A Performance aluminum intake drops ~50 lbs off that, plus if you did aluminum heads... Anyway, the Windsor Fords are 450 for the iron 302-down (plus they make an aluminum 302 block/heads/everything), and the iron 351W is under 500 lbs.

I say the AMC 6 is heavy because the Buick V8 is just as easy to get parts for, weighs the same, gets the same or better mileage (assuming equivalent--ie both have to run the same transmission/vehicle), and more torque/hp. And the 302 can EASILY be made lighter and make better power/torque, as well as being a piece of cake to get parts for (and cheaper!), and being a nice compact design.

I mean there's obviously way worse out there. The FEs for instance weigh 700 lbs, which is more than some DIESELS. They are reliable and make lots of grunt, but they are NOT light.

Of course if you've got room, an aluminum Coyote or 4.6 DOHC is about 500 lbs and the '96-98 4.6 block can hold up to about 800 hp...

An AMC 6 has way better parts availability than the Buick V8. The Buick 350 was only made for 12 years, and only came in lower production number vehicles. The AMC i6 (232, 258, 242) were made for 42 years and came in a huge number of vehicles. Now yes, the early engines can be tossed out as they had a lot of differences. But that still leaves 35 years of usage. And the 258 was used in other countries, which is good if traveling out of the US.

As for horse power, that's actually pretty easy to fix. The 4.0 HO has 195, with a cam, intake, exhaust and some mild porting, you can easily get to 250. If you are doing a stroker, 300 is doable and stay reliable. The extreme end is turbo setups putting out 800+. But that's strictly for drag racing, and not a reliable driver setup.

But really, I don't think the engine weight matters until you get to really heavy engines, such as iron big blocks or diesels.

Plenty of arguments for a V8. I am just saying he doesn't need a V8 for what he is thinking of. Its a gravel highway, and people have done it in Model T's with 20hp.

I mean you can get factory FI for the I-6...but as long as you research what you're getting, the Buick shares a lot of accessories with the SBC, the alternator is standard, Saginaw p/s pump, manifolds are plentiful (esp. the 2-barrel), and you can get all the stuff to rebuild it pretty cheap and easily. And even for our '95 ZJ 4.0 you've gotta order pretty much anything you'd have to order if it was a Buick 350. I.e. you can't walk into the parts store and ask for say, a waterpump gasket, and expect them to have it, in either case.

Regardless of where the weight is, 100lbs=10 hp. The autocross guys are HUGE on this.

[threepiece]

Interesting. I think the power thing is more about breakage than any other factor. With great power comes great responsibility (not to abuse the vehicle).

Indeed, experienced overland travelers are often wealthy or retired. They are seldom in a hurry to get there. While setting up and using recovery gear can be a tedious process, it beats being stranded with no replacement parts within 300 miles.

[Stuka]

Regardless of where the weight is, 100lbs=10 hp. The autocross guys are HUGE on this.

In that case the average wagoneer has a negative horse power rating

Most racing I have been involved with states X amount of weight reduction is good for Y amount of increased rate of acceleration. But its not a linear progression.

[Yeller]

Weight applies to forward progress off highway too. Less mass to find enough traction to push up a hill or across a bog

[Stuka]

Weight applies to forward progress off highway too. Less mass to find enough traction to push up a hill or across a bog

Depends on the offroading too. Unsprung mass on the street is terrible. But in rock crawling, it can be great. Its why people put water in the tires of their rock crawlers. Plus it lowers their center of gravity.

But low weight is great for desert and sand terrains.

[Yeller]

Weight applies to forward progress off highway too. Less mass to find enough traction to push up a hill or across a bog

Depends on the offroading too. Unsprung mass on the street is terrible. But in rock crawling, it can be great. Its why people put water in the tires of their rock crawlers. Plus it lowers their center of gravity.

But low weight is great for desert and sand terrains.

I’ve never put water, steel shot, lead shot, beet juice or calcium in a tire for traction

Been involved in rock crawling competitions since they started in 1998.

Now want to put some axles to the test put 150# of water in your tires on the front. Does amazing things but can be hard on parts.

I believe the weight being hard on parts thing applies to most off highway travel.

[SJTD]

Never heard of weight in the tires. That would get the CG about as low as it could be. But once you do bounce those heavy tires and get them started moving up they'll have more momentum to keep going up.

How about a small rocket engine pointing up on the front? Could use those ox and propane bottles.