Project "Six Shooter" Build Thread - Page 156 - Jeep Garage - Jeep Forum

Go Back   Jeep Garage - Jeep Forum > Jeep Platform Discussion > Grand Cherokee - WK

Join Jeep Garage Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
  #1861  
Old 07-07-2016, 08:03 PM
Strongjeff's Avatar
Project Six Shooter

My Jeep: 2008 3.7L WK
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Alpena, MI
Posts: 8,842
Thanks: 393
Thanked 648 Times in 584 Posts
Rep Power: 324050
Strongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by CobraMarty View Post
Nah you don't need a rebuild to add boost. 5-6 pounds of SC boost is plenty and will add 30% more rear wheel power with complete reliability. We are doing it on the JK 3.6L engines, same engines.
The 3.6 is a completely different motor bro. Kenne bell was developing a sc for the 3.7 a while back and blew it up on 5# on the 6th dyno run. Problem is the ring lands in the 3.7 are only 1/8 inch thick. Also the 3.7 is a soch where as the 3.6 is doch. 3.7 is 90 3.6 is a 60....I could keep goin but the point is the 3.7 is not boost friendly. Is seen 3.6's take 14# and make 430 awhp

__________________
URL]
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #1862  
Old 07-07-2016, 08:32 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 28
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 192
CobraMarty is on a distinguished road
Re: Project "Six Shooter" Build Thread

Oops. my bad. It's late and I' tired. 3.7 not 3.6, right. The short top ring lands is the same problem that the 4.7L had years ago and didn't take well to over 5-6 pounds of boost and would blow at 7-8 pounds of boost.
Reply With Quote
  #1863  
Old 07-07-2016, 09:02 PM
Strongjeff's Avatar
Project Six Shooter

My Jeep: 2008 3.7L WK
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Alpena, MI
Posts: 8,842
Thanks: 393
Thanked 648 Times in 584 Posts
Rep Power: 324050
Strongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by CobraMarty View Post
Oops. my bad. It's late and I' tired. 3.7 not 3.6, right. The short top ring lands is the same problem that the 4.7L had years ago and didn't take well to over 5-6 pounds of boost and would blow at 7-8 pounds of boost.
Yup, that's why the 2 sc kits for the 4.7 dissapeared a few years after they came out. There was a vortec and a Paxton novi kit.....

But I've found all the internals ill need to boost it.
__________________
URL]
Reply With Quote
  #1864  
Old 07-08-2016, 08:57 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 28
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 192
CobraMarty is on a distinguished road
Re: Project "Six Shooter" Build Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongjeff View Post
I forgot to mention this was back in 03 on a liberty. It had the old 42rle transmission (complete crap) and 32 inch tires so the numbers are lower then normal. Factoring in the 42's 30% driveline loss and bigger tires it put down 159 rwhp. I forget the torque figure. On the s/c with tune and bigger injectors it put down 302rwhp on 5psi. It blew on the last pull at 302. This was on its 6th pass.
Saw this on a older post of your's.

This is what happened on the 4.7L back then. 4-5psi was fine and then there were guys that wanted more power and put smaller pulleys on the SC and 7-8 psi and they blew. The SC manufactures didn't want the liability of blown engines when owners upped the boost. This is bad for business. The other problem is when using a centrifugal SC like Vortech and Powerdyne, they put out very little boost until higher rpm. So to have a reasonable gain in power at lower rpm you have to turn up the pulley ratio and spin the SC faster but it will aslo spin faster at higher rpm and especially over 5000rpm it would be making 7psi. A better solution is to use a roots variant pr a stin screw SC which builds boost at lower rpm os you don't have to spin them as fast and limit the boost over 5000rpm.

Here it doesn't make any sense-
159rwhp
5psi adds 5/16 more power, about 30%, which is 207rwhp (302 must be calculated crank power)
The fact that they used bigger injectors tells me that there was no intercooler and no attempt to lower the charge IATs.
This is the exact same story with the 4.7L and it's short top ring land. They kept cranking up the boost and when it blew, they called it a fail.

CORRECTION Found this on another forum-
Stock:
210 bhp @ motor 235 ft.lbs @ motor
166 rwhp 193 rwtq

Kenne Bell:
296 bhp @ motor ---------- +86 343 ft.lbs. @ motor -------- +108
235 rwhp ------------------ +69 275 rwtq. ------------------ +82

So it's 210 to 296 @motor which requires 7psi
and 166 to 235 rwhp which requires 7psi

We have a M90 SC on a 4. 7L GC with 'Low Boost' 4-5psi and it runs like a raped ape. Over 1 year now and no problems. Tuning is important as is lower Intake Air Temps. We use a 9th injector to add the fuel needed under boost and to cool the charge IATs to a safe level and a controller that retards timing with boost. It might not be the fastest or a dyno queen highest HP but with 'only' 4-5 pounds of boost, it really wakes up the sleeping giant in the 4.7L.

Many will argue that for Low Boost 'only 4-5psi' why bother, it's not enough. Well adding 30% more rwhp and tq is very noticeable. All the 'bolt-ons' will only add 10% as you have found out, but that 10% is very noticeable.
Reply With Quote
  #1865  
Old 07-08-2016, 10:06 AM
Strongjeff's Avatar
Project Six Shooter

My Jeep: 2008 3.7L WK
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Alpena, MI
Posts: 8,842
Thanks: 393
Thanked 648 Times in 584 Posts
Rep Power: 324050
Strongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by CobraMarty View Post

Saw this on a older post of your's.

This is what happened on the 4.7L back then. 4-5psi was fine and then there were guys that wanted more power and put smaller pulleys on the SC and 7-8 psi and they blew. The SC manufactures didn't want the liability of blown engines when owners upped the boost. This is bad for business. The other problem is when using a centrifugal SC like Vortech and Powerdyne, they put out very little boost until higher rpm. So to have a reasonable gain in power at lower rpm you have to turn up the pulley ratio and spin the SC faster but it will aslo spin faster at higher rpm and especially over 5000rpm it would be making 7psi. A better solution is to use a roots variant pr a stin screw SC which builds boost at lower rpm os you don't have to spin them as fast and limit the boost over 5000rpm.

Here it doesn't make any sense-
159rwhp
5psi adds 5/16 more power, about 30%, which is 207rwhp (302 must be calculated crank power)
The fact that they used bigger injectors tells me that there was no intercooler and no attempt to lower the charge IATs.
This is the exact same story with the 4.7L and it's short top ring land. They kept cranking up the boost and when it blew, they called it a fail.

CORRECTION Found this on another forum-
Stock:
210 bhp @ motor 235 ft.lbs @ motor
166 rwhp 193 rwtq

Kenne Bell:
296 bhp @ motor ---------- +86 343 ft.lbs. @ motor -------- +108
235 rwhp ------------------ +69 275 rwtq. ------------------ +82

So it's 210 to 296 @motor which requires 7psi
and 166 to 235 rwhp which requires 7psi

We have a M90 SC on a 4. 7L GC with 'Low Boost' 4-5psi and it runs like a raped ape. Over 1 year now and no problems. Tuning is important as is lower Intake Air Temps. We use a 9th injector to add the fuel needed under boost and to cool the charge IATs to a safe level and a controller that retards timing with boost. It might not be the fastest or a dyno queen highest HP but with 'only' 4-5 pounds of boost, it really wakes up the sleeping giant in the 4.7L.

Many will argue that for Low Boost 'only 4-5psi' why bother, it's not enough. Well adding 30% more rwhp and tq is very noticeable. All the 'bolt-ons' will only add 10% as you have found out, but that 10% is very noticeable.
Well true, I like the centrifugal setups as they don't beat up the motor like a roots style does. That's what Kenne bell was doing. But thoses numbers if I remember right was on a otherwise stock motor except for the blower and supporting mods.

Eighter way tho, I will be throwing stronger fully forged internals in. 14# of boost is my magic number I'm shooting for 400+ at the wheel. My only concern is will the crank hold 500+?

I got a buddy that had a 07 4.7 and he dynod 196rwhp and 254rwtq. With just an intake and catback, no tune like me. Hell even stock Chevy 5.3 only make like 220 at the wheels lol
__________________
URL]
Reply With Quote
  #1866  
Old 07-08-2016, 10:37 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 28
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 192
CobraMarty is on a distinguished road
Re: Project "Six Shooter" Build Thread

Yep, but roots style do not beat up the engine. Boost is modulated by the throttle position. It's about the boost vs rpm and boost and power under the curve.

I would get a used junk yard engine to build up.

14 pounds is very optimistic and will require everything just right. I would be satisfied with 8 pounds boost, 50% increase on your N/A power numbers and a reliable daily driver.
Reply With Quote
  #1867  
Old 07-08-2016, 11:07 AM
Strongjeff's Avatar
Project Six Shooter

My Jeep: 2008 3.7L WK
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Alpena, MI
Posts: 8,842
Thanks: 393
Thanked 648 Times in 584 Posts
Rep Power: 324050
Strongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by CobraMarty View Post
Yep, but roots style do not beat up the engine. Boost is modulated by the throttle position. It's about the boost vs rpm and boost and power under the curve.

I would get a used junk yard engine to build up.

14 pounds is very optimistic and will require everything just right. I would be satisfied with 8 pounds boost, 50% increase on your N/A power numbers and a reliable daily driver.
I know lol, I just want to put it in srt territory just because too many people said it can't be done lol. I've already found like 95% of the parts needed.

But yeah a second block was part of the plan. Only thing now is finding a 3 bar map sensor lol
__________________
URL]
Reply With Quote
  #1868  
Old 07-08-2016, 12:47 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 28
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 192
CobraMarty is on a distinguished road
Re: Project "Six Shooter" Build Thread

Maybe a Hellcat or GM 3 bar MAP sensor.
Packaging and install can be easier on a centrifugal SC but I like the low end boost of roots/twin screw SC.
Be sure to invest in your heads. Bigger valves, good seats, ported. This will add 20-30rwhp and more when boosted and all at lower boost levels. Lower boost levels means lower charge IATs, which is more power. Win Win.

Sounds like a fun project.
Reply With Quote
  #1869  
Old 07-08-2016, 01:38 PM
Strongjeff's Avatar
Project Six Shooter

My Jeep: 2008 3.7L WK
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Alpena, MI
Posts: 8,842
Thanks: 393
Thanked 648 Times in 584 Posts
Rep Power: 324050
Strongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by CobraMarty View Post
Maybe a Hellcat or GM 3 bar MAP sensor.
Packaging and install can be easier on a centrifugal SC but I like the low end boost of roots/twin screw SC.
Be sure to invest in your heads. Bigger valves, good seats, ported. This will add 20-30rwhp and more when boosted and all at lower boost levels. Lower boost levels means lower charge IATs, which is more power. Win Win.

Sounds like a fun project.
Oh believe me, this is gonna be a full motor build. I've found a set of fully race prepped heads for 2k
__________________
URL]
Reply With Quote
  #1870  
Old 07-08-2016, 03:28 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 28
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 192
CobraMarty is on a distinguished road
Re: Project "Six Shooter" Build Thread

Time to start a new thread and share pics of your findings.

For an unloved engine, you have seemed to have found the much needed parts for it.
Reply With Quote
  #1871  
Old 07-08-2016, 03:34 PM
Strongjeff's Avatar
Project Six Shooter

My Jeep: 2008 3.7L WK
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Alpena, MI
Posts: 8,842
Thanks: 393
Thanked 648 Times in 584 Posts
Rep Power: 324050
Strongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond reputeStrongjeff has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by CobraMarty View Post
Time to start a new thread and share pics of your findings.

For an unloved engine, you have seemed to have found the much needed parts for it.
I've shared a lot of it already on the 3.7 performance love thread lol. Hell I was the first to prove the JBA's for the liberty fit the wk 3.7 lol.
__________________
URL]
Reply With Quote
  #1872  
Old 07-08-2016, 03:45 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 28
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 192
CobraMarty is on a distinguished road
Re: Project "Six Shooter" Build Thread

Isn't the 3.7 the baby brother of the 4.7? Same architecture?
We made an intake manifold for the 4.7 that allows the Eaton M90 supercharger to bolt on top of it. I'm sure it wouldn't take much to modify the program to knock off a pair of cylinders.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Coops "Silver Surfer" Build Thread JeepCoop Members Rides 1566 03-29-2014 05:55 PM
"Oscar the grouch" build thread mrtosh Members Rides 678 07-27-2012 05:11 AM
My "Hybrid" lift build thread AcidCold Off Road Modifications 6 12-08-2009 01:49 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2012 - JeepGarage.Org
The Jeep Grand Cherokee Owners Community

JeepGarage.org is in no way associated with or endorsed by FCA US LLC. Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Ram, Mopar and SRT are registered trademarks of FCA US LLC.