|
I have a 95 5.2 with some goodies but looking to go a little wild and put a turbo on it. I can do all the fab work and such just looking for a little info on electronics and whatnot. Would it benefit me to rework my entire harness and computer to convert over to an ob2 setup? Anyone ever done a turbo setup on one of these? I am looking too have a little fun i am one of those guys that i have to stay busy with something.
if its been done i'm not aware of it.. you're gonna be pressed for room for sure. keep us updated
im not real sure but it may be beneficial to upgrade to obd2 and buy efi live or hp tuners so you can make your own tune
My buddy Dom has a 95 5.2 with tera 60's and a supercharger (vortec?). I know he's had lots of problems with the required ignition setup, and cooling. He doesn't come around the forums very often though.
Obd2 is easier for tuning on ZJ's and it's easier to just run a rear mounted turbo to free up engine bay space, plus you don't need to run an intercooler with a low boost rear mount setup because the length of the piping cools the air before it enters the throttle body. Google "turbo Grand Cherokee" for more info.
Just make sure you use PVC for all your turbo-piping needs.
Yea I was kinda thinking about doing an sts type setup. Only thing is I still crawl with this thing. I wouldn't want to take the chance if bashing it up but I may be able to come up with something? So with an obd1 setup I have to get my computer flashed or do I run some kinda of piggyback system?
Wow, that sounds ideal for something that gets wheeled.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that you'd have far more power (usable and otherwise) with less far less headache swapping in a tuned GM 6.0. You'd be thousands upon thousands of dollars into a 5.2/ 5.9 to get anywhere near the power and reliability of a stock but well-tuned 6.0 (forget about it if the 6.0 has a bigger cam). Throwing the kind of cash at a 5.2 to reliably add significant boost would be asinine IMO, especially to get to the power level most have in mind when doing such modifications.
Yes, you could turbo it "cheap," but cheap =/= reliable here. This is all assuming you are talking about running enough boost to make it worthwhile. When most people say they want to turbo a V8, even one as antiquated as a stock 5.2, they're wanting somewhere in the neighborhood of 350+ horsepower and an equal amount of torque. If you're actually wanting to do this, you'll be replacing the entire top end of the motor as the heads are prone to warping/ cracking, the cam is pitiful, and the keg-style intake manifold will self-destruct in a hurry under boost. Then you have to figure out how to package it in an already too-tight engine compartment and keep it cool.
Basically, it's a bad idea.
I have often thought about putting a 6.0 with a nice cam injectors and ported heads. I've put a few in my buggies the only reason I still have my grand is cuz I love it. It was my first vechile. I had alot of firsts in this thing. If I'm gonna swap a motor I am putting a 4bt in it behind a 47rh I already have the built trans I traded for some fab work. I just got done with a cummins swap in my f350 so I can handle it. A nice 400hp 4bt with twins would be really cool in a zj. It makes sense because I make my own fuel.
I was just wondering about electronics and other things. But I guess it doesn't seem feasible. Or worth my while.
Last edited by 8WR_ZJ; 01-31-2012 at 08:54 PM.
The 5.2/ 5.9 is the pinnacle of ZJ powerplants, but that's about as far as I would go. It's just not worth putting cash into (IMO) compared to other powerplants if you're getting into something like turbocharging and want to keep it reliable. There are just too many issues to take care of if you have decent-to-serious power in mind. They can be solved, but it'll cost you, and it'll still be terribly inefficient just by design compared to a LS engine or diesel. By the time you build a Magnum with 350-400 usable, reliable hp, you probably could have swapped in something else that would do the job better (and likely cheaper than old Chrysler stuff anyway).
The 4bt would be tits and it sounds like you could tackle it. Or just leave the 5.2 alone
stock 5.2 with 10 lbs of boost = a stock 6.0 ls engine in horsepower
I vote LS powertrain, but I'm partial my 5.3 powered ZJ can rape my 5.9 powered ZJ pulling a trailer uphill. I'm not aware of any way to flash a ZJ ECU of either OBDI or II variety. The only method I know of is using a piggyback computer to trick it or running standalone engine management. I looked into this a lot a while back when I was young and stupid and built a 4.6 stroker for my first ZJ.
ORLY?
Says who? At what rpm, for how long, and with how many parts/ $$$$/ tuning headaches? The stock-type manifold is a known failure point without boost, the head gaskets won't last past 6-7 psi, and the bottom end sure as hell won't have a chance at a long life at 10 psi unless the tuning is dead nuts on. That kind of tuning means a chassis dyno, so add another few hundred $ to a grand unless you know a guy (but who can/ will tune it?). And you have to cram all that shit into an already tight engine compartment and keep it cool.
A stock 5.2 supposedly made 225 horsepower and 300 lb ft. of torque brand new. Add in several years and a hundred thousand miles or so and you're lucky to be sitting at 200 hp on a good day. That would mean damn near doubling the horsepower and adding another 100 lb ft. to an otherwise stock 5.2 to equal a stock 6.0 with a basic tune.
And that's a stock 6.0 you're comparing to. You can throw a mild cam and a mail-order tune at it and have an honest 450 hp at the crank with just as much torque with a flat curve.
/hijack
Last edited by IndyZJ; 02-01-2012 at 05:53 PM.
exactly that my point, as a general rule of thumb for every 14.5psi or 1 bar of boost you add to an engine, you double the horsepower, i would completely agree it would be stupid and pointless and unlikely that it would even hold that,
all i am saying, is if you somehow are able to add 10 lbs of boost to a 5.2, you would be at the same power level as a stock 6.0,
so it would be a much better choice just to swap in an ls engine
You obviously know little to nothing about turbos, the amount of "boost" has almost no direct relation to horsepower gain. For example, I can show you a turbo that makes the same 100 additional hp at 6psi as another turbo at 15psi. And engine size also is a deciding factor on horsepower gained when a turbo is added. Please refrain from posting unless you have a clue.
i would agree with that, but i said AS A GERNERAL RULE OF THUMBand i am talking about if you properly map out a turbo and use one that is correct for you engine and power band, if you can put exact twice as much air in the engine you can make twice as much hp, that part is pretty simple
of course you can make the same power with one turbo thats perfect and one that takes hours to spool, and they are going to be at different boosts, but if you put on a giant turbo then your just an idiot,
well of course my statement would be assuming if everything else stays the same
im not going to turn this into a debate about my turbo knowledge its not like i work on cars that are boosted every day or anything... o wait i do,
PLUS i am on the ls swap bandwagon, a 5.2 turbo is a really stupid idea, i am not supporting adding a turbo
Ok so I am pushing forward with this. Mainly because i have my 4bt inline pump in the shop plus a built 47rh. So i guess i am gonna do this and see how it turns out. I have a couple turbos laying around. I think I will use the he351cw 9cm housing. Shooting for about 8-9 lbs of boost. Questions. I am going to use the cartech fmu for fuel control. Would it be a good ideal to add a msd 6al and msd boost retard controller? I think the factory ignition system controls this already correct? I no a gm swap would be way better but I figured for 400-600 this can be done realistically. I have most of the parts leftover from my turbo vw build. The msd 6al and boost retard in cab controller, just gotta buy the fmu.
« Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
Thread Information |
Users Browsing this ThreadThere are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests) |