RIPPMODS

Reads: The real variable would be that your at altitude (12000 above) and we do all our testing at sea-level. It would be hard to know if it requires more fuel for the added air and your losing MPG. On average our clients are seeing about 2-4 over all... we have (but we had to try) to get that 11mpg increase, by driving conservatively. I will suggest that the marketing guys re-issue the mileage statement for purposes of clarity.

We have posted and sent out Torque Request Denied fixes, have you received and installed one yet? We will be in Utah for the Easter Jeep Safari Show are you attending?


Most of this is true… however you do not have to unhook your battery for 8 hours to clear the long and short term memory. It can be done in one step with the proper battery disconnect/reconnect.

1 disconnect positive and negative sides of battery.
2 Touch the two leads (in your hands not the battery terminals) together to clear PCM
3 Hook up the positive side only
4 Turn key to the on position
5 Hook up negative side to battery
6 Wait for all sensor noise to stop, at which point your system is zeroed
7 Start truck up and leave it idle for a minute or two
8 Drive rig conservative at first and then proceed as normal
9 All you learn cycles will need to re-learn including the Black Box.

Thanks for the positive reinforcement we really do try our best to make sure our clients are satisfied. We look forward to 2009…

RIPPTECH

HULKGREEN

See ..... I told you these guys have their Sh-t together !!!! All you have to do is ask and they have the answer !!!!

BTW ... is that you ... ROSS ?????? If so ...... tell them a little about the " minivan " 3.8 internals and how BEEFY the Rods and such are !!!! And this is not a " wimpy " motor !!!!

chuck45

For RIPP:

So am I to understand that the bottom end of this engine different from the 3.8 used in the minivans. Are the part nubers different? What would they be compared to. Has a destructive test been done? Or is it theat the minivan 3.8 just happens to be beefy.

Have you had any success in producing more power that you mentioned some months back? Or moved the power lower in the power band?

I'm glad to hear that you will be in Moab for EJS. I'm planning on attending. Will you be there the whole time and is there any possibility of driving one of your vehicles? Or at least getting a ride in one; though it would be easier to pry the bucks out of my wallet if I could drive one.

HULKGREEN

No Chuck !!!


The botttom end does not have diffrent part #'s ...... The minivan 3.8 ( which the Jeep shares ) is a very beefy engine !!!! The dealer near me uses a Caravan for a shuttle van and it has over 350,000 miles and still going everyday !!

Think overengineered as in V-8 rods and such in a V-6 ( not what you would expect to see ) . Chrysler did the same thing back in the late 1980's with the 2.2 L turbo ( as in Shelby Z Daytona ) ( Yes !! The same car that in a Quarter mile shootout against a 350 Iroc Camaro and 5.0 Mustang GT and a Dodge Daytona Shelby Z 2.2 L Turbo 4 cylinder ) The Dodge 4- cylinder outran both V-8 cars by half a second !!!! This was in 1988 or 1989 !!!
Any way they used V-8 Rods and bottom end stuff in that 4 cylinder also !!


As to your other questions for Ripp I can not answer !!!!

chuck45

I guess I'd feel better about a blower if I knew the bottom end could handle it. I'm quite comfortable using boost to get more power. The first semi I ever drove was a 225 HP Cummins - normaly aspirated and no turbo - what a pig. A few years ago I had a pump unit powered by a Jimmy with twin turbos feeding a supercharger. This engine was obviously designed to handle boost.

I would really like to see a 3.8 pushed to destruction on a dyno. Just cram the boost to it and see where it comes apart. It would help let us know how close to the edge we would be at with a blower.

HULKGREEN

Don't know if it will make you feel all warm and fuzzy about the SC ; but it is only pushin like 8 psi ..... I have seen others push like 15 !!!!

Chrysler Crossfire SRT-6 is a Supercharged 3.2 v-6 that puts out about the same power as the 3.8 Supercharged !!

chuck45

Well the 3.2 is a totally different motor isn't it?

As to 8 pounds I know it isn't a lot. I once took a Mustang SVO in trade. After it got reconned I took it out for a drive. Well it turns out the owner had pinned the wastegate (and whatever else) and the little puppy was putting out in excess of 20 pounds of boost. That car was impressive. I knew the little 2.3 was stout - but damn. There wasn't much that was streetable could have kept up with that car.

I recall Ripp mentioning that they were experimenting with different pulleys to boost the power. I wonder what they've found. If they could find another 50 HP and 50 ft/pounds my decisiomn would be made!

JulietKilo

Hmm would be cool to have an SRT-6 decal on the Jeep somewhere or "supercharged 3.8" or "S3.8L"

foxcasper

Sure anything is possible - you just will just have to probably live with an inverse exponential relationship with engine (and powertrain) life after the first "reasonable" amount of power is obtained.

Engines are designed and tested to be durable for their target life (e.g. maybe 200k miles) for their stock outputs with a low target cost at the OEM - typically they don't make them stronger than they have to these days as that costs $$.

Of course, in Europe now with all their downsized turbo charged DI engines (and the 2.0 l VW diesel turbo for example), the base engine mechanicals in the range is typically the same as the top - just different boost and minor other differences - which goes aganst my point, but this is not the case with our engine it seems to be only designed as a one trick pony.

What I would be worried about is that typically there will be some weak points encountered in the engine as boost is increased (or other parts in the powertrain will fail as torque inceases) that will fail at a certain point, e.g. bearings, exhaust valves, crankshaft, lack sufficient piston cooling, lack of sufficient block/head cooling, air-flow restrictions in the head etc.

I'd be interested to see the result of running a JK engine boosted on a dyno at full load for x hours, and through various durability type tests the OEMs do to get confidnce - and find and correct the weak points.

Having said that 8psi isn't that much boost... but data beats speculation..

HULKGREEN

I am sorry to confuse anyone with the reference to the SRT-6 ...... It was just a horsepower reference and comparison !!!!

I am confused you asked for LONGEVITY , but you want 50 more HP and TQ !!??

The configuration they have NOW is in the neighborhood of the 5.7 Hemi for Flywheel HP with minimal boost for Longevity of the system ...........Best of Both worlds !!!!!

Then you get it for $ 10,000 + less than a comparable 5.7 Hemi swap and get better fuel economy !!!!! .................

You really want your cake and eat it too !!!!