F134 to 225 swap

I am considering swapping my f134 for the 225. As you may guess, I have the T90, Spicer 18 setup. I understand this is a common swap done with great success (according to the Novak site). My question is, what is the reasonable top speed with this swap. Currently at 45mph the F134 is at max rpm.

My goal is to reach freeway speeds - 65mph comfortably rpm wise.

Any input on using the warn OD with this setup ( in terms of top speed)?

Thanks.

 

it'll go faster than you'll want it to go.....
and I have OD and 5.38s.....

 

I'd say leave it like it is, and use something else for freeway driving. But that's just my opinion.

 

put an OD on it and drive it now like it is at 60mph. Mucho cheaper

 

I agree....I've found that the mind set of "I'll get there when I get there" applies to all pre 72 CJ's, especially the flatties. That being said, an OD will help out at any speed.

 

While we're on this subject, y'all.....do CJ6's handle higher highway speeds better? Since they have the longer wheelbase and all, and assuming the steering's in top shape. Just wondering.

 

That's a good question, and you'd think the obvious answer should be yes. However, my small sample says that 104" CJ-6s are less stable than comparable 84" CJ-5s. Both the serious highway accidents that I knew of in the era were in CJ-6s, and these were both experienced Jeep drivers (me, and my boss Brian). I owned both a CJ-5 and a CJ-6 within a few years, and the '73 CJ-5 inspired a lot more confidence at 70-80 than my '75 CJ-6. Much of this may have been due to the '6 having a full Meyer steel cab, and the '5 having a soft top.

I always have a hard time reconciling people's modern impressions of how unstable and frightening their CJ rides are, when I compare them with my memory of my new vehicles. The '5 in particular was very easy to drive at way over legal speeds, and I used the '6 on a 1-hour CA freeway commute for about a year (and I have the speeding tickets to prove it). Things may have changed a lot in 1972, but if they did, I don't know whether to attribute it to steering geometry, wheelbase, weight distribution, or what. I would not think that a 3-4% change in the wheelbase would make that much difference. I know that, in the era, the dealership ran a team of 3 or 4 glass bodied 101 Jeepsters, with stock (hopped up) drivetrain. The main change was to a front 30. These cars went as fast as they could, obviously - even then, to be competitive I'd expect they'd have averaged above highway speeds.

So 101" wb vehicles can be stable, 84" wb can be stable, and 81" and 104" are suspect. Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?

 

I see from your signature you have a 225 in your CJ5 so I guess you are talking about your wagon?

If so that would probably be a help. You are going to want an overdrive if you keep stock gears.

 

Not sure how much difference it makes, but I feel very comfortable with my V6 Ross box on the highway (I think they're slightly bigger than the 4cyl model). Other than new front wheel bearings, I really haven't changed anything on the stock setup yet. I've got somewhere around 1/16" toe-in, and a few degrees of castor. I have an OD, and I can stay at 65mph for long periods of time with 4.89 gears. The other day I even got up enough nerve to do the "hands off" test, and it stayed straight.

 

It looks like you're talking about the wagon for the swap, right?

That being said, I have my doubts about the F-Head being able to pull that big wagon WITH overdrive.
Flatland only because once you'd hit a hill in overdrive, that little F-Head would grind to a crawl and you'd be downshifting like a madman.

If you're doing a wagon, why not a small block Chevy or Ford?
The adapters, T90 input shaft and such are about the same money as a V6, right?
If you were talking about V6'ing an early flatty or CJ, I'd say go for it but that Wagon is a heavy rig.

Just my 2 cents.

 

The T-90 adapter for a SBC is identical to that for a V6. Fairly easy to find on the used market, if you want to save some money.

For a Utility Wagon, I'd go 283 or 307 rather than a V6. 307s used to be the least desirable of the SBCs, and should be cheap. If the engine compartment is the same size in a 134 Utility as with the 226, a 292 I6 would fit, and uses the same SBC adapter. I wouldn't pay any extra for a 292 over a SBC though. A 250 Cheb I6 would be another good candidate, if you found one in good shape for the right price.

 

Thanks for all the replys.
Yes, I forgot to mention that I am talking about my wagon.

On the V8 comments, my understanding is that this would be more work and more cost. Specifically, radiator upgrade, saginaw upgrade, boxing part of the frame, and I am not sure I would trust the T90 behind a V8. I also, understand the front cross member needs to be re-located, it is further back in the wagon as opposed to the cj5 location (according to Novak).

The 225 upgrade is comparibly simple, same radiator, same trans, no requirement to do the steering upgrade now, etc.

I do plan to upgrade the brakes even if I stay with the f134.