Forum Home Forum Home > CJ-2A Discussion Area > Tech Questions and Answers
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - L134 or Pinto
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

L134 or Pinto

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
Teds Ride View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 28 Feb. 2019
Location: Merlin, Oregon
Status: Offline
Points: 59
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Teds Ride Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: L134 or Pinto
    Posted: 16 Oct. 2019 at 9:09pm
I need an engine for my 1950 CJ. Should I drop in a L134 with a 4 speed pickup trans. (will this trans match up to my transfer case? Should I drop in a Ford Pinto engine with a Novak adapter? Real problem deciding. Any advice will be helpful.
Back to Top
67charger View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 27 Sep. 2011
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 1272
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 67charger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct. 2019 at 10:38pm
Ford is a four letter word sooooo.....haha just kidding. I cant help you with the four speed, but what is your intent on the jeep? Wheeling, cruising, keeping up with modern traffic. Also budget and parts you have. A 134 with a 3 spd can do a lot except "no overdrive" keep up easily with modern traffic.
Back to Top
Teds Ride View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 28 Feb. 2019
Location: Merlin, Oregon
Status: Offline
Points: 59
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Teds Ride Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct. 2019 at 11:48pm
Thanks for your input. I will need to decide.
Back to Top
Bruce W View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 July 2005
Location: Northeast Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 9651
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bruce W Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 12:03am
. If you know me at all, you won’t need to ask. The L134 and the T90 are more fun than you can imagine. Any swap is only the beginning of your troubles. Someone at cruise night might look at the Pinto engine and say, “nice” and walk away, but the stock jeep will get no end of good comments and thumbs up. JMO. Your jeep, do what you want. BW
It is NOT a Jeep Willys! It is a Willys jeep.

Happy Trails! Good-bye, Good Luck, and May the Good Lord Take a Likin' to You!

We Have Miles to Jeep, Before We Sleep.
Back to Top
Mark W. View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 09 Nov. 2014
Location: Silverton, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 7982
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mark W. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 12:12am
Keep in mind the pinto engine in stock form has no more bhp then the 134L does.
Chug A Lug
1948 2A Body Customized
1949 3A W/S
1957 CJ5 Frame Modified
Late 50's 134L 9.25"clutch T90A D18 (1.25") D44/30 flanged E-Locker D25 5.38 Since 1962
Back to Top
Teds Ride View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 28 Feb. 2019
Location: Merlin, Oregon
Status: Offline
Points: 59
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Teds Ride Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 1:35am
Good comments guys. So far I have lined up a L134 and a F134.
Back to Top
rocnroll View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 20 July 2005
Location: Tuscumbia, AL
Status: Offline
Points: 13584
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rocnroll Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 1:58am



Edited by rocnroll - 17 Oct. 2019 at 4:41am
'47 CJ2A PU
'48 CJ2A Lefty

"Common sense is not that common"
Back to Top
rocnroll View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 20 July 2005
Location: Tuscumbia, AL
Status: Offline
Points: 13584
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rocnroll Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 2:18am
Ted's Ride, here is some good reading on the subject. (containing some helpful links)
 
 
 
 
'47 CJ2A PU
'48 CJ2A Lefty

"Common sense is not that common"
Back to Top
oldtime View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 Sep. 2009
Location: Missouri
Status: Online
Points: 4184
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldtime Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 2:40am
IMHO the Pinto engine RPM  ranging is too high for slow speed crawling.
If I'm not mistaken ...the Pinto engine puts out it's max torque at like 3200 RPM.
Currently building my final F-134 powered 3B .
T98-A Rock Crawler using exclusive factory parts and Approved Special Equipment from the Willys Motors era (1953-1963)
Zero aftermarket parts

Back to Top
64CJ5 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 15 Nov. 2013
Location: NE Wyoming
Status: Offline
Points: 942
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 64CJ5 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 2:44am
I went with a 2300 cc pinto.  Previous owners had cut out the Jeep motor mounts and hacked the fire wall to get  a 350 in.  Hood had a 12" hole in it, transmission had to be rebuilt. It came to me with out the 350.
The pinto gets down the highway nicely and has power off road.
If I must replace it some time I may go in with the L head.  As I now have a L head block of unknown condition to work with.
Fewer Pinto engines to pick from now.  Novak is the one to go to for expert help.
I agree with Bruce the L head sounds right. 
64CJ5 "Eeyore"
01TJ "Tigger"
52 M38 Severely demilitarized, "Popeye" The Coast Guard Jeep.
14 JK "Jake"
To Trust Government Defys Both History and Reason.

PUBLIC LAND Owner/User
Back to Top
Teds Ride View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 28 Feb. 2019
Location: Merlin, Oregon
Status: Offline
Points: 59
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Teds Ride Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 3:00am
Thank you. Nice to get experienced comments. All of you guys and comments are great. Keep on keeping.
Back to Top
rocnroll View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 20 July 2005
Location: Tuscumbia, AL
Status: Offline
Points: 13584
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rocnroll Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 4:12am
I went a slightly different route with the one I built years ago.

Instead of the T-90 I elected to adapt the Pinto C3 (which is essentially a C4 adapter wise) to the Dana 18.

I loved mine, wish I had it back and will probably build a clone if anything happens to this l-head.

It certainly got down the trail just fine without having to rev to its "max torque of 3200rpm".... but different strokes for different folks.....I won't try to talk Old-time or Anybody else into building one , just saying with the automatic and 5.38s it is an enjoyable trail rig.

Mine ( and the one I have in storage ) was a '71 2000.....they were rated close to 100hp.

Yes, the earlier versions are getting harder to come by....a bunch got used up on roundtracks around the country.

One combined with one of those super duper low geared transfer cases everybody seems to be clammering about these days would be a very offroadable rig and still run 60 mph.

'47 CJ2A PU
'48 CJ2A Lefty

"Common sense is not that common"
Back to Top
timcj2a View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Sponsor Member

Joined: 19 July 2005
Location: Chula Vista, CA.
Status: Offline
Points: 801
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote timcj2a Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 6:13am
I put a 2000cc Pinto motor with Novak adapter in my first '47. i had all the other original running gear, but added a Warn overdrive. The combo I had never let me down on flat land, but sometimes when I got into a steep extended climb it would flood on me occasionally. That made for some real hair raising (back when I had some) adventures.
1946 CJ2A #69376

Chula Vista, CA

#69376
Back to Top
jpet View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Sponsor Member x 5

Joined: 30 Apr. 2008
Location: Ramsey, IL
Status: Offline
Points: 11173
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jpet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Oct. 2019 at 12:08pm
Hopefully m38mike will join in on this conversation since Blue Mule has had a pinto motor most of its life and Mike has years of experience both on and off road. He drove Blue Mule back and forth from Salida for work and the drive home is a significant upward long pitch going home.

From what I understand (no personal experience). People like the pinto motor because it produces more torque at higher RPM where it is needed, on the highway. Off-road, you can get your power from your gears. I don’t know the specs on the motor but I would guess that even though it may not produce “max “ torque at low rpm, it is still producing as much or more than an L134. (no data to back that up)

If the choice were mine, and I was content to cruise 40-45 on road, I’d use the L134 out of bias and convenience.
CJ2A #29110 "General Willys"
MB #204827 "BAM BAM"

"We do what we can, and we try what we can't"
Back to Top
oldtime View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 Sep. 2009
Location: Missouri
Status: Online
Points: 4184
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldtime Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Oct. 2019 at 1:03am
Well Yes and No. 
I was only making comments from my limited Pinto engine experience and data.
It,s certainly feasible that some Pinto engines put out max torque at a lower RPM than 3200. 
And that does not really tell us how much torque is actually being produced at various RPM's without a dyno chart.

YES the added HP increase is always useful when on road
YES if you dramatically increase the Jeeps overall gear span then crawling at higher RPM's may certainly be a good thing.

But if you want to crawl at the common Willys standard  of 37/1 crawl ratio then NO, because 3200 RPM would be much too fast if anything near full torque output is needed.

Basically what I'm saying is that when the Engine RPM Span increases then ideally your selectable gearing ratios should increase proportionately.


Edited by oldtime - 18 Oct. 2019 at 1:16am
Currently building my final F-134 powered 3B .
T98-A Rock Crawler using exclusive factory parts and Approved Special Equipment from the Willys Motors era (1953-1963)
Zero aftermarket parts

Back to Top
tamnalan View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 Oct. 2013
Location: Port Orford, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 989
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tamnalan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Oct. 2019 at 3:57am
If I had a good Pinto motor then I would be very tempted to use it, but I wouldn't try to find one.

There are better choices now like the 4.3 Vortec or a turbocharged Kubota diesel.  I personally am a fan of Ford's ecoboost motors.  I think a 2 liter version would be a great jeep engine.
Alan Johnson
1942 MB - "TBD"
1943 MB - "Lt Bob"
1950 cj3a
M-100 x2
teardrop camper: https://forums.g503.com/viewtopic.php?f=141&t=201740
Back to Top
Jw60 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jan. 2018
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jw60 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Oct. 2019 at 5:35am
The ford rangers used a fuel injected 2300 and 2500 derived from the pinto for a long while into the 2000s. They are pretty good in stock form and I considered one in my CJ5 but after reviewing costs the 4.3 was ahead mostly because I wanted something to pull a trailer on the local highway and plow snow in the winter. Once you get into adding more than stock power in the Ford it gets pretty silly dollars per hp and the valve train can't take much additional spring rate without cam bearing issues. 
That all said if I built a little flatty for the wife i would try to find the a c4 and Ford 2.3 then keep the overall weight and tire size down. The rangers I test drove had more high rpm than the Chevy s10 iron duke or tech4. But not the torque of a 4.3 
It's really boils down to driving style. Around town stick with the 134. Highway speeds would call for the engine swap and the Ford seems to create a smaller snowball than other swaps.
Back to Top
Ol' Unreliable View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 Sep. 2016
Location: CO Springs CO
Status: Offline
Points: 4226
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ol' Unreliable Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Oct. 2019 at 5:41am
If you don't get a Go-Devil, get a Buick V-6.  Or a Dauntless V-6.  Okay, they're almost the same thing.  They're excellent choices for the application. 
There's a reason it's called Ol' Unreliable
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.06
Copyright ©2001-2022 Web Wiz Ltd.