JBA Liberty Headers 3.7l - Jeep Commander Forums: Jeep Commander Forum
Exhaust Questions or advice about exhaust systems? This is the place...

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 7 (permalink) Old 09-17-2014, 03:31 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
Points: 7,991, Level: 60 Points: 7,991, Level: 60 Points: 7,991, Level: 60
Level up: 21% Level up: 21% Level up: 21%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
luckyse7ens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: CA
Own a Commander?: Yes
Model year: 2010
Trim Package: Sport
Power-Train: 3.7L V-6
2WD
If 4WD - system: QT-I
Current Mileage: 140000
Posts: 1,585
JBA Liberty Headers 3.7l

Has anyone every installed the JBA Liberty Headers on an 07+ commander? Any differences? I have an exhaust leak and possible warped manifolds. If i'm replacing them might as well snag some headers...
luckyse7ens is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 7 (permalink) Old 09-18-2014, 07:28 AM
Senior Member
Points: 15,906, Level: 81 Points: 15,906, Level: 81 Points: 15,906, Level: 81
Level up: 12% Level up: 12% Level up: 12%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lusby, MD
Posts: 3,037
I've had headers on other vehicles, more often than NOT they cost more, take longer and are a pain to install, then they are more likely to have problems and need repair or replacement than the OEM part.

Even if the header is cheaper than the OEM exhaust manifold, I'd get the direct replacement part. If there are common problems with 3.7L exhaust manifolds, they may have produced an updated part that corrected the problems.

Heck, my '99 Neon DOHC, the exhaust manifold cracked and it was common, they made an improved manifold that didn't crack and even NAPA was selling the manifold for far less than the dealer. I put a High Quality Header on my Neon and all of the above I told you was true, I had to go back and fix exhaust issues every year on that vehicle.

Just headers alone are unlikely to produce an noticeable power difference, IMO you'd be better served by just replacing the exhaust manifold with direct replacement parts and have the most trouble free use of your vehicle for years to come.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Mongo is offline  
post #3 of 7 (permalink) Old 09-18-2014, 12:04 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
Points: 7,991, Level: 60 Points: 7,991, Level: 60 Points: 7,991, Level: 60
Level up: 21% Level up: 21% Level up: 21%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
luckyse7ens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: CA
Own a Commander?: Yes
Model year: 2010
Trim Package: Sport
Power-Train: 3.7L V-6
2WD
If 4WD - system: QT-I
Current Mileage: 140000
Posts: 1,585
Good advice. I can source some used for $~250.

I had headers on my camaro for years with no problems, and significant performance benefits. The log style manifolds on that thing were terrible however.
luckyse7ens is offline  
 
post #4 of 7 (permalink) Old 09-18-2014, 01:47 PM
Senior Member
Points: 15,906, Level: 81 Points: 15,906, Level: 81 Points: 15,906, Level: 81
Level up: 12% Level up: 12% Level up: 12%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lusby, MD
Posts: 3,037
What year Camaro? You really never had any gasket and seal problems with the headers?

With todays modern Fuel Injection, Catalyst Systems, I'd be warrer of anything that didn't come as a complete kit from head to tail-pipe. Trying to adapt the pipes with the Catalyst in them is going to be a pain, you'll end up paying a shop a fortune to come up with the custom pipes to fit to the header. I wouldn't be shocked at all if you end up with a contant CEL for Catalyst Failures.

Most of the newer vehicles have pretty low restrictive exhaust, even if they have somewhat log type exhaust manifolds.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Mongo is offline  
post #5 of 7 (permalink) Old 09-18-2014, 03:05 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
Points: 7,991, Level: 60 Points: 7,991, Level: 60 Points: 7,991, Level: 60
Level up: 21% Level up: 21% Level up: 21%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
luckyse7ens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: CA
Own a Commander?: Yes
Model year: 2010
Trim Package: Sport
Power-Train: 3.7L V-6
2WD
If 4WD - system: QT-I
Current Mileage: 140000
Posts: 1,585
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
What year Camaro? You really never had any gasket and seal problems with the headers?

With todays modern Fuel Injection, Catalyst Systems, I'd be warrer of anything that didn't come as a complete kit from head to tail-pipe. Trying to adapt the pipes with the Catalyst in them is going to be a pain, you'll end up paying a shop a fortune to come up with the custom pipes to fit to the header. I wouldn't be shocked at all if you end up with a contant CEL for Catalyst Failures.

Most of the newer vehicles have pretty low restrictive exhaust, even if they have somewhat log type exhaust manifolds.
That was an 89 Tuned Port Injected 5.7L IROC-Z, I owned that more than 12 years ago. They were 50 state legal emissions compliant and had No gasket or seal issues, unlike the factory manifolds.

The JBA headers are marketed as direct drop in and hook up to the factory exhaust in place of the factory manifolds, in the Jeep Liberty. They have been successfully installed in some of the earlier XK's and Wk's.

Last edited by luckyse7ens; 09-18-2014 at 03:11 PM.
luckyse7ens is offline  
post #6 of 7 (permalink) Old 09-18-2014, 03:35 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
Points: 7,991, Level: 60 Points: 7,991, Level: 60 Points: 7,991, Level: 60
Level up: 21% Level up: 21% Level up: 21%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
luckyse7ens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: CA
Own a Commander?: Yes
Model year: 2010
Trim Package: Sport
Power-Train: 3.7L V-6
2WD
If 4WD - system: QT-I
Current Mileage: 140000
Posts: 1,585
luckyse7ens is offline  
post #7 of 7 (permalink) Old 09-19-2014, 08:22 AM
Senior Member
Points: 15,906, Level: 81 Points: 15,906, Level: 81 Points: 15,906, Level: 81
Level up: 12% Level up: 12% Level up: 12%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lusby, MD
Posts: 3,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckyse7ens View Post
That was an 89 Tuned Port Injected 5.7L IROC-Z, I owned that more than 12 years ago. They were 50 state legal emissions compliant and had No gasket or seal issues, unlike the factory manifolds.

The JBA headers are marketed as direct drop in and hook up to the factory exhaust in place of the factory manifolds, in the Jeep Liberty. They have been successfully installed in some of the earlier XK's and Wk's.
These are the stubby headers, with the same outlet location as the factory exhaust manifold? Thus they are a direct bolt in?

Those really aren't "headers", but yes a quality built pair would bolt in without major modification and might NOT leak, depending on the quality.

It depends on the vehicle/platform and the quality build of the stubby header. Pacesetter made a stubby header for the Neon R/T's, in that case, the stock exhaust manifold flowed well enough that the stubby header was barely, if any, improvement, but pacesetter's low quality resulted in leaks, cracks and rusting out. They produced an upgraded exhaust manifold for the neons that elminated the cracks and it was just smarter to go with the upgraded stock manifold then the pacesetter header, that although it was easy to install, didn't produce any extra power and would just fail much earlier than the stock part.

I would check the part number for 3.7L exhaust manifolds for the Liberty and the Commander. If both vehicles have the same part number for exhaust manifolds, and the replacement part is designed to bolt in without modification, then if the original part works in both vehicles, logically the replacement part would work in both vehicles as well. Usually the aftermarket seller would take the time to figure that out and list as many applications as possible to make as many sales as possible, so I would NOT assume that just because Liberty and Commanders have the same engine, the same header will work for both. Of course the Commander may have engine bay walls and other equipment that might interfer with the Header, that the liberty does NOT and thus it won't work.

A real "header" has tuned length runners designed to create a scavenge effect on the exhaust and will result in more power. That means the runners are much longer than stock and thus the connection point to the rest of the exhaust is very different.

The stubby headers, may reduce flow resistance and that would give you some power increase if the rest of the exhaust and the intake side of the engine supported the additional flow.

If you put the stubby "direct bolt-in" headers on your Camaro, I can see how they never suffered any leaks or problems. If the factory exhaust manifold was the only choke point on air flow through the motor, I could see how just a set of stubby header that flowed a little better did make a big difference in power. In another vehicle/engine, where there may have been several chokes points in the intake and exhuast system, swapping in a stubby header may NOT have made any difference at all.

One thing about the Speed Density EFI systems, they are NOT tunable unless you have some programming tool (like the Hypertech). I don't think there was anything like that in '89 for Camaro's. The Speed Density EFI system, at Wide Open Throttle (WOT or Max Power) the A/F ratio is not the stoichometeric 14.7:1, thus the typical switching oxygen sensor is worthless for feedback. So at WOT, its just dumping a predetermined amount of fuel into the motor based off testing of the engine as what should give the desired A/F ratio, but the PCM has no idea if its the right A/F ratio or NOT, and the PCM can't use the O2 sensor to tell, so it is totally blind if it has the right A/F ratio or NOT. The manufacturer, to prevent engine damage, goes to the safer side and dumps more fuel than it should to give a richer A/F ratio. (Too lean at WOT causes exhaust temps to spike and burns valves, Cat's, does all sort of damage). So, its a safe bet that leaning out the A/F ratio at WOT throttle will bring it closer to the best A/F for WOT and produce more power. Since the amount of fuel being dumped into the motor is static, increasing the air flow through the motor at WOT will result in leaning out the A/F ratio, i.e. more power. And that is why sometimes, some engine/platform combinations that might have a single choke point in the air flow through the motor, using a speed density EFI system, if you free up that choke point, it could make a big jump in power. While other platforms, using the exact same engine, might NOT see one bit of power change swapping with the same part.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by Mongo; 09-19-2014 at 10:16 AM.
Mongo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Jeep Commander Forums: Jeep Commander Forum > Jeep Commander Discussion > Performance Modifications > Exhaust

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Commander Forums: Jeep Commander Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome