3.0 Guru's

[roguetrip]

To anyone that has the factory service manuals for the Chrysler 3.0, i have the 3S service manuals where we could compare to find more accurate specs for valves and such.

[Ondonti]

Yeah, the a670 is going to have better gearing in the final gear. The a604 isnt going to be any fun in overdrive.

My first 3.0 motor was pampered and babied with religious oil changes, and chevron gas its entire life. It definitly made the power to prove that after I started playing with it at 92,000 miles. Sad the motor didnt make it far past there.

[Ondonti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roguetrip Yeah i do rev out the engine alot, about 148k or so on it now, usually do maintanance regularly since i got it at 90k, i do think moving from the A604 to the A543 it does get to 120mph faster, but it just takes a bit after i hit 110. Although there have been times where it hits 120mph (or the govener) in no time at all but i think it has more to do with the conditions outside. As far as a race goes, its usually good unless its at a roll of 70-90mph already But i'm loosing alot of power right now cause i need some solid motor mounts, i've got a solid bubble strut and a new front motor mount (advanced auto) and the engine still will rock like crazy when punching it! To the OP, i don't think the SOHC valves are any larger in the 3S's, i believe most of the extra power was the intake cause it was long runners that could cool the air down alot, i'm not positive but also think it had a bump in compression. Also chrysler minivans around 95 also got a bump to 9.5:1 which i think added 15hp or so. Also if you going to go forged pistons, then you would want beefier crank which i know the TT/VR4 had forged cranks, could save cost instead of cryo'ing your n/a crank or getting a custom one.

The valves are all the same. I have head diameter measure ments somewhere around here I got from Mike at KMP if you want those #'s. You wont find that in any book.

THe mitsubishi FWD cars had higher compression. With higher compression you also increase duration on the cams and this combines to make more HP.

I think the compression of the 3.0 only went from 8.85 to something like 9.3:1 or less. That wont give you more then 3-4 HP, if that. They used the same cam with higher compression which doesnt take advantage of the higher compression.

I think the main reason why the 3.0 was rated at 150 was just that chrysler was giving a more accurate representation of the 3.0's power. No one was bragging about how much power your family car makes in 1990 in order to sell more cars.

I also dont think that mitsu cars really make that much power power then chryslers, they just rated the engines differently. The higher compressoin only means a difference of about 10whp if that. The mitsubishis dont make 23 more hp then the chryslers, and I think that is well proven by the 1/4 times then run with similar weight cars.

It seems even an 1988 3.0 makes 150 crank HP after 100k miles so I wouldnt give any credence to chryslers "upgrades" in 1996.

Also, there is no reason to use the forged cranks, since the cast crank will handle up to around 900bhp before it has problems. Forged crank is heavier, and thus robs more HP.