?Easiest & cheapest way to turbo a 3.0??

[Ondonti]

anyways,
The new yorder had a 2.5 t1 I consulted the owners manual which was in the glove box.

Show me on a dyno where the 2.2 power curve flies past the 3.0 at any point stock.
I know the 87 new yorker was very slow whatever motor was in it.

I think the whole point of my post was to say that people dont buy their turbo dodge for reliability, and you didnt seem to have any arguments with that.

The valve fix isnt that hard, sorry you got burned because you didnt do your homework.

The only reason why stuff like that is famous and not other cars, is because other companies spend lots of money trying to make mitsubishi look bad, and lots of money to cover up their own problems. The Toyota v6 is a total pile of junk, but they have that all covered up.

Mitsubishi has been forced to make engines that never have a problem because there is so much bad press, but the things that go wrong with other companies cars would put a stake in the heart of mitsu if they did the same thing.



Hmmmmmm, and I think we should all know that the 3.0 motor saved chrysler from going out of business (thank you turbo motors) so I dont see how you can come down on it so hard. i cant think of a single motor that has done more for any car company in the last 20 years.

[roguetrip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ondonti anyways, The new yorder had a 2.5 t1 I consulted the owners manual which was in the glove box. Show me on a dyno where the 2.2 power curve flies past the 3.0 at any point stock. I know the 87 new yorker was very slow whatever motor was in it. I think the whole point of my post was to say that people dont buy their turbo dodge for reliability, and you didnt seem to have any arguments with that. The valve fix isnt that hard, sorry you got burned because you didnt do your homework. The only reason why stuff like that is famous and not other cars, is because other companies spend lots of money trying to make mitsubishi look bad, and lots of money to cover up their own problems. The Toyota v6 is a total pile of junk, but they have that all covered up. Mitsubishi has been forced to make engines that never have a problem because there is so much bad press, but the things that go wrong with other companies cars would put a stake in the heart of mitsu if they did the same thing. Hmmmmmm, and I think we should all know that the 3.0 motor saved chrysler from going out of business (thank you turbo motors) so I dont see how you can come down on it so hard. i cant think of a single motor that has done more for any car company in the last 20 years.

The 5.0 maybe?

The 3.0's are quite easy to work on! But Mitsubishi gets a bad rep from its owners and their bad parts, I mean, yes, the 6G72 and 4G63 had there problems when they first came out, but both are still around almost now for two decades, which just means they have been built reliable, but mitsu gets more of a bad rep mainly for the transmissions for the DSM, and 3/S's and lots of people have been ticked off how they didn't have recalls for the longest time to fix its issues.

Just a few problems with the 1st gen chrysler 3.0s was the valve guides, the fuel delivery system, sludge buidup on the rear bank, and egr on the plenum which was fixed by was all fixed by 92' which was about 5 years after the engine release.

The Mitsubishi DOHC in the 3/S's engines weren't quite as lucky with the 1st gen as in the CAS was a problem, the ISC/IAC motor if it got stuck would blow up the 1200$ ECU. lifter tick, timing belts slipping which aren't good for a interference engine. And if your a lucky one, main bearings wear out (main bearings and timing belt plague both the 1st and 2nd gen 3/s's)

And thats just the engines! All cars have there flaws, its just to what extend of a problem it is.

I have 3 3.0 cars, my 92 lebaron convertible has only had the timing belt water pump done with the original tranny and motor still strong at 184k on it.

So we need to get back on topic, I'd say at first you don't want to go big, but at 12psi you should be near 300hp, which a Super60 should be able to give you, i'm still learning all the turbos, so you guys add more info!

[MachineHead]

Quote:

I really think its funny to hear someone on this site say they like their 2.5 turbo because its reliable moreso than the 3.0. That is completely not true.

Well in my experience of being a professional mechanic and owning several of each it is certainly true.

Quote:

If you are comparing a 4 speed auto with a 3 speed then thats not a fair comparison. I dont see anyone in these threads that even has that combination. compare 3.0 5 speed to 2.5 turbo 5 speed or 3.0 3 speed to 2.5 turbo 5 speed.

No, I am comparing the 3.0 and the 2.2 / 2.5 just as I said. I have used A543's with the 3.0 and various 5 speeds with my turbo cars, but I never compared them in this thread, only engines.

Quote:

buy 1 of each, and drive them across america

Been there and done that. Well that is if you count half way across several times. I do prefer the turbo motors quite a bit. The gas mileage on my 3.0 was surprisingly good though.

Quote:

3.0 will only smoke if you are an incapable repairman unable to perform an easy fix correctly

Now that is way out there! The fact is the valve guides tend to sink and that cannot be repaired without pulling the heads off. Skill has nothing to do with that fix. Once that happens it doesn't matter what condition your seals are in either.

Quote:

Gee, lets go comparing an 83 2.2 to a early 3.0 and tell me which is a more refined motor.

No one is comparing an early carb'd NA motor to the 3.0 in this thread, so why bring it up?

Quote:

I think the whole point of my post was to say that people dont buy their turbo dodge for reliability, and you didnt seem to have any arguments with that.

Actually a LOT of people by turbo dodges because of the combination of reliability, low cost, ease of maintenance, and hop up potential. The fact is the 3.0 just doesn't have the same features. It CAN be a reliable engine, and no one is debating that. You either need a later model engine to start with to get that or you need to make many updates to the older ones. You will still not have the hop up potential though.

Quote:

Hmmmmmm, and I think we should all know that the 3.0 motor saved chrysler from going out of business (thank you turbo motors) so I dont see how you can come down on it so hard. i cant think of a single motor that has done more for any car company in the last 20 years.

The 3.0 did nothing good for chrylser at all. They started producing there own 3.3 to replace it after a few short years. A company does not spend the time and money to replace something that is saving them from going out of business. They did keep using the 3.0 for quite a long time once the problems were fixed, but that was only because it is cheap to produce and they had an agreement with Mitsu that they didn't want to back out of.

As far as engines that have done more, can you say hemi?

I do not mean to sound argumentative with any of this, although it probably is coming across that way. My original intention was to provide an alternative idea (2.5 TI swap). I stated the fact that I abandoned my own 3.0 turbo project to let you know that there are other alternatives. You seemed upset in your reply and I am trying to respond to your comments with my own information and reasoning for swapping to a 2.5. I am not trying to argue or flame you or anything, so please do not take it that way.

I did a lot of work on turboing a 3.0, so if for some twisted reason you are set on it, I can help answer some questions.

-Kyle

[onenastymopar]

this whole post has gotten way out of hand and way off the subject.......simple as that!

[Frank]

Quote:

Originally Posted by onenastymopar Well ive done a few t1/t2 daytonas in past but have never conisdered a 3.0 turbo setup until i just found this 3.0 5spd lebaron and so i want to know where i can get as much info as possible such as where to get custom exhaust manifolds or have most been just getting a custom "y" pipe with the t3/4 flange welded onto it with the turbo above the tranny? and a manual boost controller for boost or??? i never boosted a non turbo car before so im new to this type of thing....any suggestions? Basically for now i just want to run a very small amount of boost (4-7#) on a stock high mileage motor then later on once the new motors built then i'll upgrade to a hybrid setup/high psi fuel pump and so on. So whats everyones opinion on my very stock and very mild setup?? thankx in advance for any advice brooks

putting the turbo over the tranny is the most common. You will need to flip the upper intake plenum so that the throttle body is on the opposite side of the engine bay. This is ideal so that you have the most clearence.

One problem is that with any boost, you will experience a lot of blow by from boost creaping past the rings, etc. You will probably want to remove the current pvc system and install a catch can. There are tons of ways to implement this... just do a search.

If you are going to stick with low hp goal... max of 250hp, then go with a Garrett from a T2. If you try to go for more then that, you will probably wear the turbo out.

Hows that for on topic.


Frank

[Ondonti]

Well, I love being misquoted, thats so fun, yes this is off topic.
I dont enjoy being picked apart for incorrect translations.....
I said trannies because a 3 speed 3.0 is a lot different in reliability that a 4 speed (most 3.0 complaints are on the 4 speed and NOT on the motor, smoking never stopped anyone from driving). I compared a 83 2.2 to a 91ish 3.0 because thats about equal for those 2 motors in their development. You cant compare a 15 year refined engine against a 1st year motor and dance about in victory. turbo killed chrysler, people dont know how to take care of a turbo cars. Please argue they do because I would enjoy that.

2.5tbi=reliable in my junkyard experience.
ON TOPIC

I have successfully turned my intake around, but it would not work without my 1" intake spacer. Otherwise my TB would be pointing into the motor mount. I dont know if anyone else has had this trouble. There are a lot of AC lines and stuff that are in the way of my 90 degree cai turning towards the headlight. It barely fits and the hood is pushed up a few mm.....I had to bend a few a/c parts a little bit to get more clearance. I dont know how the a/c works so I dont know how to move stuff around.

Now there is TONS of room on the drivers side. If I move the battery, wow crazy amounts of room.

If anyone has ideas on moving the battery to the passenger side without putting it in the trunk, that would be cool. I dont want to lose a/c.

The thing about using a dodge turbo, is that your flanging will not fit when you upgrade to better turbo's (unless you buy turbo's from dodge vendors). I think its nice to have the T3 flange. Very versatile.