?Easiest & cheapest way to turbo a 3.0??

[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

[JZK316]

Well I looked into this and its very posible to boost a 3.0 but the big problem with doing it is that they like to blow up. I would say get a small turbo for it, thats what I read responds best on them if I remember right. I'll post pics of the prototype Turbo 3.0 manifolds from mopar that they were working on you could use that as a template for getting custom parts done.

[rfb6435]

Wouldn't the easiest way be to take the darn thing out and put in a 2.5 TI?

-Rich

[onenastymopar]

If i was plannin that then i'd just buy a t1/2 car and be done with it....that would be easiest way but im gettin thiss car and i like different non-norm ideas/cars rather they've been done before or not. And there still arnt very many 3.0 turbos runnin around out there so still a odd setup for most part which is what i like.

[Reaper1]

I'd like to know since when the 3.0 likes to blow up? They smoke because the valve guides drop, but they don't blow up unless you do something REALLY stupid for the most part. I'm sure there are the few out there that were bad apples, but I've been in the 3.0 and TD community since 1996 and found it pretty rare to have heard of one blow without a good reason. Crazyace, you wanna comment??

If you want to boost it, there's no issue, but be sure to use common sense like you would on anything else you'd put a turbo on...

[onenastymopar]

I agree and they had a recall for the valve guides but most people dont realize its a simple fix.....but i just like the idea of things that are different....i own a festiva that i swapped a 1.8 sohc into and i even considered putting a turbo on it for a while but now im bored so time for a new toy
well im going to the car tonite to make sure it runs good etc and then probably tues will drive it home so we'll c what happens from there.

[onenastymopar]

well looks like the cars gonna be mine as i started it up tonite and after a yr of sitting it ran and moved....actually pretty darn well....so now a matter of getting tires on the rear and the new rad in it and see hopw it "RUNS" lol j/k i'll give her a bit befgore opening her up

[Reaper1]

BTW, just thought I'd throw this out there...my Daytona has in the neighborhood of around 300,000 miles on it(odo's broke, but I kept track based on tanks of gas and oil changes over the years added to the scanned milage when we got back from Germany in '94 which was around 154,000...odo reads around 134,000 IIRC). The bottom end has been opened once to install a new oil pump(it came with the FMS installed and it was leaking, plus since it is crank driven I figured a new pump would be best because if the pump was on the way out it would have caused the seal to go bad). Other than that, the heads were off once for replacing the lifters in '94(I *think* they came off...I didn't own the car then, mom did). It's had three timing belts and two water pumps. I did the front cam seals when I did the water pump, belt, and oil pump/FMS this last time. The RMS was supposedly replaced when the third tranny went in back in '98. Other than that I've NEVER had an issue out of my 3.0...and I beat the living crap out of it. I've done slight mods, but nothing major. It put down 130hp and turned a best of 15.949@86.2mph in the 'Tona, but has since lost a lot of pep. The best I could muster out of it the last time I took it to the track was 16.5....so it is definatly slowly going downhill, but it's still good enough and economical enough to drive around town(that is if the trannt wasn't screwed)...

[Ondonti]

im pretty sure the factory was not wrong when they decided on the position and method of turboing the 3.0. As many have said before, copy the best.

[JZK316]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfb6435 Wouldn't the easiest way be to take the darn thing out and put in a 2.5 TI? -Rich

Working on that and no its not much easier :P

[JZK316]

BTW when I was talking about them blowing up I was talking about after you put a turbo on it. But I think if you can get your hands on some 3kgt vr4 pistons you'd be set. 3.0 is a good motor I liked mine want to get another. :P

[MachineHead]

Quote:

Working on that and no its not much easier :P

Actually swapping in a 2.5 (or 2.2 obviously) is pretty freakin simple.

Quote:

BTW when I was talking about them blowing up I was talking about after you put a turbo on it. But I think if you can get your hands on some 3kgt vr4 pistons you'd be set. 3.0 is a good motor I liked mine want to get another. :P

As far as I know ther are only a small handfull of turbo 3.0s running and none of them has run over about 8PSI that I know of. None of them has ever blown up or had any catastrophic failure that was not the owners own fault either.

The VR4 pistons are a bad idea, since the SOHC pistons are strong and have a nice dish in them that matches up with the head very nicely.

I personnaly do not like the 3.0 AT ALL. I have put over 50,000 miles on mine and don't like the thing much at all. The power is lower than a stock 2.5 TI along with worse gas mileage. Parts are more expensive. The reliability is worse than the 2.2 or 2.5, but is not terrible. They are smokey bastards but that can be fixed easily some of the time. Working on it is not really any more difficult than a 2.5, but is certainly more time consuming.

After putting lots of time into planning a turbo 3.0, gathering parts, and prepping the motor, I still decided to swap in a 2.5 and do a neon head swap on it.

-Kyle

[Ondonti]

the first documented person I know of to supercharge the 3.0 ran 12 psi unintercooled. bad detonation thanks to using a roots and no intercooling, but he didnt blow the motor.


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. 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. buy 1 of each, and drive them across america.....Im quite sure Id rather take the 3.0 over those thousands of miles and not have any breakdowns. Now, you definitly might not have as much fun...........but last time I checked my 3.0 stock was about the same as most stock t1's in the 1/4. Ive driven a stock 2.5 t1 87 new yorker and it was definilty not faster than my 3.0 stock, and it probably weighed the same or less.

Lots of people own a 3.0 to drive around when their turbo is broke. 3.0 will only smoke if you are an incapable repairman unable to perform an easy fix correctly.
My 94 does will not have this same problem besides normal aging, and the 3.0 has been produced for 9 years without this problem......longer than the years it had the problem. Gee, lets go comparing an 83 2.2 to a early 3.0 and tell me which is a more refined motor.

I would think its a lot easier to swap in a 2.x turbo than turbo the v6 but thats not what I want to do.

[Mystryguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ondonti Ive driven a stock 2.5 t1 87 new yorker... Lots of people own a 3.0 to drive around when their turbo is broke. 3.0 will only smoke if you are an incapable repairman unable to perform an easy fix correctly.

First off theres no such thing as a stock 2.5 T1 87 yorker but im sure you meant 2.2, lol. Secondly i think in mid range/high rpm after the 3.0 lost its steam the 2.2 would pull past. Ive never driven a heavy 2.2 T1 log car though so i dont know... Lastly whats this easy fix you keep talking about on the 3.0's?? I had to get a valve job and new seats and before i knew it 500 dollars was down the drain doing it myself... If chrysler would have tested a bit more they wouldnt have such a bad rep right now with the smokey 3.0

[mwinkle353]

Bronze C-clipped valve guides and new style valve seals.

The reason most of the older 3.0L motors burned oil was because the valve guides would drop and the older style valve stem seals would leak and allow massive amounts of oil to go into the combustion chamber.