Differences in the TII and TIV blocks?

[Shelby VNT]

It depends on the year really. The '87 and '88 Turbo II 2.2 liter engines were rated at 200 ft/lbs. dead on, but that was before the common block came along. A few computer programming changes and a one piece intake, vs. the two piece of the '87 and '88 are the differences.

So depending how the person you tell that too is looking at it, you still could be right. :big grin: Notice I said the '89 Turbo II 2.2 liter made 210 ft/lbs. or torque."thumbs up

[Polygon]

Interesting.

I've never trusted specs from Chrysler, they like to lie a lot and underrate some cars. I have always wondered if they did that with the TDs? I just had an interesting experience a year ago that kind of confirms it for me.

[Chris Faulk]

Quote:

Originally posted by Polygon Hmm, if that is true it is no matter. All of the internals are going to be replaced with beefier ones.

Beefier?

How can you get beefier than a T-II bottom end without spending a whole lot of moola? Forged crank...forged rods...very strong block...

[Polygon]

Quote:

Originally posted by Chris Faulk Beefier? How can you get beefier than a T-II bottom end without spending a whole lot of moola? Forged crank...forged rods...very strong block...

I plan on running, at times, around 25 PSI of boost with the aid of a boost controller wehn this project is done. The stock internals are **** strong, but they aren't up to the task.

I plan on spending a lot of money.

[Shelby VNT]

Yup, they do lie once and a while. The SRT-4 is putting out alot more then it should! :big grin:

[Mopar_Nutz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shelby VNT It depends on the year really. The '87 and '88 Turbo II 2.2 liter engines were rated at 200 ft/lbs. dead on, but that was before the common block came along. A few computer programming changes and a one piece intake, vs. the two piece of the '87 and '88 are the differences. So depending how the person you tell that too is looking at it, you still could be right. :big grin: Notice I said the '89 Turbo II 2.2 liter made 210 ft/lbs. or torque."thumbs up

Just to clarify. Only the 87 Shelby Z had a 2 piece intake. The 88 had a 1 piece, and shared the same computers as the 89 Daytona, so the only real difference between the 88 and 89 Daytona's is the 89 has a common block. So I don't see how there would be a significant power difference between those 2 years.

I also remember reading that the VNT's made about 10 hp less than the TII's, and the only reason they were rated at the same hp as the TII is because it was pretty much replacing the TII and they didn't want people to see that the new engine (the upgrade) had less hp than the old one. They gave it the same hp rating, (maybe higher torque rating? not sure) and promoted the faster spool time to make it look like the engine/turbo was better in some area's and just as good in the rest. All around a far better combo. So they said....

[Turbodave]

wow, someone blew the cobwebs off this thread...

[90DodgeVNT]

""I plan on running, at times, around 25 PSI of boost with the aid of a boost controller wehn this project is done. The stock internals are **** strong, but they aren't up to the task.

I plan on spending a lot of money.""



Cha-ching. VNT specific parts are not cheap ($850+ for a VNT28 upgrade) or a stock VNT25 ($500-700 range). The vacuum actuator on the turbo alone runs $120+

If you plan on running high boost and want to keep the engine together, get the forged internals. With all the mods I have, I have run up to 24 psi and I have not had any problems, and I was told the VNT28 can run up to 30 PSI. John Craig @ limit Engineering is a good guy to talk to about VNT stuff...

[sliderr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polygon I was under the impression that the turbo II was "rated" at 200 ft/lbs and the turbo IV was "rated" at 210 ft/lbs.

and this would be because the turbo iv had the 568 which was designed to hold more power than the 555. It was just a programming change really. The fact that you have full boost with the vnt at 2100-2200 rpm helps use that torque better too!

[Polygon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbodave wow, someone blew the cobwebs off this thread...

Yeah, I don't even have that car anymore.

[Mopar_Nutz]

How'd that show up in new posts? :big grin: