Putting a turbo motor in a 1996-2000 minivan

[Tbone]

I have a strange desire to have a turbo 2.2L or 2.5L in a newer minivan. I like the 1996-2000 minivans and they are fairly rust free still (and cheap). They don't get great gas mileage, though. I have a 2000 with a 3.3L and it gets around 20-24 mpg. I think a turbo 2.2L would get around 30 hwy using a custom cal. and it would still acclerate well when necessary. The 89-90 turbo minivans are getting very scarce and are usually very rusty. I know at least one conversion a guy did where he put a turbo motor in a 93 minivan. He didn't have to do too much fab. work. Everything is different on the 96 and newer, though. I know it would probably take custom motor mounts, custom exhaust, maybe custom driveshafts, and custom wiring. My biggest fear is the wiring. Any opinions on the best way to handle the wiring. Obviously, I would have the wiring and computer from the donor car, but is there any hope of getting the 96 gauges to work? Even if it is just the speedo and idiot lights? Or would I need to use the gauges from the donor car?

Anyone think this is a stupid idea and they have a better idea, I am willing to listen. My main goal is better fuel economy while still being able to accelerate well into traffic. The turbo motor would fit the bill and then some. I know I could have a ton of fun with a turbo motor but that is only 2nd priority to the fuel economy. Thanks.

[moparfreak3]

To tell you the truth you may be better off going with a 2.4L turbo in one of those. Because some came with a 2.4 stock so mounts can be found and it would look stock. You could get a 2.4 out of a stratus and upgrade it to srt-4 status with new rods and pistons. Just my .02

[pobort]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tbone I have a strange desire to have a turbo 2.2L or 2.5L in a newer minivan. I like the 1996-2000 minivans and they are fairly rust free still (and cheap). They don't get great gas mileage, though. I have a 2000 with a 3.3L and it gets around 20-24 mpg. I think a turbo 2.2L would get around 30 hwy using a custom cal. and it would still acclerate well when necessary. The 89-90 turbo minivans are getting very scarce and are usually very rusty. I know at least one conversion a guy did where he put a turbo motor in a 93 minivan. He didn't have to do too much fab. work. Everything is different on the 96 and newer, though. I know it would probably take custom motor mounts, custom exhaust, maybe custom driveshafts, and custom wiring. My biggest fear is the wiring. Any opinions on the best way to handle the wiring. Obviously, I would have the wiring and computer from the donor car, but is there any hope of getting the 96 gauges to work? Even if it is just the speedo and idiot lights? Or would I need to use the gauges from the donor car? Anyone think this is a stupid idea and they have a better idea, I am willing to listen. My main goal is better fuel economy while still being able to accelerate well into traffic. The turbo motor would fit the bill and then some. I know I could have a ton of fun with a turbo motor but that is only 2nd priority to the fuel economy. Thanks.

forget all that. theres nobody pulling near 30mpg with any turbo 2.2/2.5 unless maybe with an hho converter
i have a lot of documented minivan fuel mileages. turbo 89 stick 26mpg, nonturbo 94 2.5 stick 28mpg. 1997 3.3 grand caravan 28, 1998 3.0 3 sp auto 25, 1999 2.4 auto 28. 1985 2.2 stick 25mpg. and i have a couple more. this is all driving very cautiously, slow accleration, 55-60mph highway miles

1996 minivans weigh 350# more than an identical optioned 1995.

if you want a turbo package the best is what was stated, 2.4 get a motor from a pt cruiser and get a manual trans too.

i just found a 1999? stratus 3.0 stick that i'm negociating on the trans and pcm for a 1999 voyager 3.0 conversion

[Tbone]

Thanks guys for the advice. That is really what I needed. I like the 2.4L turbo idea. The main thing is that I had it in my head that you can get 30+ mpg in a turbo daytona so why couldn't you get around 30 mpg in a heavier van. The reason I thought that was because I read a post were guys were writing down there fuel economy numbers. The guys using custom cals. were getting around 30 mpg when not beating on it.

I think my 3.3L caravan stinks for fuel economy. I get 18-20 city and 21-24 hwy when being cautious. I have gotten up to 27 mpg once, but I have yet been able to duplicate that. Mostly driving under 70 mph helps a lot and using the AC as little as possible. I have a theory that being a flex fuel engine has a negative impact on gas mileage even when only using gas.

Pobort: I appears the 2.4L won't be any more fuel efficient than the 3.3L (28 mpg). Does the 2.4L come with a 3 speed auto or a 4 speed? I would think a 3 speed would get crappy gas mileage on the hwy. I had an old tercel 1.5L that got worse mpg than my '85 Sunbird 1.8L. The Sunbird had a 5 speed and the Tercel had a 4 speed. My Sunbird would get 40 mpg on occasion.

[crusty shadow]

hell id drop a 2.4 in there if the mounts are avaliable, slam a set of srt rods and pistons in it and call it a day. mount it up behind one of the T-850 trans out of an srt-4 and you should be rockin. gotta be way less fab work than trying to drop in a 2.2-2.5
i was kinda wondering about this too cause im interested in picking up a mini and running a 2.5 turbo in it. theres tons of 96 up minis around me cheap with good bodies. like 500.00 cheap. i want an 89 or older but they are hard to find where they arent rusted out or totally beat to hell.

the guys you are seeing getting 30+ mpg for the most part have gutted their minis for better performance. no rear seats , carpet rear panels etc. less weight= more mileage.

for now im concentrating on cars i already have. i need to finish building 2 engines, one of em bone stock with a couple goodies for longevity and the other full on balls to the wall. but im keeping my eyes peeled for a rust free omni or horizon to play with at a later date. if you really want something boxy with plenty of room inside that will go fast and still knock down decent mileage pick one of those up.

if you're really looking for good performance and better fuel economy id seriously look at just megasquirting a V6 mini. full control over fuel so you can run it with an economy minded cal, maybe do some upgrades to the intake and exhaust so it makes more power. this will pump up the volumetric efficiency of the engine. higher VE means better economy with more power when properly tuned.