Turbo Dodge Forums banner

81 - 100 of 212 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,894 Posts
To integrate a differential into most, if not all, of the readily available part time 4wd stuff (I.E. trucks and jeeps)... I don't know how to put into words how difficult it would be. From what I understand, it's not that the one has an open/limited slip diff and the other has a locked diff. It's that the one doesn't have a differential at all. Which is why they kick ass in the snow and off road, but will break things on the dry pavement and have a high and low speed.


You're suggesting having driving the rear wheels with a pair of turbines driven by the line pressure from the transmission? Have you seen the size of the pump? Lol, (tounge in cheek of course) you'd be better off squirting it out the back for jet propultion : D. It's worth a shot if you've got lots of spare time, and if you get it to work... many props to you.

I hear audi I think $$$$!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_wheel_drive#4WD_and_AWD_systems_by_design_type
There's a list of common AWD systems and how they operate.

If you have a lot of access to junkyards with AWD transmissions, you may want to take a dodge bellhousing and see what you'd have to do to it to bolt to a VW or whatever you want AWD setup. Can the VW stuff take any kind of power? There's no real point to any of this unless you are making a ton of power, or want a time, labor, and money intensive snow cruzer.

I'd be more inclined to use a mitsubishi AWD system as they at least have nearly the same layout and are proven to hold big power if you pray to them properly.

A subie setup with a longitudinal TD engine might be interesting, but you might have to either have your engine hanging out the front of the car, or move your front wheels back. Which may not be such a bad thing if you were going to drag race. Altered WB AWD TD...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
The mitsu stuff is good choice to a point.

I still favor the AUDI stuff... Considering Dahlback and others have done AWD conversions to many a VW... and run 1000hp like in the AWD AUDI POWERED GTI Conversion.

I think a quatro donner... well whatever... money vs. power... how much power.

As for the Lebaron setup vs Mitsu.... well the AWD 3000 setup... DOHC version of v6 with turbos and awd... SAME TRANS... lebaron just doesnt have the rear output shaft and RWD parts...

An AWD Lebaron based on mitsu might be fun... as for expense... thats a different issue.

If and thats a big if I wanted to build an AWD anything that wasnt awd, I would start with something like the 924 or 944, toss the stock 2.0 or 2.5 engine, use VW Rabbit front or the audi front stuff... since the 924 and early 944 share the same control arms and other bits... not to hard to figure out axles and such... mate the AUDI quatro trans to a TD 2.5, line it all up. Swap in the AUDI rear, possibly shortening axles.

AUDI donor - less than 1000, TD motor even less... for a running motor.

Then you have a 2000 - 2500lb sports car with AWD and atleast 250-300hp with the potential for a lot more .... but talk about a frankenstein... still...

Especially if you took the 924 approach and added the Carrera GT or GTS or GTR or Holberg C or D production body kit with that fiberglass... 2000lbs.... well would be interesting.... hahaha but not really in the spirit of an AWD TD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,532 Posts
The mitsu stuff can handle any power level you can attempt to throw at it.

there are upgrades now that didnt exist even 1 year ago.


Also that chrysler lebaron does NOT have a mitsu trans and is NOT compatible. The mitsu engines have transmission on the passenger side.
Chrysler trans are on drivers side.

I still think it would be fun to run the chrysler AWD stuff and apply a lot of the things learned from similar systems and their failures.
Personally I would weld the center dif and then see about LSD's in both front a year or possibly spools.
Then i would worry about the transfer case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Ondonti your right about the configuration of the trans and engine... no denying that, but I will say everything that I had been reading about the trans configuration and the motor, seemed to indicate that the Non-turbo v6 used the same trans, less the AWD components, but what the information now that I re-read it didnt say was as it applies to the Mitsubishi only, not the chrysler setup. So bad information in - and here I was spitting it back out.

Glad to hear their are upgrades, that makes all the difference. Very Nice.

Thanks for setting me straight. All that aside, I like the 94 I have, but wish it was a TD 2.2/2.5.

I have a supercharger on it right now, 6 PSI and its the v6 is a blast, wasn't exactly the easiest setup, I understand the limit is about 8, before ring issues. Still loads of fun and more than a few surprises to the unsuspecting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
first off, the evo is the only logical solution, although parts aren't cheap. There's no reason you can turn the motor 180 for 1&2 g trans (modify oil pickup or better yet dry sump and a few other interesting "fixes").

1g dsms are much heavier than 2700# or whatever you said. The smart solution there is to put a 1g drive train into an 89 mirage, which has been done and has been proven to be capable of low 10s on street tires.

an option no one has considered is the 91 isuzu impulse RS. awd, turbo setup like ours with a 1.8L engine, and have been in the low 12s so the drivetrain is a least somewhat beefy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
Timmay2 said:
Why not AWD ?

Ok i know this topic has been beat to death. But why doesnt it exist?

I know everyone tries to use a TRUE AWD setup.

But if the engien and trans are turned sideways... i see one axle coming out of each side of the transmission.

I call that my front and my rear driveshaft.

Now, you can probably source axle pieces and build something that will work for the front.. and for the rear use an intermediate shaft and get a driveshaft made that will fit into it and into a rear differential.. and...

WHY NOT!?

someone tell me
This exact concept has been used with a Front wheel drive saturn engine/ transaxle placed sideways in a professional rock crawler, using the outputs as the yokes for their front and rear driveshafts. I remember seeing this about 2 years ago on a TV show focusing on this thing. It is a cool idea and WILL work. Youguys who are saying the spider gears etc are not strong enough, you think a rock crawler isnt hard on parts? These guys are running dana 60's with chromoly shafts, and they wouldnt build a vehicle to compete with if breakage was an issue. You have to remember that there would be significantly less torque placed on the differential in the transaxle because of the gear reduction at the front and rear differentials in the AWD/ 4WD vehicle: 1/3-1/4 the normal torque (3:07-4:10 for example).

-Jerry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,254 Posts
But to build a street drivable vehicle you would have to use very high gearing in the front/rear ends if you want to be able to get any speed out of the vehicle. How fast does a rock crawler go? 10 maybe 20 mph wide open. If your going to use the transaxle in that configuration you might as well put a full spool in it. Then you'd never have to worry about the diff and you'd have a 50/50 split of power all the time. the placement for it in a street vehicle would very impractical but in a ORV setup would probably work very well. If I ever find time and run out of other projects I'm sure I'll try it.

Benji
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
137,665 Posts
t3rse said:
first off, the evo is the only logical solution, although parts aren't cheap. There's no reason you can turn the motor 180 for 1&2 g trans (modify oil pickup or better yet dry sump and a few other interesting "fixes").

1g dsms are much heavier than 2700# or whatever you said. The smart solution there is to put a 1g drive train into an 89 mirage, which has been done and has been proven to be capable of low 10s on street tires.

an option no one has considered is the 91 isuzu impulse RS. awd, turbo setup like ours with a 1.8L engine, and have been in the low 12s so the drivetrain is a least somewhat beefy.
If you use an EVO VIII trans - it's already facing the right direction. Mitsu turned its motors around the "US" way on the VIII. Just make an adapter plate to reun an EVOVIII trans. It's THE easiest and most logical solution. As for the rear, you could adapt an evo rear or any 1 or 2g DSM.

The hard part of the job will be fitting the AWD transfer case around the K-frame and getting the trans lined up so that the driveshaft runs through the tunnel TD's already have. If you have some $ - probably around 5 grand - a garage - some time -= and wleding skills - you could do this.

Now, as long as we are talking about crazier swaps, another option would be a custom K-frame (like the RWD k-frame exline makes - in fact that one may work for this idea) and a TD motor mated to an audi quatttro 5 speed. It's a longitudinal design, so it would be like a RWD layout only it would sit farther forward. This would probably NOT work in an Omni but it could be done in any other TD (including charger - because you can cut the front end since you have a nose cone to work with). The same applies to subara, its the same layout and you could do the same thing. It would even fit in an omni IF you used the subie engine. However, unless you buy the STI trans its not a good idea. The WRX trans is junk.

All of this is just theory of course. The fact remains, the only REASONABLE method is an EVO VIII trans. It's not the only way, it's just the BEST way.

Ont he sdame note - if you just wait for the new turbno wolrd engine from the SRT caliber - it "should" mate to the EVO X trans which is ALSO facing the right direction. Time will tell though. Although they are a shared design, its possible mitsu or chrysler could change the bolt pattern on the block. You could also swap in the enire EVO X drivetrain. However, it would be a mitsu designed version of the world engine then which means different head work, different VVT and a 2.0 instead of a 2.4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,447 Posts
Another possibility is the transmission from a Mazda 323 GTX. Turbocharged AWD Ford Escort in Layman's terms. I have no idea how strong/capable they are, but the transmission is on the correct side.

An AWD turbododge is no where near impossible. This is a project I'd be tacking if I had the time/space.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,721 Posts
i still say that the 3.0 can be made AWD with relative ease. you can even retain the 12v motor if so desired. a bit of creativity with the motor/tranny mounts (motor rotated 180*) with a 3KGT/stealth AWD 5/6sp transmission and rear end would be a monster of a sleeper. esp. since it would weigh a LOT less than the 3KGT, and the torque of the 3.0 would make it launch hard :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,447 Posts
I dunno about that. I pulled the engine/transmission out of my stealth for an engine rebuild and even with some aggressive tilting of the assembly for removal out the top of the car, it barely made it out.

The Stealth is wider than the K-based Chryslers, so if it barely fit in a 3S.... I should take some measurements. Heck--maybe the 3S's subframe could be retrofitted to fit! The rear axle/suspension mounts on its own subframe from how it looks, so that could be bolted in, too. Then you basically have a 3S with a K-based body on it.

A lot of work no matter how you look at it. I'd rather have a 4 cylinder under the hood.... I like cars that appear to be normal, but have interesting things hidden here and there if you look closely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
604 Posts
Ondonti said:
Even if it couldnt handle any power I still think it would be fun to use the RWD conversion parts but then work on getting the chrysler awd housing to bolt to a 5 speed trans.
It bolt's up already. The problem lays in the way the t-case interfaces with the diff. The AWD cars have the carrier splined, so that the t-case has power at all times, the shaft is hollow and the axle used on the pass side has a VERY long end that pass through the t-case, through the hollow shaft and into the pinion gear on the diff like normal. You'd need to machine the 5-spd diff to accept the t-case and it's very unlikely that there is enough material to do so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,352 Posts
turbomini said:
umm a quick question. what about using a AWD mini van trans and putting that in a shadow? or daytona? wouldnt that work?
You'd have to make some sort of adaptor to do so. The AWD trans has a different bellhousing bolt pattern than the 3.0 or 2.2/2.5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
Rob Carter and I discussed this a couple years back, and the extension housing that bolts to the PTU and then to the A604, SHOULD also fit the A670 (and by association the A413). You are in effect driving the drivers front tire off the left side of the diff, and the rest of the tires off the right side of the diff. But I wouldn't want to spool the diff as that will cuase binding front to rear. Not good. ALso, the AWD setup is very picky about tires. They HAVE to be a matched set, size and air pressure. And my understanding of the setup is that the 3.8 power and torque are about the absolute limits of the PTU and rear diff.

Shelby had a couple of AWD Daytona mules running before 88, the "transfer case" was a one off unit, and the rear axle appeared to be a Dana 30 diff attached to a beam axle (likely a stock G body axle) and drove custome made hubs. I had the article somewhere on an older computer and archived it to CD years ago. I also sent it to someone years ago. Maybe Gary Donovan has it? I don't know, haven't seen it for some time.

More in keeping with the original theme of this discussion, Chrysler (Jeep) did consider a K based drivetrain for a still born concept Jeep (JJ) whcich would have used a 2.2 mounted front to rear, and the axle shaft/driveshafts would have driven aluminum Dana 25 axles. I'm going to guess the JJ would have been IFS/IRS and I have never found out what gear ratios would have been used.

When I first heard of the JJ a couple years ago, I started gathering parts for a rock crawler. I still had the 2.2 T2 and A555 from the 88 Shelby Z I stripped. I had gathered 2 Toyota IFS units complete with suspension parts and some other stuff. I was about to purchase a sandrail chassis to significantly modify, when I got laid off. I spent the next 60 days unemployed and sold off all but the motor and trans.

I am trying to figure a way to run yokes off either side of a FWD diff, so you would lose trans fluid or risk pulling an axleshaft out of the diff. I'm thinking an approriately splined shaft shoved through both spider gears would be fine, and then tap the ends of the shaft so a yoke could be fit on the ends and bolted down tight.

Funny things seem to happen as I gather parts, I change jobs. A year ago March, I had started gathering parts for a RWD 2.2 powered minivan. I didn't have too many parts gathered save for the front axle out of a 2wd Cherokee and assorted other little things. But was offered a job elsewhere and we moved from Cali to Utah. Don't worry, the 2.2 and A555 went to TD fanatic who now has THREE 88 Shelby Zs...

While I no longer am in a minivan, I have switched to Jeeps and drive a 95 Grand Cherokee. I'm looking to take a 86 Comanche pickup off a neighbor before the end of summer. It has a 2.5 (AMC, not GM Iron Duke) and a 5 speed and is 4x4. Rusty and needs some work. But, I'm seriously contemplating converting the AMC 2.5 (EFI TBI) to run on say a 2.5 T1 minivan ECM and add a turbo... I still have the intercooler from the 88Z...
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
16,490 Posts
Avenger said:
You'd have to make some sort of adaptor to do so. The AWD trans has a different bellhousing bolt pattern than the 3.0 or 2.2/2.5.
ahh not a V6 person never worked on one lol... v8 or 4cylinder turbo only lol
 
81 - 100 of 212 Posts
Top