3.0 to a Turbo 2.2 or 2.5?

[danristheman]

How hard would it be to change over a 93 voyager minivan 3.0 a670 3 speed to a turbo 2.2 or 2.5 with a 413 3 speed auto? Its also a plain jane voyager no power options expect for power steering and A/C.

Dan Rose

[raccoon]

you'll have to change the engine, transmission, fuel pump, computer and your going to have to replace the engine harness or alter it.

Im not sure of any changes to the body 3.0vs 2.2. as ive never owned a 3.0

[danristheman]

I am not a fan of the 3.0 I would have alot of room taking out the V6 and putting 2.2 or 2.5. would there be computers that would work from any other TD's?

Dan Rose

[BadAssPerformance]

You could use a 92 or 93 SBEC-II Turbo computer... IIR the BCM (Body Control) is all done in a separate box on 93?

and Welcome to the Forum! :thumb:

[turbovanman²]

You need to change the engine and trans, reuse the axles. Reuse the right side mount but you'll need the 4 cylinder mount bracket and front bracket, reuse tranny mount. Reuse fuel pump and the lines from the 4 cyl will fit the stock 3.0L metal lines. Alt is reusable, power steering pump and brackets nope.

As for engine control, you need to make up a harness to meld an older van harness with yours due to different body and engine computers to make all your options, wipers, radio etc work.

The other option could be standalone or find a tbi 4 cylinder computer and use an RR etc but that's a crude way.

[Vigo]

and tbi computer has no knock sense. :(

[turbovanman²]

and tbi computer has no knock sense. :(

We don't need no stinkin knock sensor, :eyebrows: :D

[Vigo]

you think you dont need one! hahah

people with stock pistons probly couldnt use your methods for long!

[Ondonti]

bump
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/90-Junkyard-Runs-11s-on_649313.htm

[turbovanman²]

you think you dont need one! hahah

people with stock pistons probly couldnt use your methods for long!

LOL, I know, I should put a disclaimer on it, I am going to build or use a listening device but that will come later, I have 4 races left, weather permitting.


bump
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/90-Junkyard-Runs-11s-on_649313.htm

Brent, not everyone wants a 3.0L, :eyebrows:

[Vigo]

...not everyone knows what they can do, either.

[Ondonti]

well then simon style 3.3/3.8 :P

I still think you are afraid to build your wife a v6 awd van.

[bakes]

well then simon style 3.3/3.8 :P

I still think you are afraid to build your wife a v6 awd van.

No his not he just has not picked it up !:eyebrows:

[turbovanman²]

well then simon style 3.3/3.8 :P

I still think you are afraid to build your wife a v6 awd van.

I never said I wasn't, just right now, need to fix some cars I have kicking around my shop I bought and are just rotting and sell my R/T and yeah, go pick the van up, :nod:

[Ondonti]

So pretty soon the wife will be able to beat you at the track and then tow you home without changing tires ;) :P

[turbovanman²]

So pretty soon the wife will be able to beat you at the track and then tow you home without changing tires ;) :P

Nah, she'll never get that kind of power, :eyebrows:

[Vigo]

Nah, she'll never get that kind of power,

Unless you think you're building her a 14 second van and it runs 12s... oops! lol

[Big_P]

2nd gen Caravan swaps have been done ;)

[Vigo]

but now we're talking turbo 3.8 awd 2nd gen :D

which is in a sense easier if you start with the right van.

I honestly think you'd be better off boosting a stock 3.0/670 van than trying to swap in a turbo 4.

It would certainly work to swap the 4, but it'd be an uphill battle to modify all the wiring and swap all the junk only to end up with a car that's only as fast as the 3.0 would have been with a 5spd swap. Of course you can get a full weight van into the 14s on stockish parts, but for reference the vast majority of turbo 3.0s ive seen have trapped 100 mph on ~5 psi non intercooled. Even in a heavy van you'd be way ahead with a turbo 3.0 and something like emanage with less work and probably even less money than swapping to a turbo 2.5, unless you have a really cheap donor car and good electrical skills.

[turbovanman²]

^^^^^^^^ I gotta agree, plus the V6 should get better mpg, mine sucks, :(

[Ondonti]

Anthony's 3.0T van on only 5 pounds.
And this is just a turbo and a rising rate regulator. No wiring at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2atLBT3xCXs&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNUiGGxBfHU&feature=channel

[Vigo]

^^and that's in a second gen. 95 grand van.


plus the V6 should get better mpg, mine sucks,

5speed swap works miracles. Matt86's 5spd 3.0 van is getting 25-30 iirc? my tbi/5spd avg'd 27 and could break 30.. Even with the turbo swap i anticipate 25+ but havent finished it yet.

[Big_P]

I got 23 CITY in my 95 3.0 5 speed van.

[turbovanman²]

5speed swap works miracles. Matt86's 5spd 3.0 van is getting 25-30 iirc? my tbi/5spd avg'd 27 and could break 30.. Even with the turbo swap i anticipate 25+ but havent finished it yet.

I know, I just don't want a 5speed for a daily driver. :(



Anthony's 3.0T van on only 5 pounds.
And this is just a turbo and a rising rate regulator. No wiring at all.

Yeah, but he's only running 5 lbs and he isn't putting a different engine in it. He has to swap computers no matter what as the 4 banger TBI computer is only setup for one injector.

Either way, that van is cool, If my van gets written off, I would do a turbo 3L, :thumb:

[Vigo]

He has to swap computers no matter what as the 4 banger TBI computer is only setup for one injector.

:confused2:

U forgot, the OP is STARTING with a 3.0/670 van. A proven engine hooked up to a very buildable tranny.. no need to swap engines :evil:

[turbovanman²]

:confused2:

U forgot, the OP is STARTING with a 3.0/670 van. A proven engine hooked up to a very buildable tranny.. no need to swap engines :evil:

He wants to put in a 4 banger, did you miss that part? ;) :nod:

[Vigo]

He may only want to because he thinks its a better option for going fast..


Yeah, but he's only running 5 lbs and he isn't putting a different engine in it. He has to swap computers no matter what as the 4 banger TBI computer is only setup for one injector.


^this doesn't apply to the original poster OR the van in the video because they both started as 3.0s anyway.

[turbovanman²]

He may only want to because he thinks its a better option for going fast..

And its a great option.



^this doesn't apply to the original poster OR the van in the video because they both started as 3.0s anyway.

It does apply if he's putting a 4 banger in.

[Vigo]

It does apply if he's putting a 4 banger in.

Ok, start over.


And this is just a turbo and a rising rate regulator. No wiring at all.
Since the van is already 3.0, this applies perfectly..

Its not like he would tear out all his stock wiring and put in a tbi harness and then try to switch back.:confused:

Either he'll go 3.0 turbo and have the option of doing almost no wiring work...

Or he'll got 4 cyl and replace 95% of the wiring under the hood to get back to the same starting point as the 3.0, power wise.

he doesnt have to
swap computers no matter what

Im not trying to decide for him but Brent's point was that he can go fast on the motor he has without doing all the wiring work.

[turbovanman²]

Ok, start over.


Since the van is already 3.0, this applies perfectly..

Its not like he would tear out all his stock wiring and put in a tbi harness and then try to switch back.:confused:

Either he'll go 3.0 turbo and have the option of doing almost no wiring work...

Or he'll got 4 cyl and replace 95% of the wiring under the hood to get back to the same starting point as the 3.0, power wise.

he doesnt have to

Im not trying to decide for him but Brent's point was that he can go fast on the motor he has without doing all the wiring work.

Your missing the point. Brent bragged you can turbo a 3.0L with a simple RRR, I said for him, the POSTER of this thread, he doesn't have that option if going 4 banger, and to make it more complicated, you can't add an RRR and use a TBI computer with a turbo one, make sense now???????

[Vigo]

He could use a RRR with a turbo setup if he wanted to, but there are far better ways to do things.. and easier too.

I guess i see what you are saying but the way it came out did not make sense to me. I just dont want him to think he has to switch computers to turbo his 3.0.

[Aries_Turbo]

Even with the turbo swap i anticipate 25+ but havent finished it yet.

my k car has a low if 28 and a high of 39. mixed driving.


bump
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/90-Junkyard-Runs-11s-on_649313.htm

yeah but how long is that going to stay reliable. you and i both know that you have had your fair share of broken/worn out motors..... largely because of a lack of tunable timing control.


He could use a RRR with a turbo setup if he wanted to, but there are far better ways to do things.. and easier too.

I guess i see what you are saying but the way it came out did not make sense to me. I just dont want him to think he has to switch computers to turbo his 3.0.

its kind of a crap shoot depending on what is goals later down the road. if he wants to push a 2.2L/2.5L setup hard, the factory computer is fully workable. the 3.0L isnt. until it becomes fully workable, the megasquirt is the best option and it involves wiring.

yes i know brent has gone really fast. his car rocks. but its not the pinnacle of reliability. its been apart as much as its been together. :)

Brian

[Vigo]

its kind of a crap shoot depending on what is goals later down the road.
I think the 3.0 has every bit as much potential and honestly more for power than the 2.2/2.5. The amount of power Brent has dyno'd on stock 10:1 compression pistons is higher than 99% of all 2.2/2.5s have dyno'd on forged ~8:1s. Stock piston motors cant even come close.

As for mileage, its doesnt give up too much to the smaller motors if it is tuned for it. Brent's 3.0 spirit was seeing 36mpg on highway commutes a few months ago.


if he wants to push a 2.2L/2.5L setup hard, the factory computer is fully workable. the 3.0L isnt. until it becomes fully workable, the megasquirt is the best option and it involves wiring.

I agree it's not as easy, especially since you cant get someone else to do it for you like you probably could with the 2.2/2.5 stuff. However, if you dont like the work and tuning of megasquirt you could still do something like an e-manage. I believe there's a turbo 3.0 on e-manage as we speak, and i just heard from Shelgame the other day that he thinks he can move the rev limiter on 93 3.0 computers. It's harder but not as hard as all the porting and fabrication one would have to do to get an 8-valve to hold a candle to a turbo 3.0, imo.


but its not the pinnacle of reliability. its been apart as much as its been together.

That's true, but he is always trying different combos because there isnt the long list of proven recipes that there is for an 8-valve, and for that matter his duster is more of an experiment than an attempt to have a fast, reliable daily driver.

Back when he had a full weight spirit running the same times as your 8-valve k-car (not derogatory here, just comparison) on 5psi with no electronics that i know of, he could have left it that way for a long time.

I clearly think both ways have their benefits. I have owned more turbo 8-valves than 3.0s and have never owned a boosted 3.0 at this point.

But, based on my experience and what ive seen from others on both motors in basically the same cars, i wouldnt take apart a 3.0 van to swap for a 2.2 or 2.5, unless it was an r/t motor and i was using an older (90 or earlier) van. A 93 van going back to older electronics is gonna run into lots of issues, as Big_P found out many moons ago, and for all the work he will essentially be downgrading his power potential just to have a factory turbo setup that he would have to change everything on to make big power.

So yeh ive just about talked my face off in this thread, so i gotta quit. lol

[Ondonti]

Lack of fuel system for 400-500+ whp has been my problem.
Even built 2.2's fail constantly as that level with proper fuel systems and fully built motors. Ive been doing that with stock bottom ends now. I still have my forged piston shortblock and its still unscathed except a nick in a piston from a spark plug porcelain piece. That motor saw bunches of 500+whp pulls on the dyno and street. I can still throw it into any car I want but 7:1 compression is not E85 friendly.

Brian, if you can show me any 2.2/2.5 thats made similar power with so few upgrades and 'lasted' then go ahead. :thumb:

But we both know that no stock heads/cams/shortlbock 4 cyl has EVER come close. :thumb:


I've run my turbo setups on low boost for extended periods of time with no problems, NEVER had a problem.

The only problem that turbo van has is broken axles. Something that will happen regardless of motor choice.

I would buy a 4 cylinder van if thats what I wanted.
Rising Rate regulators are bad for 350+ hp because high fuel pressure = less flow from the pump. I never dealt with that problem until now (with crazy fuel setup) but I am doing my MS install as we speak.

I would have no problems putting a 10:1 boosted motor into my daily/Tow car with RRR.

Outpull Most dodge gasoline powered trucks and get 30+ mpg when daily driving. Yesssir.
With Megasquirt then we could talk about outpulling stock turbo cummins.

[Aries_Turbo]

of course an 8v stock head isnt going to come close. the headflow is awful and the displacement is smaller.

im just saying its easier to do the electronics on a 8v.

Larry Jolieffe (sp?) did 505+ whp with a stock spirit R/T motor and thats even 2.2L. granted its 16v but it was stock inside. head, cams and all.

right, 5psi, they are great. more than that and you are going to want good solid engine management and fuel system which makes it a but more complicated.

Brian

[Vigo]

Forgot to mention, i actually took apart a 93 3.0/670 van to use the motor to swap into my turbo 2.5 van (blue one in sig pic)!

I also used the front brakes for my 90 van (and then upgraded them to 11" a few weeks later:eyebrows:)
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk124/Vigo327/DSC04036.jpg

and used the back brakes to swap onto my Executive Sedan (avatar pic)
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk124/Vigo327/DSC04056.jpg


And then i made the worlds only 4-lug-swapped 93 caravan so i could roll it back out..


I almost forgot! Got to make sure the motor's good.. heh
http://s279.photobucket.com/albums/kk124/Vigo327/?action=view&current=Movie-1.flv

I also cut the quarter panels off for my 90.. what a ----- that was!!!!

[Ondonti]

of course an 8v stock head isnt going to come close. the headflow is awful and the displacement is smaller.

im just saying its easier to do the electronics on a 8v.

Larry Jolieffe (sp?) did 505+ whp with a stock spirit R/T motor and thats even 2.2L. granted its 16v but it was stock inside. head, cams and all.

right, 5psi, they are great. more than that and you are going to want good solid engine management and fuel system which makes it a but more complicated.

Brian
I really don't believe anything about that car because it only made 1 "500hp" dyno its entire life and it looks like it did it in 2nd gear. Never did it on the street/track etc.
I am also convinced that he didnt have enough fuel to support that kind of HP. Some have said he made up the difference with alky but from the tiny nozzle size he used, No way in hell. I spray 32 gallons per hour of Meth and it can only support about 150hp. he probably only sprayed 25hp worth of methanol. I think the moment he tried to do a 3rd gear pull anywhere that thing would have erupted in flames. Thus the car is basically a 360whp car with a phony dyno to help sell the car. We all know that it was "tuned down" back the the 360hp tune the moment it got off the dyno for "safety"

Smaller turbo and 10psi is just fine. its more of an issue of how much fuel system you have, which is required on any car. The fact that a 3.0 can max out the fuel system at 5 psi says volumes.
10psi really just requires a walbro pump.
I did 107mph on a stock intake manifold bone stock 3.0 motor and 5 pounds of boost and drag radials. At 4500 ft elevation. That was my first duster track visit ever. That was also with no tuning of the AFRs because the car only managed to start just before the races. Car started and I drove to the track with NO tuning done on the drive.

My heavier Spirit did 101.89mph on its first ever pass with no tuning whatesover, 9:1 air fuel ratio! Smaller ebay turbo.
At sea level I would have no problems getting that setup to run near 110mph with a proper tune. On 5 pounds. Just to show how much more power was in it, It did 82mph in the 1/8th and then only gained 19mph (bogging out from too much fuel.
The high altitude Duster on 5psi picked up 28mph on the top end with a less rich "non tune" on a motor with 2 points lower compression. So i have no problems claiming I can put a 3000# Spirit trough the traps at 110mph on 0.4 bar boost.
Thats something that Gary D only accomplished once in a similar weight car, with a LOT of work and a LOT of boost and MORE mods.
Even the faster 16v's are struggling to trap in the high 10xmphs.

Or take your 3.0T and turn the boost from 5 to 7 and walk on by the struggling TD's

Most TD owners struggle their whole life for those numbers. Almost all part out their cars before that happens.

[Ondonti]

There was already a 3.0T running a billet 6262 turbo, before Reeves even had his. The car should be a monster on almost no boost.

I've been helping him build up the car cause unlike some of the fastest TDers, I don't care if someone goes faster then me. :nod:
I'd rather pat them on the back and say "thats my boy!"

And every time I work on bansheenut's R/T, I buy the story less and less about Larry's car. Have you seen the dyno sheet? It looks completely retarded as if it was done in 1st or 2nd gear and then they let out of the gas the moment it hit full boost. Or its just complete BS. There are enough fast R/T's proving themselves now that there is no need for TIII guys to swing on that car to get motivation on going fast.
Its obvious a TIII can make power, no need for there to be "proof" that its worth wasting your money. It never is :(

[Aries_Turbo]

I really don't believe anything about that car because it only made 1 "500hp" dyno its entire life and it looks like it did it in 2nd gear. Never did it on the street/track etc.
I am also convinced that he didnt have enough fuel to support that kind of HP. Some have said he made up the difference with alky but from the tiny nozzle size he used, No way in hell. I spray 32 gallons per hour of Meth and it can only support about 150hp. he probably only sprayed 25hp worth of methanol. I think the moment he tried to do a 3rd gear pull anywhere that thing would have erupted in flames. Thus the car is basically a 360whp car with a phony dyno to help sell the car. We all know that it was "tuned down" back the the 360hp tune the moment it got off the dyno for "safety"

yeah.... if you want to believe that, go ahead. it isnt the truth though. larry, frank and i used to chat over email all the time back then. you dont know the specifics of his setup. Frank and I do. you also dont know about how the car performed on the street. 100mph and roll on it and it would lay endless black stripes in 4th gear. he ran more boost on the street than on the dyno. you also havent seen all the other vids and stuff from back then.

keep making ---- up in you head to try to put others achievements down to make you feel better about your self. what is your problem?

this discussion was going well till you have to ruin it with your crap attitude. we were discussing the pluses and minuses of 3.0L setups pretty objectively till you had to open your fat mouth.

i think more people would be fans of 3.0L turbo setups if you werent such a douche.

Brian

[Aries_Turbo]

I've been helping him build up the car cause unlike some of the fastest TDers, I don't care if someone goes faster then me. :nod:
I'd rather pat them on the back and say "thats my boy!"

And every time I work on bansheenut's R/T, I buy the story less and less about Larry's car. Have you seen the dyno sheet? It looks completely retarded as if it was done in 1st or 2nd gear and then they let out of the gas the moment it hit full boost.

youre the biggest idiot if you think that we dont want anyone to go faster than ourselves.

if you knew anything about the car, youd know that he hammered the car with alky before the boost hit as a preventative measure.

Brian

[turbovanman²]

I've never driven a V6 turbo van but so far, I still love my TIII van, its not cheap but it sure is fun. My only downside is MPG but as I keep being told, a 5 speed will fix that. Not sure what heavy auto van's would get with a V6?