PDA

View Full Version : turbo 3.9?



mopardad1
12-13-2010, 11:20 PM
I have been planning a 5.7 hemi swap into my 1990 D150 2wd for some time. My son and son-in-law have decided to put it into my son-in-law's 97 TJ, oh well.
It would have replaced the 3.9 non-Magnum it currently has.

Now back to the 3.9. Has anyone ever done this? I'm thinking a single turbo (Buick 3.8?) or a couple of 2.2 Mitsubishis.
Any thoughts?

BadAssPerformance
12-13-2010, 11:31 PM
I dont see why it wouldnt work, what is the compression ratio on those? I know the 3.9L dont like to rev too high tho or the rods come out, unless thats only the Magnum ones?

turbovanmanČ
12-13-2010, 11:38 PM
Sure, why not, anythings possible with time and fabrication, :thumb:

I think a couple of mitsu's would be too small.

black86glhs
12-13-2010, 11:57 PM
Sure, why not, anythings possible with time and fabrication, :thumb:

I think a couple of mitsu's would be too small.

I think 2 Mitsu's on say 7lbs boost would be ok. You wouldn't need to rev the crap out of it either, saving the con rods.

Vigo
12-14-2010, 12:57 AM
I think the buick GN turbo would work very well and give you a lot of room to make power without all the extra plumbing of the duals.

I am considering rear-mount turboing a magnum 3.9 right now but dont have much to add.

mopardad1
12-14-2010, 08:49 PM
thanks for your input.

the cr for the non-Magnum is 9.2, and the rods are as strong as the ones in a 318.

BadAssPerformance
12-14-2010, 09:03 PM
Its not the rod strength thats the issue its the vibrations of 6 cyl vs. 8 cyl

glhs0426
12-14-2010, 09:08 PM
A friend of mine supercharged a 3.9L in his Dakota with great results. The first engine with a small supercharger used a 1992 cam, pocket ported heads, and stock pistons. The big supercharger had forged 8.5:1 pistons, fully ported heads, o-ringed block, custom ground camshaft, intercooler, custom intake, custom high stall lockup converter, etc. It put 650plus HP down on the ground. All with stock rods, abiet polished and resized.

The 3.9L is very capable.

turbovanmanČ
12-14-2010, 09:10 PM
HE351 or HX35 if your looking for a budget turbo capable of some serious power, :thumb:

Mopar318
12-14-2010, 09:17 PM
A friend of mine supercharged a 3.9L in his Dakota with great results. The first engine with a small supercharger used a 1992 cam, pocket ported heads, and stock pistons. The big supercharger had forged 8.5:1 pistons, fully ported heads, o-ringed block, custom ground camshaft, intercooler, custom intake, custom high stall lockup converter, etc. It put 650plus HP down on the ground. All with stock rods, abiet polished and resized.

The 3.9L is very capable.

650+HP to the ground with a 3.9? Sorry not buying it. The highest Figure I have seen from a magnum was around 700 and that was a turbo charged 6.7 liter stroker.

Also, there are no aftermarket heads for the v6. Magnum heads ported still dont flow that great.

mopardad1
12-14-2010, 10:08 PM
Its not the rod strength thats the issue its the vibrations of 6 cyl vs. 8 cyl

didn't give that much thought. We are straight 4, 6 and v-8 guys.

plan on limiting boost to 7-8 pounds, it's not a rev engine now and don't plan on it. thanks for your input

Vigo
12-14-2010, 10:12 PM
650+HP to the ground with a 3.9? Sorry not buying it. The highest Figure I have seen from a magnum was around 700 and that was a turbo charged 6.7 liter stroker.

Yeh, im really skeptical about that. It would certainly be possible to make the power (really a built 6.7L shouldnt even need a turbo to do 700hp), but id need to know more about it to really believe it.


plan on limiting boost to 7-8 pounds, it's not a rev engine now and don't plan on it. thanks for your input

I agree with that approach. In my case i just want something i can get 4-5psi at converter stall so i can have stronger part throttle acceleration. I hardly ever floor it cuz i dont want to listen to the nasty noises this 241k mile motor makes past 3500 rpm!

glhs0426
12-14-2010, 10:21 PM
I stand corrected. Just got a text back from him to confirm and he said the chassis dyno put out numbers between 480 to 500. So, it was not 650WHP. At 15% loss that is 552-575. He said the dyno operators told him he needed bigger injectors since he was out of fuel and going lean. He was wanting 650HP, but never did install bigger injectors or crank up the boost to make his numbers.

He got tired of it and traded it for a customized Magnum. The new owner waisted no time cranking up the boost and toasting the 3.9L engine two weeks after the trade.

Vigo
12-14-2010, 10:50 PM
Figures. That had to be one of the strongest 3.9s around so its sad to hear it ended up in the hands of someone like that.

Did he document the build online anywhere? Id love to read about it.

glhs0426
12-14-2010, 11:05 PM
Figures. That had to be one of the strongest 3.9s around so its sad to hear it ended up in the hands of someone like that.

Did he document the build online anywhere? Id love to read about it.

The whole point was the 3.9L can take the abuse of high HP. I didn't mean to muck up the thread.

He did not document the build. I can get the specs for the powertrain if anyone needs them. I doubt the cam would work well with a turbo, it was specifically ground to make power from 4000-6500rpm with the big supercharger.

The truck wound up somewhere around Fort Smith, AR.

Ondonti
12-15-2010, 03:46 AM
Turbo matching is not just about engine size, but RPM capability and airflow.

What is the rev limiter on a 3.9 since you are probably not going to change that?
I wouldn't really want to do the work of fitting twins but on a longitudinal engine it should not be too bad, maybe even preferred.

8 pounds from twin mitsu's isn't exactly rocket science so I don't think we have to worry about "whats best"
Its not going to be fast but it should beat up the larger engine while getting better mileage.
Plus....sound cool.

turbovanmanČ
12-15-2010, 02:31 PM
Turbo matching is not just about engine size, but RPM capability and airflow.

What is the rev limiter on a 3.9 since you are probably not going to change that?
I wouldn't really want to do the work of fitting twins but on a longitudinal engine it should not be too bad, maybe even preferred.

8 pounds from twin mitsu's isn't exactly rocket science so I don't think we have to worry about "whats best"
Its not going to be fast but it should beat up the larger engine while getting better mileage.
Plus....sound cool.


Ahem, its a V6, :p

Mopar318
12-15-2010, 05:33 PM
Ahem, its a V6, :p

I think he meant the placement of the engine. Long ways versus horizontal like on a FWD..

turbovanmanČ
12-15-2010, 06:23 PM
I think he meant the placement of the engine. Long ways versus horizontal like on a FWD..

Inverted headers, like some of the V8 RWD crowd does, cake, :p

Vigo
12-15-2010, 07:40 PM
I know that cant be done with stock manifolds on a magnum v6 without interference from the power steering setup. At least, thats what i can tell from eyeballing.. A magnum 3.9 is ALSO one of the motors i have sitting on the ground. lol.

black86glhs
12-15-2010, 11:03 PM
I know that cant be done with stock manifolds on a magnum v6 without interference from the power steering setup. At least, thats what i can tell from eyeballing.. A magnum 3.9 is ALSO one of the motors i have sitting on the ground. lol.

Headers FTW!:thumb:

Vigo
12-16-2010, 01:30 AM
I dont get it.. shorty headers would discharge in the same place and have the same issues as stockers, and long tube headers would probably run into even more stuff if you turned them upside down..

got pics?

Mopar318
12-16-2010, 08:25 AM
I dont get it.. shorty headers would discharge in the same place and have the same issues as stockers, and long tube headers would probably run into even more stuff if you turned them upside down..

got pics?

You cant flip them and have them point up because the bolt pattern is wrong. You cant even flip them at all because there are 3 ports, and two of them are at the front.

The only way is custom

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d48/Mopar318/ARCintercooler031.jpg

Vigo
12-16-2010, 02:15 PM
Oh duh, you're right. What i was looking at with the power steering issue was just rotating them.. they'd still point down but be on opposite sides.

Ondonti
12-17-2010, 02:02 AM
Ahem, its a V6, :p

I have no idea what you are going here for.

Running 2 oil feeds, 2 oil drains, 2 downpipes, 2 charge pipes, 2 wastegates to get working together.

Or make a crossover and just one of each of those. When you are not going all out, simplicity has something going for it. Honestly the only reason I think I would go twins on a longitudinal vee motor is for looks. In that situation, looks would be a very powerful motivational factor. I like symmetry.

black86glhs
12-17-2010, 02:55 AM
I dont get it.. shorty headers would discharge in the same place and have the same issues as stockers, and long tube headers would probably run into even more stuff if you turned them upside down..

got pics?

Sorry, meant custom made headers, FTW!!!!! LOL.

turbovanmanČ
12-17-2010, 03:03 AM
I have no idea what you are going here for.

Running 2 oil feeds, 2 oil drains, 2 downpipes, 2 charge pipes, 2 wastegates to get working together.

Or make a crossover and just one of each of those. When you are not going all out, simplicity has something going for it. Honestly the only reason I think I would go twins on a longitudinal vee motor is for looks. In that situation, looks would be a very powerful motivational factor. I like symmetry.

I thought you figured it was an inline 6, not a V6.

Even so, many people twin turbo V8's and they say its not that hard. To each their own, :nod:

The Pope
07-04-2011, 03:11 PM
http://www.pnw-sdac.org/gallery/v/Members+Rides/Rob+Walsh/HPIM1292.jpg.html

I went with 2 magnum V8 manifolds and spun them, the 3.9 mag manifolds will do this. Truck manifolds exit way back. Then 2 2.5" SS band clamps welded on for a seal. Used a Flow master 2.5"-3" Y collector to make a T4 mount. Then a 60mm WG going into the exhaust pipe. Pretty clean and leaves room. On the 3.9 you may have to route PS and alt some where else. 318 pistons and rods are dirt cheap so beefing up a 3.9 is pretty easy. I would swap in a magnum 3.9 vs the first 3.9 as they flow horrid.

dds78910
07-11-2011, 11:20 PM
Why not try a remote mount setup like the STS turbos, just use a hy or hx.

Vigo
07-12-2011, 02:11 PM
I'll probably be doing a remote-mount type of build on a 96 3.9 at some point. Whether it has the 3.9 or 5.9 at that point will determine what turbo gets used. heh.

dds78910
07-12-2011, 04:15 PM
I'll probably be doing a remote-mount type of build on a 96 3.9 at some point. Whether it has the 3.9 or 5.9 at that point will determine what turbo gets used. heh.

I have a 98 3.9 I have been collecting parts to to a remote mount setup. Now that I decided to not build my 2.2 hybrid anymore I think a few of those parts might work for it also. Like my turbo and IC.

RoadWarrior222
07-12-2011, 05:25 PM
Ahem, its a V6, :pand everyone we know with a V6 mini gets better milage than your 4 banger so I'm not quite sure of your point here :D

---------- Post added at 05:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:22 PM ----------


Running 2 oil feeds, 2 oil drains, 2 downpipes, 2 charge pipes, 2 wastegates to get working together.

Or make a crossover and just one of each of those. When you are not going all out, simplicity has something going for it. Honestly the only reason I think I would go twins on a longitudinal vee motor is for looks. In that situation, looks would be a very powerful motivational factor. I like symmetry.

Plus redundancy! if one bank blows you can pull bits out until it stops clanking and drive home on the rest :D

Khajjathefang
07-26-2011, 12:28 AM
I realize this thread is looong dead but have any of you considered running an eaton m90 off a supercoupe? they come pretty cheap and are internally lubricated. Hell, iirc direct connection used to sell a draw through roots blower for the 3.9. Might still be a few out there if you look hard enough

RoadWarrior222
07-26-2011, 08:35 AM
Its not the rod strength thats the issue its the vibrations of 6 cyl vs. 8 cyl
Yeah, I think you're right, longevity will be an issue. Whatever the V8 might be capable of, this V6 is the one of the roughest and worst balanced V6es ever produced.

Vigo
07-26-2011, 02:04 PM
I realize this thread is looong dead but have any of you considered running an eaton m90 off a supercoupe? they come pretty cheap and are internally lubricated. Hell, iirc direct connection used to sell a draw through roots blower for the 3.9. Might still be a few out there if you look hard enough

Ive thought about it but personally i like the turbo idea better. I do have a supercoupe m90 im putting on my caravan though.

RoadWarrior222
07-26-2011, 02:07 PM
Just 'coz it's supercharged doesn't mean you can't have a turbo too :eyebrows: ..... unless you're some pansy that wants traction in 3rd or lower...

Vigo
07-27-2011, 02:33 AM
Im also considering that for my van, but definitely not for the dakota. lol

mpgmike
07-31-2011, 08:51 AM
A few years ago I was considering building a small block for turbo. I contacted HP Engines in Thompsontown, PA and asked if they had a torque plate for the SB Mopar. He said no. I said your head guy (the guy that does the heads, not Mr. Big) runs a '70 SB Duster in the 9's, surely you have a torque plate!?! He said the older pre-Magnum blocks are quite stout, and the torque plate made no measurable difference. After a pause, he added, The Magnum blocks are a totally different story. Besides a torque plate, bolt on motor mounts, alternator brackets, and anything else because those blocks do distort.

I got to thinking that it might be better to use the older block with a Magnum top end. Get the beef of the block and the better flow from the Magnum lid. As for turbos, a street oriented 3.9 would be well suited with twin Mitsus. Twin Garrets would make for quite high HP ingredients.

Mike

dds78910
07-31-2011, 09:29 AM
How do you think a 2000 7.3 powerstroke turbo would spool up on a 98 3.9 v6? I'm thinking it might do ok.

Vigo
08-01-2011, 02:00 AM
i think it would do well.