3.0L AWD 5-speed minivan!

[Kreel]

I know I've been saying it awhile but I have finally come to create a project log for my AWD build. First off I want to say that I've officially completed the AWD conversion for a 3.0L and have been driving it around for a few days. I have several hundred km's on it with no signs of failure yet. Since I'm breaking in a new clutch it has not undergone and serious abuse yet. Soon though, real soon

I've been working on this project for ~3 months. For this project I started with a 1991 Dodge Grand Caravan LE with a factory 3.3L w/ AWD. I'm not particularly thrilled by the lackluster performance of the 3.3/3.8 engines. To be fair, most of it is due to A-604. I am, however, a fan of the 3.0L engines and their potential. The addition of a 5-speed transmission was enough for me to go through with this project. AWD was just icing on the cake. Since nobody had 100% confirmed that the PTU will fit behind a 3.0L I figured I'd try it out. Lostaboost had done a lot of the heavy lifting as far as the diff is concerned. If it weren't for him I probably wouldn't of tried in the first place. I did things a little differently which I'll try to explain. I took a fair amount of pictures so if you don't see something or want me to explain something further I will try my best



Here's the van with the 3.3L before I pulled it out. Holy crap was that painful. I'll gladly pull 5 3.0L engines before one 3.3L.



Donor car. It was cheap and paid for itself even though I had to travel 8 hours to get it. Factory 3.0L 5-speed under the hood.



I couldn't resist cleaning it up. I ended up having a couple dropped valve guides so I yanked the heads, had them replaced, did a little porting, cleaning, etc, etc.



PTU mounted to the 5-speed transmission. Instead of drilling and tapping the case I opted to weld on extensions and re-drill holes into the adapter plate. It ended up working out ok. I did have to grind a bit from the PTU to make the bolts fit. I used the upper left bolt as the guide just like lostaboost.



Here's a closer look at the modified adapter plate.



I shaved just a bit out of the PTU. I actually had 1 PTU snap on me when I was putting a bolt in. I'm not sure if it was pinched or if I just took to much material out. The second PTU I didn't take near as much out and I shaved the bolts to make it fit more easily.



Just a comparison to show the difference between the AWD diff (left) and 5-speed diff (right).



This was one of the initial mock-ups just to show myself that it would work.



Here is the modified AWD diff. This is where I did things differently than lotsaboost. Instead of modifying the ring gear I opted to modified the diff. So I had the machine shop add a ring so my ring gear would sit centered. It was recommended to me that the amount I was taking off would not provide a large enough lip to center the ring gear. It's hard to tell but I had 35 thou taken off the diff. What I did was checked the wear pattern for the stock diff, then compared it to the wear pattern for an unmodified diff and determined how much I needed to take off. After machining it was pretty darn close to a stock wear pattern. It's a bit of a rough measurement but as far as I'm concerned, if I'm able to do a 5k launch in a 4000 lb van and not shear the teeth off then this should be acceptable. Worst case scenario I put an auto in



One thing I noticed when I had everything bolted up is that the diff bolts came real close to the case, REAL close. So close that I actually had to grind them to make them fit. Again, it's a little hokey and there are better ways to do things, but I feel that I'm not affecting the integrity of the bolt.



The 3.0L exhaust is very close but not quite the same as the 3.3L exhaust. It sits lower and protrudes closer to the firewall. All I did was chop out the cat and weld in a slightly shorter straight pipe. It is really tight back there with maybe 1/2" of clearance between the exhaust and the k-frame so I have urethane mounts keeping the engine in place. With stock rubber ones it would surely smash and break the exhaust. It still might but so far it is holding up.

So there you have it. It's a far cry from the 10+ pages of updates on TD but it is a start. I believe in sharing this knowledge and I'd love to see more AWD projects down the road. I'm certain there's more things that can improved upon from what I've done. I'll keep updating this thread as progress goes on.

I'm about half-way through breaking in my new clutch. I've got some small issues to work through but I should be attempting some wicked launches shortly. If it survives on the street I'll be taking it to the track. I'll also be installed MS2 shortly to see what kind of gains I can get. My engine is mildly modified but I expect to see some decent numbers. Even without launching this van feels considerably faster through first and second than my old 3.0L duster. At least it feels that way And if I can't get good numbers NA then I'm going to slap an m90 on it

[turbokid]

m90 would be sick. say hello to awd burnouts =)
Awd may someday be common place. Least I hope =)

[turbovanman²]

Thanks for sharing,

Now you need a blower or turbo,

[ohiorob]

Awesome project . It must be a blast to drive.

[RoadWarrior222]

Awesomosity!

[Matt86]

That is AWESOME! I knew it could be done with some minor modifications. Interesting you chose a LWB van, I would have gone with a SWB to make up for the minor HP/torque drop the 3.0 swap has but AWD SWB vans are damn near impossible to find.

I bet that sucker will do great in the snow. I have no snow down here so AWD is useless but no more tire spins on take off!

[Kreel]

That is AWESOME! I knew it could be done with some minor modifications. Interesting you chose a LWB van, I would have gone with a SWB to make up for the minor HP/torque drop the 3.0 swap has but AWD SWB vans are damn near impossible to find.

I bet that sucker will do great in the snow. I have no snow down here so AWD is useless but no more tire spins on take off!

Thanks! I did have a SWB van but it was rusted to hell so I opted for 1 of the 2 LWB AWD vans I have. If performance was my #1 choice I would have transferred the SWB AWD to a Caravan CV. Instead I chose the luxury LE trim complete with Infinity sound system and power everything

I'd guesstimate that my 3.0L is putting out more power than the original 3.3L. Stock is what, 160/190 for the 3.3L? I'm probably close to 170/200. If I do cams and exhaust and MS2 that'll be even higher

[Vigo]

Stock is what, 160/190 for the 3.3L?

Most 3.0 fans wouldnt admit it, but yes, i think you are right based on the way my dynasty ran and some numbers crunching. The old ones are rated stock at 150/180. I think in 94 they rerated them to 164/192 or something like that. Allpar would know.

[RoadWarrior222]

I don't think they had the same output more than 2 years running, they were up and down according to where they fit on the marketing diagram that year.

I have driven a handful of 3.3 and 3.8s they just feel a lot different, there's "no drama" pull there, but it's boring. Must be the curve shapes or something. 3.0s just feel more perky, I think the 3.3/3.8 are for people scared of taking an engine over 3000 RPM. Sure you must be able to "do something" with them, but somehow it's a soulless motor. Think it's because they put the cams in the wrong place and somewhere in your butt dyno processing circuits you fear bending pushrods.

[Reaper1]

I don't think they had the same output more than 2 years running, they were up and down according to where they fit on the marketing diagram that year.

I have driven a handful of 3.3 and 3.8s they just feel a lot different, there's "no drama" pull there, but it's boring. Must be the curve shapes or something. 3.0s just feel more perky, I think the 3.3/3.8 are for people scared of taking an engine over 3000 RPM. Sure you must be able to "do something" with them, but somehow it's a soulless motor. Think it's because they put the cams in the wrong place and somewhere in your butt dyno processing circuits you fear bending pushrods.

THAT is funny stuff right there! LOL


Good job on the swap, Kreel! It's really cool that not only did you get it done, and running, but you're driving it around as well!

Now, get that clutch broken in and lets see some launch videos!

[cobra2411]

Boing!

Forced induction would be killer, although there is someone selling 10:1 pistons and cams for the 3.0...

[Kreel]

THAT is funny stuff right there! LOL


Good job on the swap, Kreel! It's really cool that not only did you get it done, and running, but you're driving it around as well!

Now, get that clutch broken in and lets see some launch videos!

Thanks It really is a blast to drive. I'm still being pretty gentle on it while I'm breaking it in. Launch time will come shortly and there will be vids. I should have MS2 installed soon so I'll test out launch control at at the same time

Boing!

Forced induction would be killer, although there is someone selling 10:1 pistons and cams for the 3.0...

Yeah, I tried but missed out on those. However, the second I get my hands on an m90 I'll be mocking it up on top of the plenum

[Vigo]

Hey guys, i got an idea!! Lets take the 3.0 motor and put longer runners, smaller plenum, add .8L, keep the same throttle body, same size exhaust manifolds, etc, and see what happens!

Well, thats a 3.8. You get more torque, but thats it. Because just like a 3.0 gets power from going to a 52mm throttle body which is still too small for a 3.0, the 3.3/3.8 are choked by the stock intake and the same size throttle body with more displacement.

When mitsu put 10:1 pistons, higher-rpm cams, and a ~60mm tb on the 3.0, they got 160hp at the crank. When Dodge put better-sized intake tract on the 3.8, it made 215hp at the crank.

But since the 3.3/3.8 manifolds are one piece and you cant just unbolt them and knock out a divider to double the plenum volume and bolt on an upgraded throttle body without even porting the plenum opening.. nobody improves the 3.3/3.8 intake side, so they are held back by that. If dodge made it as easy on 3.3/3.8 as on 3.0, people would do it and there would be results to talk about.

[j4278h]

why not take the newer improved plastic intake and bolt the complete thing onto a 3.8?

[Kreel]

Hey guys, i got an idea!! Lets take the 3.0 motor and put longer runners, smaller plenum, add .8L, keep the same throttle body, same size exhaust manifolds, etc, and see what happens!

Well, thats a 3.8. You get more torque, but thats it. Because just like a 3.0 gets power from going to a 52mm throttle body which is still too small for a 3.0, the 3.3/3.8 are choked by the stock intake and the same size throttle body with more displacement.

When mitsu put 10:1 pistons, higher-rpm cams, and a ~60mm tb on the 3.0, they got 160hp at the crank. When Dodge put better-sized intake tract on the 3.8, it made 215hp at the crank.

But since the 3.3/3.8 manifolds are one piece and you cant just unbolt them and knock out a divider to double the plenum volume and bolt on an upgraded throttle body without even porting the plenum opening.. nobody improves the 3.3/3.8 intake side, so they are held back by that. If dodge made it as easy on 3.3/3.8 as on 3.0, people would do it and there would be results to talk about.

No, the biggest thing holding back the 3.3/3.8 is it's amazing amount of transmission choices

I don't want to turn this thread into a 3.0 vs 3.3/3.8 debate. That's not what this thread is about. Start up another one and I'll come in fists swinging

[zin]

Looking good! Personally I don't have much experience with the V6s, but I'll bet if you do forced induction, or a 50-75HP shot of nitrous, it WILL get with the program, and test the integrity of your mods!

In fact, adding nitrous is one of the ways Ford "torture tested" some of their cars and trucks (mostly trucks), I know because I sold them the stuff!

Anyway, it's looking good and I'm very interested in how your PTU/diff adaption mods work out.

Mike

[RoadWarrior222]

Because just like a 3.0 gets power from going to a 52mm throttle body which is still too small for a 3.0,

Sixes can cope a liiiiittle better with a smaller TB, than a i4 or v8 can... Just because the next cylinder is just picking up flow while the previous one is tailing off. This tends to give you a more constant induction velocity. I think actually there might be a slight advantage in keeping the TB just small enough to keep induction momentum more constant. More so on a six than others. I think therefore you are not too badly off with a TB that would be "optimal" on a 2.0 i4 or that has nominal HP rating of about 2/3 what you're trying to make.

I'm thinking out a plenum mod that turns linear induction momentum into circular, and sort of stores it temporarily, then lets it switch between banks easily. Basically imagine a plenum with the divider only half cut, such that vortexes are encouraged to form either side, and the bottom of one can feed the top of the other through kind of figure 8 cross in the middle. Seems to me that just opening up the plenum has one cylinder trying to haul the air into it, then the opposite cylinder working against that, well at an angle, but it seems like it's changing the flow direction through too sharp an angle to be very efficient. It's no turbo but I think it can get the VE up and possibly allow slight ram effect overpressure. Anyway, I think it's the difference between trying to put a semi-truck through a 6 box maneuvering course, or a kind of chicane, or instead popping it into the 3rd dimension and having a neat "wall of death" effect that flips it over backwards instead of trying to haul it round sideways.

[Vigo]

I don't want to turn this thread into a 3.0 vs 3.3/3.8 debate.

You didnt.. i was mostly responding to RW222's comments, though i didnt quote him to make it obvious.

Anyway, i dont see anyone debating my points on what holds back the 3.3/3.8, so i dont think your thread got turned into a debate.

[Kreel]

You didnt.. i was mostly responding to RW222's comments, though i didnt quote him to make it obvious.

Anyway, i dont see anyone debating my points on what holds back the 3.3/3.8, so i dont think your thread got turned into a debate.

Nah, it's all good. I just wanted to catch it before it did turn into a debate Although I admit it could have easily been me who kept things going. We'll save that for another day...another thread

[Matt86]

I think a GM 3.8 Supercharger would fit quite nicely under the hood of a 2nd gen minivan. I had an extra 3.8 SC sitting around and with some creative modifications to the 3.0 upper intake plenum would make it work.

I noticed a huge burst of performance when I did the A543 swap in my 94, good enough for me, I remember what torque steer is now! I think its the fastest of my two vehicles, and the least suspecting