Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 129

Thread: Development of the Turbo engines

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Development of the Turbo engines


  2. #2
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pickering, ontario
    Posts
    2,670

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    always nice to re-read this stuff. You always pick up somethimg

  3. #3
    Slugmobile & MeanMini Caretaker Turbo Mopar Contributor wheming's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Raleigh Area, NC
    Posts
    4,809

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Thanks! That's a good read. I haven't seen that one before. Regular grocery items are what you may possible spot on the Food Lion Ad.
    Last edited by BadAssPerformance; 11-11-2020 at 12:59 PM.
    Wayne H.

    '91 Dodge Spirit ES 2.5L turbo 5spd
    '05 PT GT 2.4T HO autostick (RIP)
    '89 Plymouth Acclaim 2.5L turbo auto, "Slugmobile" yes, THE Slugmobile!
    '89 Dodge Caravan SE 2.5L turbo auto, "Mean Mini" yes, Gus' Mean Mini! (Current best 11.699 @ 114.43 mph! - Oct 15th, 2022 Cecil County Dragway, MD)
    MeanMini dragracing videos: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...URZLB1RxGYF6vw
    and other cars, trucks and motorcycles
    https://www.youtube.com/user/SlugmobileMeanMini

  4. #4
    Supporting Member Turbo Mopar Contributor mopar-tech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Oakdale CT
    Posts
    2,419

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    rife with errors, but nice.


    Working on clearing the decks.

  5. #5
    Garrett booster
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Radford, VA
    Posts
    61

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by mopar-tech View Post
    rife with errors, but nice.

    Can you please point out some of the most-glaring errors? I'm asking out of sincere curiosity, not being hateful.


    Thanks!
    Dave

  6. #6

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Yeah the 2.2 being used on Hitler's jet ski during WWII was somewhat debatable but nobody is perfect!!!!

  7. #7
    Supporting Member Turbo Mopar Contributor mopar-tech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Oakdale CT
    Posts
    2,419

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    1) All Chrysler turbocharged engines had multiple-port fuel injection in the US, making them, for some time, the only Chrysler engines to hold that honor.

    False, see FFV 2.5. Chrysler also made non turbo PFI engines in Mexico.

    2) Turbo II — a more powerful version using a charge air cooler (usually but incorrectly called an intercooler), producing around 174 hp (starting in 1988, these had black manifolds).

    False, 1987 (Shelby Daytona)

    3) Turbo III — the rare semi-experimental engine with dual overhead cams, four valves per cylinder, and returnless fuel injection, producing an absurd 224 horsepower

    Rare semi-experimental? It had been development since 1982 and was produced for 3 years. They made more Spirit R/T's than VNT CS Shadows or Daytona's.

    4) Two other setups, even less well-known and rarer, were used in the Cosworth-head M4S and in the TC by Maserati.

    The Cosworth head was NOT a production head. If you are going to bring that up there is at least 2 other designs you should mention as well.

    5) The first production Chrysler turbocharged engine was a 2.2 liter four-cylinder, launched in 1984, and generation 142 hp at 5,600 rpm and 160 lb-ft of torque at 3,200 rpm — around 30 hp and 30 lb-ft more than the best power made by any other 2.2, and competing with the bigger 3-liter Mitsubishi V6 in power — while turning in superior fuel economy.

    The 3.0 mitsu did not debut till 1987 1/2, the 2.2 turbo proceeded it by several years. There was no competition as the V6 was not an option yet.

    6) To make the engine, Chrysler dropped the compression ratio to 8.5:1 by using deep-dished, strutless, lightweight pistons. For durability, they strengthened the valves and springs, and used better-sealing rings, a special cam, select-fit bearings, and special exhaust manifold; a diecast aluminum cylinder head cover was added, mainly for looks. One key change was switching from a single throttle body injectors to four individual fuel injectors.

    The bearings were not "select fit" and the valve cover was NOT for looks but noise suppression and oil control.

    7) We ran Fast Burn heads on the 2.5L and the big advantage was that with the Fast Burn head, wide open throttle spark timing was lower than with the standard head, so you didn’t have to worry about spark knock too much and you didn’t need premium fuel. That made a big difference for the turbocharged engine.”

    Premium fuel was ALWAYS specified, decal was on fuel door or quarter panel with Shelby Chargers.

    8) Boost calibration changes in 1991 added 2 horsepower and a full 30 lb-ft of torque, so the motor produced 152 horsepower and 211 lb-ft of torque at the same speeds. A different control setup gave it faster reactions, as well.

    Manual transaxles only (high torque packages) auto was not rated for the torque.

    9) One Chrysler engineer wrote: “Incredible engine. Heads cracked in the 1991 version because some dummy decided to use cast iron plugs in the water jacket holes instead of aluminum.”

    Heads cracked since the castings from Lotus were incredibly bad and porous. Chrysler identified this issue as far back as 1987 in an engineering report I have.

    10) The timing belt tension had to be set so high to overcome “tow roping” of the timing belt, i.e. the timing belt going into negative tension. Tow roping is a belt killer. This problem was caused by the extremely low valvetrain friction from using roller rockers, combined with the DOHC setup.

    No, the belt tension was high since Lotus spec'd out the valve springs for some ridiculous spring rate for an rpm that the motor would never, ever see in its lifetime. There is offset retainers available to reduce the pressure and help prolong the belt and cam life.


    Working on clearing the decks.

  8. #8
    Garrett booster
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Radford, VA
    Posts
    61

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Thank you for the additional information.

    Dave

  9. #9

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    I have noticed tons of spelling errors in Allpar articles as if nobody there has spell check. They do have some good stuff there.
    Even if you have to take it with a grain of salt or maybe a bucket full.....

  10. #10
    Mitsu booster
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    30

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    wow, talk about the creator being forgotten (Me, Stuart Davis). I was even the interface to the Chrysler-Shelby Development Center for years. I developed it, they stuck Shelby's name on it to market it.

    Dick Winkles and Mark Rozmen DID NOT develop the Turbo II. An engineer named Jim Prestel started the design of the tuned intake manifold and it was my assignment to "run with it" (Stuart Davis). I have up with the split manifold for servicing the injectors and the nearly "ideal entries" where they mated. ALL the early development was done with a dyno technician, Don Bloom. Later on Mark helped me map out the ultra cold charge air characteristics by pumping a gylcol/dry ice mixture thru the fins of the charge air cooler, as I stood next to the engine stirring the "slush". Dick and Mark had nothing to do with the manifold /intercooler/vehicle integration or calibration. I did all the performance cal, and Gregg Weber at the Proving Grounds did the drive/emissions cal.

    The first charge air cooler core was custom made for me by a Sr. Engineer at Blackstone corporation (Larry Barrons). All we had to chose from was the 2" thick Garrett Air-research core from a diesel, that was too restrictive, and it did not provide enough charge air cooling. So Larry and I came up with the first 3" thick core (that went into production). I actually made the sand molds that cast the charge air cooler tanks in the casting lab at the old Highland Park facility. A skilled welder named Joe Trybus welded them on for me. We ran it in a dyno cell (10 I believe).

    All I can say is "WOW, did the author get the facts wrong.

    A mechanic named Herb Norton put the FIRST turbo II car together for me. It was a K-Car rear end with a Daytona Front end. Here it is in 1985 : http://www.team1.org/first%20Chrysler%20turbo%20II.jpg




  11. #11
    We Todd D dot D Turbo Mopar Staff sdac guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Near Detroit MI
    Posts
    4,576

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Welcome to Turbo-Mopar.com Stu. Its good to see you are alive and kicking!


    Barry
    86 Shelby Lancer Prototype
    90 Daytona Shelby VNT
    91 Spirit R/T



    For your questions about SDAC, please contact BadAssPerformance


  12. #12
    Mitsu booster
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    30

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by sdac guy View Post
    Welcome to Turbo-Mopar.com Stu. Its good to see you are alive and kicking!


    Barry
    Yep, I'm kinda back. While my (ex) wife had me sell my 1985 Gunmetal Blue Turbo Z, with one of my best engines and calibrations in it. The wife said we needed a mini van, and the Daytona and 1977 Corvette had to go. (still have the 'vette, not the wife!). As luck wold have it a 1985 Turbo Z (clean from California) showed up on my door step. So I'm trying to figure out to leave it stock, or "do my thing" to it and re-make my Turbo II car again. I saved the very first Turbo II manifold we made. It's been in my garage attic since about 1984.

    May need to call in a few "favors" from old friends to chase down some parts.
    Last edited by stuartshomepc; 03-22-2017 at 07:24 PM.

  13. #13
    Garrett booster
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Umatilla, Fla.
    Posts
    185

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by stuartshomepc View Post
    wow, talk about the creator being forgotten (Me, Stuart Davis). I was even the interface to the Chrysler-Shelby Development Center for years. I developed it, they stuck Shelby's name on it to market it.

    Dick Winkles and Mark Rozmen DID NOT develop the Turbo II. An engineer named Jim Prestel started the design of the tuned intake manifold and it was my assignment to "run with it" (Stuart Davis). I have up with the split manifold for servicing the injectors and the nearly "ideal entries" where they mated. ALL the early development was done with a dyno technician, Don Bloom. Later on Mark helped me map out the ultra cold charge air characteristics by pumping a gylcol/dry ice mixture thru the fins of the charge air cooler, as I stood next to the engine stirring the "slush". Dick and Mark had nothing to do with the manifold /intercooler/vehicle integration or calibration. I did all the performance cal, and Gregg Weber at the Proving Grounds did the drive/emissions cal.

    The first charge air cooler core was custom made for me by a Sr. Engineer at Blackstone corporation (Larry Barrons). All we had to chose from was the 2" thick Garrett Air-research core from a diesel, that was too restrictive, and it did not provide enough charge air cooling. So Larry and I came up with the first 3" thick core (that went into production). I actually made the sand molds that cast the charge air cooler tanks in the casting lab at the old Highland Park facility. A skilled welder named Joe Trybus welded them on for me. We ran it in a dyno cell (10 I believe).

    All I can say is "WOW, did the author get the facts wrong.

    A mechanic named Herb Norton put the FIRST turbo II car together for me. It was a K-Car rear end with a Daytona Front end. Here it is in 1985 : http://www.team1.org/first%20Chrysler%20turbo%20II.jpg



    Thanks for the information. That picture is cool. Quick story: I had a 2 door Reliant that was that color that was rear-ended in Sept., 1983. I used the insurance money to buy my 84 Daytona Turbo which was the first one the dealership sold. I loved my Reliant but is lives on in my Daytona. My Daytona needs a lot of work but someday...... Cool picture!

  14. #14
    Garrett booster
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Posts
    171

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Stuart, thanks for the clarification, if you have old pics and stuff you want to share/post that would be awesome!
    86 GLH-S #315

  15. #15
    Hybrid booster
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Wastelands of NJ
    Posts
    729

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Awesome! I love history.

  16. #16
    Mitsu booster
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    30

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by Wastelands Warrior View Post
    Awesome! I love history.
    sure would have been nice if the "ALLpar" history was even close!" I worked for years on that program. It was "my baby".

    Added 3-19-17, I made contact with AllPar (Dave) and he double checked the facts and yep, what is written is not correct. He said he is busy with a big story but will re-write the section on T II when he can. At least he put a slight patch in the article that is on line. Still not right, but I appreciate him taking swift action.
    Last edited by stuartshomepc; 03-19-2017 at 07:29 PM.

  17. #17
    Hybrid booster
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Wastelands of NJ
    Posts
    729

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by stuartshomepc View Post
    sure would have been nice if the "ALLpar" history was even close!" I worked for years on that program. It was "my baby".
    It's nice to hear from the man who created the history.

  18. #18
    Mitsu booster
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    30

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Being a "newbie" I guess I can't post pictures yet. But here was the "first" "turbo II" intake manifold Jim Prestel and I designed, and Joe Trybus fabricated it. It actually had 3 tuning peaks as I shuck a Helmholtz resonating chamber in front of the throttle body
    https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3...21Wb3JKMlI0WE0
    https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3...VdKOGYtSG9uRWs

    And here was Chrysler's first All Wheel Drive, 4 valve per cylinder car (in my driveway in 1984). Some though we didn't work on 4 valve engines until the 1990's, like the AllPar article states. Not only was it a 4 valve, but all wheel drive too! way back in 1984 https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3...nd3UnVqS0tHaGc

    and my promotion paperwork the went to a review board that shows what I did (for any doubters) CLEARLY states that I not only did the Turbo II but also installed and calibrated the first 2.5L turbo https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3G4LxfQg6LQeDEzeFBGRWVGWWM
    Last edited by stuartshomepc; 03-22-2017 at 07:29 PM.

  19. #19
    Moderator Turbo Mopar Staff Force Fed Mopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Greenville/Spartanburg SC area
    Posts
    7,557

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by stuartshomepc View Post

    And here was Chrysler's first All Wheel Drive, 4 valve per cylinder car (in my driveway in 1984). Some though we didn't work on 4 valve engines until the 1990's, like the AllPar article states. Not only was it a 4 valve, but all wheel drive too! way back in 1984 https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3...nd3UnVqS0tHaGc
    Must know more! Like, why did they never actually put the awd into production?
    Rob M.
    '89 Turbo GTC

    2.5 TIII stroker, 568 w/ OBX and 3.77 FD

  20. #20
    Mitsu booster
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    30

    Re: Development of the Turbo engines

    Quote Originally Posted by Force Fed Mopar View Post
    Must know more! Like, why did they never actually put the awd into production?
    well, back then we "borrowed" and AWD unit from a competitor (I think the Audi Quattro?) It was not really a "blessed" program so we had very limited funds. We KNEW from the start that the AWD unit was designed to be mated to an auto trans and could not handle the "shock loads" of a hole shot or "power shift". So we put warning labels on it, and told every driver NOT to do it. It was reserved for executive drives only (but I'd drive it all the time, it cornered great as we had to change the rear suspension and it didn't "plow" into hard corners). Just NO HOLE SHOTS! No power shifts.

    Well, numerous people drove it and one day I had about 6 executives lined up. At Highland park we didn't really have a "test track". Just a straight section if asphalt leading to a warehouse representative of about 1/4 mile and "just enough room" to stop before you nosed into a chain link fence. We all nicknamed it "the drag strip". The best part was once and a while a guy on a fork lift would pull out 1/2 way down, carrying a barrel of fuel or oil. It was "exciting" as we both tried not to hit each other. The facilities department sent out memo's that we could not use it like that, but we did anyway. Finally the fork lift drive learned to drive on the far right side, not down the middle. The problem resolved itself.

    So a few guys drove it, knew the "caveats" and how we would need to do the AWD unit differently "if" we ever produced it. I even had a defined "loop" for them to drive around highland park to go some nice cornering (amongst the burned out houses and decaying city). About the 4th driver decided to do a hole shot. The car jumped about 5 ft, parts came flying out from underneath, and it was done. Without funding I could not fix it. And the interest was starting to grown in a AWD mini van, not a sports car. So the program died. Chrysler was not "real" serious about sports cars beyond simple "tweaks" like the IROC Daytona or GLHS's. We could not compere with the mustangs and Camaro's without LOTS of investment.

    MANY years later (like 16?) another was built with better parts. It was evaluated at the Proving grounds (I think Niel Haneman was the driver, a good guy). While it was a "good car" it was not on par with the competition. It was (in my opinion) a bit unfair as they compared a Daytona against exotic European AWD sports cars. A $15k Daytona vs a $35k European sports car, and gee, it was not as good! It just didn't have enough engine power, nor could we push the engine any harder. So again, the concept was abandoned. Chrysler just didn't see the need for it. The Viper was coming into play, so why tweak a Daytona and dilute Viper sales?

Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Engine (2) Older turbo engines FREE
    By mpgmike in forum Parts For Sale
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-15-2013, 06:25 PM
  2. Why do turbo engines have such low oil PSI?
    By 87yorker in forum 2.2L/2.5L 16V Hybrid conversions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-16-2009, 08:32 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •