Turbocharging my Jeep
08-31-2003, 03:21 PM
#31
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re:Turbocharging my Jeep
all 80s vettes were dogs. everyone knows that. i'm gettin tired of hearing GM doesn't make a 12second car because it beats the vette. its pure buisness. if 30million people wanted to buy v6 turbo transam that ran 13flat. THEY WOULD SELL THE ******. regardless if it "beat a vette".
the 80s vette was a big production car and it had to meet all the emissions and gas mileage standards. which this turbo v6 trans am obviously didn't.
the 80s vette was a big production car and it had to meet all the emissions and gas mileage standards. which this turbo v6 trans am obviously didn't.
08-31-2003, 03:40 PM
#32
1.5 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,115
Re:Turbocharging my Jeep
Ummm, yes the turbo TA did. It was a perfectly street legal car. I'm seen 2 just drving around and 1 at a car show. They have to meet the same rules as the vette, why wouldn't they ?
Your right, the vette killing all the "bad-***" cars was businuss, but a stupid move. They could sell twice as many correctly designed Turbo V6 Z28s for $24K that runs 12.50s than they are selling N/A V8 vettes that only rich, older, mid-life crisis, or plan stupid people can get ( stupid b/c you'd have to make payments for 7 years to get a half way desent payment if your not rich already ).
Think anyone would be turboing civics if the 93+ camaros came with a turbo v6 that could run 12.50's from the factory and run 9's on the stock block ?? Why would anyone even try ? I'd sell my TT stealth for a Turbo v6 camaro that had the right style ( no S-10 rearend, and an automatic tranny that can last more than 6 months under power ).
My friends 87 GN ran 12.8 with JUST drag radials !! Imagine what a modern turbo V6 camaro could do... Of course even if GM built a turbo V6 they would ---- it up, I've lost all faith in GM...
The trail blazer is the best motor they have, so why don't they TT it and put it in a vette ?? B/c they are stupid. Those 1/4mile times that "motortend" had in the back of some of its issues is a big seller !!! See a vette that runs 11.80s and a camaro that runs 12.50s !!! GM would be on top of the world again, but they wouldn't do anything that smart, they'll just make another SUV that even biiger than the catty, and then sell it for $60K and think "yea, were the ----, we made a truck with seats that gets 5mpg and runs 19sec 1/4 miles and people are still dumb enough to wanna buy it". While in the mean time all GMs "would be "future buyer are at the mistu/subby/dodge dealers checking out the newest turbo cars..
Keep spitting out pushrod v8s, GM... forget the turbocharger was ever invented, and keep chasing neon srt's in your new LS-1 GTOs...
Your right, the vette killing all the "bad-***" cars was businuss, but a stupid move. They could sell twice as many correctly designed Turbo V6 Z28s for $24K that runs 12.50s than they are selling N/A V8 vettes that only rich, older, mid-life crisis, or plan stupid people can get ( stupid b/c you'd have to make payments for 7 years to get a half way desent payment if your not rich already ).
Think anyone would be turboing civics if the 93+ camaros came with a turbo v6 that could run 12.50's from the factory and run 9's on the stock block ?? Why would anyone even try ? I'd sell my TT stealth for a Turbo v6 camaro that had the right style ( no S-10 rearend, and an automatic tranny that can last more than 6 months under power ).
My friends 87 GN ran 12.8 with JUST drag radials !! Imagine what a modern turbo V6 camaro could do... Of course even if GM built a turbo V6 they would ---- it up, I've lost all faith in GM...
The trail blazer is the best motor they have, so why don't they TT it and put it in a vette ?? B/c they are stupid. Those 1/4mile times that "motortend" had in the back of some of its issues is a big seller !!! See a vette that runs 11.80s and a camaro that runs 12.50s !!! GM would be on top of the world again, but they wouldn't do anything that smart, they'll just make another SUV that even biiger than the catty, and then sell it for $60K and think "yea, were the ----, we made a truck with seats that gets 5mpg and runs 19sec 1/4 miles and people are still dumb enough to wanna buy it". While in the mean time all GMs "would be "future buyer are at the mistu/subby/dodge dealers checking out the newest turbo cars..
Keep spitting out pushrod v8s, GM... forget the turbocharger was ever invented, and keep chasing neon srt's in your new LS-1 GTOs...
08-31-2003, 04:39 PM
#33
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re:Turbocharging my Jeep
Gm has traditionally built NA engines. people that want/buy camaros & corvettes don't want small engines with turbochargers, that you have to boost to move. they want big engines than are torquey. that you can cruise around in comfortably.
also turbochargers and the heat they produce would make a camaro/vette cost more. they would need stainless steel valves, and other misc ---- that can hold 20+ years of exsessive heat.
the new GTO would walk all over a SRT neon don't kid yourself. they have a soup'd up ls1 engine. not the regular 285hp ~340ft-lb engine that is in z28 camaros.
the 4.3l v6 is not the best motor GM makes. the ls1 platform is obviously. everyone that has a z28 camaro uncorks the exhaust and intake and runs 12s. the reason they are restricted is emissions and noise and COST, you would pay a lot more in insurance for a 12 second car rather than a 14 flat one.
the 4.3l --> OHV <--- v6 that comes in the camaros and trail blazers is exactly like a ls1 engine missing two cyclinders. i mean seriously what do you think is the major difference here...
chevy made a ZR1 DOHC v8 vette that could go about 200mph. where there are faster GM cars than that?
NA v8 camaros would be faster than factory turbo'd v6 cars. i'm positive about that.
1980 turbo trans am... v8. they were slow as ----, small engine boosted from factory = slow
also turbochargers and the heat they produce would make a camaro/vette cost more. they would need stainless steel valves, and other misc ---- that can hold 20+ years of exsessive heat.
the new GTO would walk all over a SRT neon don't kid yourself. they have a soup'd up ls1 engine. not the regular 285hp ~340ft-lb engine that is in z28 camaros.
the 4.3l v6 is not the best motor GM makes. the ls1 platform is obviously. everyone that has a z28 camaro uncorks the exhaust and intake and runs 12s. the reason they are restricted is emissions and noise and COST, you would pay a lot more in insurance for a 12 second car rather than a 14 flat one.
the 4.3l --> OHV <--- v6 that comes in the camaros and trail blazers is exactly like a ls1 engine missing two cyclinders. i mean seriously what do you think is the major difference here...
chevy made a ZR1 DOHC v8 vette that could go about 200mph. where there are faster GM cars than that?
NA v8 camaros would be faster than factory turbo'd v6 cars. i'm positive about that.
1980 turbo trans am... v8. they were slow as ----, small engine boosted from factory = slow
The Pontiac 301 (Engine Code YN or XN) was the standard engine for all Trans Am's outside of California and was equipped with a 4-bbl carburetor. Referred to as a 4.9 litre V8 to distinguish itself from the Chevrolet (5.0L/305 CID), this was the engine Pontiac's had developed purely for economy. The engine had a bore of 4.00" and a stroke of 3.00" (ironicly the same as Ford's 302 and Chevrolet's mighty 67-69 302 cid Z28 engine) and produced 150 hp at 4400 rpm and 235 lb/ft of torque at only 1800 rpm, up five horsepower from 1979 benefitting from a slightly hotter cam and a revised exahust system.
04-22-2013, 07:26 AM
#35
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 6
I'm sure your aquainted with 'HESCO' or '505' Jeep performance sites. If you belong to any Jeep forums, you surely must have seen a reference or two somewhere along the line.
Another article much worth searching is an old magazine article called "Insane 4.0 Jeep" ..... I think that was the title, anyway they were approaching 600HP with the stroked and turboed Six Cylinder motor...... and it was lasting...
Edit..... hope this link takes you to the site.
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://w...3Bt0wa1MHNiccw
And this
http://www.jpmagazine.com/techarticl...t_2/index.html
Another article much worth searching is an old magazine article called "Insane 4.0 Jeep" ..... I think that was the title, anyway they were approaching 600HP with the stroked and turboed Six Cylinder motor...... and it was lasting...
Edit..... hope this link takes you to the site.
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://w...3Bt0wa1MHNiccw
And this
http://www.jpmagazine.com/techarticl...t_2/index.html
Last edited by Gohot; 04-22-2013 at 07:42 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
