Big question of the day ????

dereksbicycles

dereksbicycles

Active Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
6,497
Reaction score
27
Which car would make a better candidate for a turbo engine swap? It has to be one or other:

1986 Plymouth Reliant

OR

1986 Mercury Topaz

Which would you pick and why??
 
Mercury Topaz.

It was a more sporty car to begin with.
 
For quick turbo engine swap is a Plymouth Reliant. Why? You can find a donate complete 2.2L turbocharged engine from a Chrysler LeBaron. You want that one?
 
The Highlander said:
Most 80's gasoline vehicles with turbocharger are suck due no intercooler and short life.
Click to expand...

I think the European cars started with the intercoolers in late 1980's or early 1990's. I've seen many different intercooler designs in the vehicles when performing smog inspections. Even the intercooler looks like A/C condenser. Complex designs.
 
I wouldn't pick these, they're piece of shits. Try to find one with a intercooler and a more reliable one too.

The 1986 Saab 900 turbo is a pretty nice car, but very quirky. It remember driving it once or twice and it was pretty fast and smooth. Last time I heard it finally died with over 320k miles on it. It was one of the true sweden car before GM took over and ruined everything.
 
dereksbicycles said:
Which car would make a better candidate for a turbo engine swap? It has to be one or other:

1986 Plymouth Reliant

OR

1986 Mercury Topaz

Which would you pick and why??
Click to expand...

neither. old piece of shit.

just get a honda.
 
dereksbicycles said:
Which car would make a better candidate for a turbo engine swap? It has to be one or other:

1986 Plymouth Reliant

OR

1986 Mercury Topaz

Which would you pick and why??
Click to expand...

Well, this is hard. Like everyone said, both are ugly shitboxes, but, if I really had to choose, I would pick the Reliant. Why? Chrysler already had a turbo version of their 2.2L engine, which is shared in all their "K" platforms (Omni, Reliant, Turismo, Caravan, etc). It wasn't a bad setup, I drove an '86 Omni Turbo, it kicked ass back then.

Still...putting a turbo in one of these cars is like Woody Allen getting a boob job....just not right.
 
green427 said:
Well, this is hard. Like everyone said, both are ugly shitboxes, but, if I really had to choose, I would pick the Reliant. Why? Chrysler already had a turbo version of their 2.2L engine, which is shared in all their "K" platforms (Omni, Reliant, Turismo, Caravan, etc). It wasn't a bad setup, I drove an '86 Omni Turbo, it kicked ass back then.

Still...putting a turbo in one of these cars is like Woody Allen getting a boob job....just not right.
Click to expand...

I hate a turbocharged 2.2L engines. Why? They keep came back for oil leaks, fucked the valve cover design where the excessive blowby(created by booster) push the oil seeping out of the valve cover gaskets and oil pan gaskets also. My step brother gave up his 83 Dodge Omni with a 2.2L non turbo and gave it to me, I fixed up and has rough time with carburetor for excessive emission (I cheated it and passed smog inspection). I drove it, real good strong run then got bad engine vibrates, I pinpointed bad torque converter, changed it (used from my friend's tranny shop). Ran great even I hard abused it then I see no oil leaks from the valve cover and oil pan. Sweet car but sold fast. I called it Old Yeller cuz the yellow Omni car was sick and about to dies in a boneyard, I saved it.
 
deafsmogtech said:
I think the European cars started with the intercoolers in late 1980's or early 1990's. I've seen many different intercooler designs in the vehicles when performing smog inspections. Even the intercooler looks like A/C condenser. Complex designs.
Click to expand...

Plymouth Reliant and Mercury Topaz are not European. :)

I mean Most 80's american with turbocharger are sucks.



Even Dodge SRT-4 with turbocharger are suck due short-life and it's disconnection. SRT-4 2003-2005 then RIP lol.


Subaru use turbocharger since 1992 and it still works smooth. That's why I like Japanese's design over american for car with turbocharger.
 
deafsmogtech said:
I hate a turbocharged 2.2L engines. Why? They keep came back for oil leaks, fucked the valve cover design where the excessive blowby(created by booster) push the oil seeping out of the valve cover gaskets and oil pan gaskets also. My step brother gave up his 83 Dodge Omni with a 2.2L non turbo and gave it to me, I fixed up and has rough time with carburetor for excessive emission (I cheated it and passed smog inspection). I drove it, real good strong run then got bad engine vibrates, I pinpointed bad torque converter, changed it (used from my friend's tranny shop). Ran great even I hard abused it then I see no oil leaks from the valve cover and oil pan. Sweet car but sold fast. I called it Old Yeller cuz the yellow Omni car was sick and about to dies in a boneyard, I saved it.
Click to expand...

I bet it's Americans's design.
 
The Highlander said:
Plymouth Reliant and Mercury Topaz are not European. :)

I mean Most 80's american with turbocharger are sucks.



Even Dodge SRT-4 with turbocharger are suck due short-life and it's disconnection. SRT-4 2003-2005 then RIP lol.


Subaru use turbocharger since 1992 and it still works smooth. That's why I like Japanese's design over american for car with turbocharger.
Click to expand...

Don't forget Volvos with turbos, the old ones still on the road today. Iowa sucks because there's not much diversity of cars. They're addicted to american cars. :lol:
 
deafsmogtech said:
I hate a turbocharged 2.2L engines. Why? They keep came back for oil leaks, fucked the valve cover design where the excessive blowby(created by booster) push the oil seeping out of the valve cover gaskets and oil pan gaskets also. My step brother gave up his 83 Dodge Omni with a 2.2L non turbo and gave it to me, I fixed up and has rough time with carburetor for excessive emission (I cheated it and passed smog inspection). I drove it, real good strong run then got bad engine vibrates, I pinpointed bad torque converter, changed it (used from my friend's tranny shop). Ran great even I hard abused it then I see no oil leaks from the valve cover and oil pan. Sweet car but sold fast. I called it Old Yeller cuz the yellow Omni car was sick and about to dies in a boneyard, I saved it.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's why the 1980's Chrysler and Dodge minivans are nearly extinct today (Some of them used the 2.2 turbo 4 cyls.) The only 1980's minivans that still run today are the Toyota Wonderwagons and the Chevy Astros (surprise!)
 
The Highlander said:
Plymouth Reliant and Mercury Topaz are not European. :)

I mean Most 80's american with turbocharger are sucks.



Even Dodge SRT-4 with turbocharger are suck due short-life and it's disconnection. SRT-4 2003-2005 then RIP lol.


Subaru use turbocharger since 1992 and it still works smooth. That's why I like Japanese's design over american for car with turbocharger.
Click to expand...

American copied European's designed FWD vehicles to manufacture the Big Three's FWD vehicles, they copied Asian FWD vehicles too. Many years ago, Toyota Landcruise's I6 engines were cloned from Chevy 235 cid I6 design.
Same thing I recognized a Chrysler 2.2L engine block looks like from old Audi/VW 1.6L I4.
Subaru should thank to the German's flat engine design.
 
deafsmogtech said:
American copied European's designed FWD vehicles to manufacture the Big Three's FWD vehicles, they copied Asian FWD vehicles too. Many years ago, Toyota Landcruise's I6 engines were cloned from Chevy 235 cid I6 design.
Same thing I recognized a Chrysler 2.2L engine block looks like from old Audi/VW 1.6L I4.
Subaru should thank to the German's flat engine design.
Click to expand...

I don't know that's parts about copied European's designed FWD.

Yes, Fuji bought blueprint from German's flat engine design. I knew about it in long time ago but I am not sure who designed for turbocharger.
 
The Highlander said:
I don't know that's parts about copied European's designed FWD.

Yes, Fuji bought blueprint from German's flat engine design. I knew about it in long time ago but I am not sure who designed for turbocharger.
Click to expand...

Funny, Porsche got an idea for Flat 6 engine from Chevy Corvair but I guess the Chevy Corvair copied the Flat 6 engine from 1948 Tucker Sedan.

Karl Benz, German engine designer, invented the world's first Flat engine in late 1850's (not exact year).

Note: the Flat 6 engine in a 1948 Tucker Sedan, is considering the largest gasoline powered flat engine, size 334.1 cid = 5.5L.... 4.50" bore X 3.50" stroke, 7.0:1 compression ratio, rated 166 HP and 372 lb. ft torque.
 
Wirelessly posted (sent from a smartphone. )

deafsmogtech said:
The Highlander said:
I don't know that's parts about copied European's designed FWD.

Yes, Fuji bought blueprint from German's flat engine design. I knew about it in long time ago but I am not sure who designed for turbocharger.
Click to expand...

Funny, Porsche got an idea for Flat 6 engine from Chevy Corvair but I guess the Chevy Corvair copied the Flat 6 engine from 1948 Tucker Sedan.

Karl Benz, German engine designer, invented the world's first Flat engine in late 1850's (not exact year).

Note: the Flat 6 engine in a 1948 Tucker Sedan, is considering the largest gasoline powered flat engine, size 334.1 cid = 5.5L.... 4.50" bore X 3.50" stroke, 7.0:1 compression ratio, rated 166 HP and 372 lb. ft torque.
Click to expand...

Actually Porsche had the flat engine design before the Corvair. VW had it since 1940s. They were air cooled as well no radiator and very easy to work on.
 
sequoias said:
Wirelessly posted (sent from a smartphone. )



Actually Porsche had the flat engine design before the Corvair. VW had it since 1940s. They were air cooled as well no radiator and very easy to work on.
Click to expand...

I means H6 engines. The 1948 Tucker Sedan started with a H6 then Chevy Corvair in 1960s and later Porsche 911 in 1965? to present. Yes, Porsche worked on the flat 4 engines for VW during WWII.
 
Back
Top