Login Register Sign up for the GRM e-newsletter

Login to post Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » Turbo Mopars.
  • BowtieBandit

    Oct. 24, 2010 2:55 p.m. BowtieBandit New Reader

    I've tried searching, and couldn't find what I'm looking for, so if you want to link me to a previous thread that's fine.

    I love the old Shelby Turbo Mopars of the mid 80's early 90's. I love the swapability (is that even a word?) and sleeperness (making new words all the time) of them.

    My question to you is this, what car/platform would be best for a mopar novice likle myself? Which of the K cars is easiest to swap in and out. Any links to any other forums and stuff that I can lurk on would be appreciated.

  • MadScientistMatt

    Oct. 24, 2010 5:34 p.m. MadScientistMatt Dork

    From a platform standpoint, there's only two real platforms they had: the K and its derivatives, and the L-body (Omni, Horizon, Charger, Turissmo, Rampage). The K based ones are a bit heavier, with the "true" K-cars generally being the lightest of the breed, but IIRC they have a bit more swapability as their platform was used for everything from small sedans up to minivans. Not sure you can get minivan brakes on an L-body, but you can on an Aries. Hopefully someone who knows them better will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe suspension parts swap over readily between the two.

    There's two big forums for them, turbo-mopar.com and turbododge.com. And a couple of pages worth checking out:

    http://www.thedodgegarage.com/

    http://www.gusmahon.org/

  • Rob_Mopar

    Oct. 24, 2010 6:21 p.m. Rob_Mopar Reader

    The K based cars have more room under the hood than the L-bodies. One of the guys in my local Mopar club was amazed at the amount of room under the hood of my Daytona vs. his GLH.

    If you want some history on the Shelby Dodges, take a look at Shelby-Dodge . It's not a how-to site, but more of a historical look.

    I've considered a Reliant based sleeper using the leftovers from the '86 Daytona Z I'm parting out. And Aries would do too, but I like the Plymouth a little more for a sleeper.

    Finding a good usable Reliant/Aries can be tough depending on where you are located. I'm in the rust belt. A Shadow/Sundance would be a little newer and probably the next lightest of the K platform.

    I'm sure Vigo will chime in as soon as he sees the thread with his suggestions. Maybe Pat too.

    Edited to fix the link.

  • CaptainSpaulding

    Oct. 24, 2010 6:40 p.m. CaptainSpaulding Reader

    Always wanted a ealrly shelby charger.

  • daytonaer

    Oct. 24, 2010 7:59 p.m. daytonaer Reader

    I think you should start with one you like (body-style wise) and the best condition one you can find. None are good at fending off rust.

    I would love a 4 door L body because I think they look the coolest. I used to have a daytona and I still have my -89 minivan. I would also fall for a 4 door Lebarron or Lancer :-)

    Interchangeability is a big factor but the L body's are a generation behind the K-cars in engineering. Engine bay is way smaller, you need to use a smaller oil filter and not all alternators fit. However get a minivan and you have room galore.

    L-body brakes are easy upgrade, the hot ticket used to be full size van brakes. Suspension is easily upgradable, not sure what is all dried up but there are plenty of grasroots upgrades.

    I sortof got out of it because they are no longer in the junk yard and stuff is drying up. However, the 2.4 stuff is common and a relatively straightforward swap.(think neon/stratus/srt4 stuff)

    turbododge.com and turbo-mopar.com are decent forums.

    Big changes were 89 and newer got upgraded blocks/cranks across the board. ECM's changed every couple years but most are hacked nicely. I think (personally) the 88-89 computers are the easiest and most covered. Maybe 90 or 91 the suspensions went to cast AL control arms instead of welded steel. Most steel K-frames could use some reinforcement as they are not fully welded and rust out.

    Transmissions is another factor, the L-body's had shifter "rails" which go bad, K cars had shift cables. Auto's are easy if you like them (they like boost).

  • Spinout007

    Oct. 24, 2010 9:08 p.m. Spinout007 Dork

    I've got a 91 Sundance 4 door I'll part with for 350.00 drug it out of a ladies yard. Had a popped head gasket, she was told it broke a rod. I put a charge on the battery and drove it the 5 miles or so.to the house. Was gonna scrap it but it's only sin to me is being a NA Sundance, fixed the headgasket and put a new thermostat in, been sitting ever since. Gotta get a new title for it. Almost the same car my ex wire had. Hell for that matter come drag it out of my yard for 250. I can get that at the scrapyard for it.

  • Oct. 24, 2010 10:14 p.m. stealthfighter1 Reader

    i'm glad im not rich because i'd have a white 2 dr aries/reliant with a 2.5 turbo with wide steelies with generic hubcaps "raping errbody out here"

  • BowtieBandit

    Oct. 24, 2010 10:59 p.m. BowtieBandit New Reader

    Hey guys, thanks alot for the input!

    Rust isn't a real big problem in my area, except for the ones that rust when you drink a bottle of water next to them.

    A real quick snoop on CL brought some cheap candidates close.

    I hate being so project-oriented sometimes.

  • Oct. 24, 2010 11:15 p.m. Mikey52_1 HalfDork

    Well Bud, you're right where you belong...we're about all like that...

  • Travis_K

    Oct. 25, 2010 12:06 a.m. Travis_K Dork

    I had a shelby charger, and I needed a more reliable car so i sold it and bought an alfa milano. I have not once been sorry. Think about that for a minute. lol

  • BowtieBandit

    Oct. 25, 2010 3:23 p.m. BowtieBandit New Reader

    I'm thinking and SRT4 swapped Caravan. 'Cause I'm sadistic like that. Still tons of those around here, if you can look past peeling paint.

    I'd like to think that even an N/A 2.4 would give it more umph than what came stock in it. Anyone here got experiencing building a turbo SRT engine from a non-turbo donor? Blocks the same? bottom end?

    I'd love to embarass the SRT guys around here with a beater caravan.

  • Moparman

    Oct. 25, 2010 3:42 p.m. Moparman Reader

    In reply to BowtieBandit:

    You can do that with an intercooled turbo 2.5

  • SilverFleet

    Oct. 25, 2010 3:59 p.m. SilverFleet HalfDork

    Turbo Mopar dot com. Go there! Great guys over there and no BS. Just a TON of great knowledge and a bunch of guys who want to go fast cheaply. The tech section is pretty good there too. I've learned quite a bit from it.

    Oh, and they have a build-up guide on 2.4L Turbo swaps, and there's a guy building a 2.4L Turbo '88 Caravan over there.

  • pilotbraden

    Oct. 25, 2010 4:01 p.m. pilotbraden Reader

    There is some pro ball player with a white woody convertible. I like it

  • tb

    Oct. 25, 2010 5:05 p.m. tb Reader

    not much to add, except to enable

    my 600es convertable was probably my favorite turbo dodge, out of many...

  • daytonaer

    Oct. 25, 2010 7:16 p.m. daytonaer Reader

    BowtieBandit wrote:

    I'm thinking and SRT4 swapped Caravan. 'Cause I'm sadistic like that. Anyone here got experiencing building a turbo SRT engine from a non-turbo donor? Blocks the same? bottom end?

    my van:

    2.5 bottom end, 2.4 dohc head, 2.0 cams, 5 speed manual intercooled with a Holset turbo.... Little more involved than I would recommend if I was gonna do it again. Its down for repairs now....

    I have no 2.4 experience but they will bolt up to a 2.2/2.5 transmission with only one bolt adapter (some just leave it off) and the passenger motor mount can be modified easily. There are adapters out there to run the distributor off the cam if you want stock electronics (pretty decent)

    AFAK, for 2.4 stuff if you get turbo rods and pistons, you are pretty much up to turbo strength levels, not the same but darn cheap and pretty close. turbo manifolds with turbo are pretty cheap because srt guys take them off to upgrade. Log manifolds for turbos are cheap too. 96 and newer caravan's came with a 2.4 stock, begging for turbo internals and megasquirt. There was a srt-4 swapped caravan, not sure where it is anymore.

  • Vigo

    Oct. 25, 2010 7:58 p.m. Vigo HalfDork

    I'm sure Vigo will chime in as soon as he sees the thread with his suggestions.

    Thank you..

    As far as which platform or model to start with..

    I honestly think the original k-car (aries/reliant) and its closest offshoots (new yorker, caravelle, 400, 600, lebaron) are the easiest of the cars to work on because of the engine bays. That really doesnt go a long way, though, if you dont like the style, because ALL the k-car based cars are pretty damn simple to work on.

    I personally vastly prefer the k-based cars over the l-bodies because as mentioned the l-bodies are one giant step behind in engineering and are more econo-crappy.. i.e. they are rattletraps that like to fall apart, ride badly, be loud, uncomfortable and fold up into a gory mess if they get hit. Most L-bodies are lighter than most k-cars but there are plenty of situations where they overlap. I dont think weight is the end-all reason to get an L-body. They are harder to work on, harder to find body and trim parts for, harder to get traction with, harder to get to hold power (they usually come with weak trannies that need to be swapped), etc etc. Pretty much the only thing they have going for them inside my head is the styling of the 2drs.

    But yes, turbo mopars are INCREDIBLY swappable, sleeperish, cheap, torquey, parts-interchangeable, easy to work on, etc.

    So if you would like to own a car that is those things, i highly recommend them. You can even get them with a large helping of comfort, funky style, and luxury.

  • forzav12

    Oct. 25, 2010 8:38 p.m. forzav12 Reader

    Vigo wrote:

    I'm sure Vigo will chime in as soon as he sees the thread with his suggestions.

    Thank you..

    As far as which platform or model to start with..

    I honestly think the original k-car (aries/reliant) and its closest offshoots (new yorker, caravelle, 400, 600, lebaron) are the easiest of the cars to work on because of the engine bays. That really doesnt go a long way, though, if you dont like the style, because ALL the k-car based cars are pretty damn simple to work on.

    I personally vastly prefer the k-based cars over the l-bodies because as mentioned the l-bodies are one giant step behind in engineering and are more econo-crappy.. i.e. they are rattletraps that like to fall apart, ride badly, be loud, uncomfortable and fold up into a gory mess if they get hit. Most L-bodies are lighter than most k-cars but there are plenty of situations where they overlap. I dont think weight is the end-all reason to get an L-body. They are harder to work on, harder to find body and trim parts for, harder to get traction with, harder to get to hold power (they usually come with weak trannies that need to be swapped), etc etc. Pretty much the only thing they have going for them inside my head is the styling of the 2drs.

    But yes, turbo mopars are INCREDIBLY swappable, sleeperish, cheap, torquey, parts-interchangeable, easy to work on, etc.

    So if you would like to own a car that is those things, i highly recommend them. You can even get them with a large helping of comfort, funky style, and luxury.

    Blasphemer! L-bodies are everything that is good and pure about turbo Dodges.

 
Tire Rack- Revolutionizing Tire Buying

You'll need to log in to post.