January 10, 200521 yr Just thinking about this. I have an 86 carbed wagon that is not worth fixing, but the engine/trans (d/r) are good. Also have an 85 turbo wagon with a bad bearing (so the guy says). Am thinking, to eliminate the compression issue and also give my old lady a 4x4auto which she wants (but has a lead foot so skip the turbo power) of putting the carbed block in place of the turbo block and redo the exhaust to what would be on a non turbo wagon...... Will the computer handle running things ok without the turbo?? Just in MPFI mode? Hush
January 10, 200521 yr I know people who used a carbed block in place of a turbo block. There is a risk of shiz breaking Due to the compression. But this car went 200+miles, rally-ed, and went another 250+ miles back home. No problems at all. So why not keep the turbo? [HTi]Johnson
January 10, 200521 yr Just thinking about this.I have an 86 carbed wagon that is not worth fixing, but the engine/trans (d/r) are good. Also have an 85 turbo wagon with a bad bearing (so the guy says). Am thinking, to eliminate the compression issue and also give my old lady a 4x4auto which she wants (but has a lead foot so skip the turbo power) of putting the carbed block in place of the turbo block and redo the exhaust to what would be on a non turbo wagon...... Will the computer handle running things ok without the turbo?? Just in MPFI mode? Hush I think this would work fine.Swap distys too.You`ll also want to swap the transmission vacuum modulator to a non-turbo one.
January 10, 200521 yr Just don't run it very hard or you will blow the pistons into pieces. Why? No turbo.
January 10, 200521 yr Author Why? No turbo. Turbo blocks are (I think) 7.5 : 1 compression and I don't have an extra around or the resources to redo the one in the wagon right now. Carb blocks and also the rare mpfi non-turbo blocks are 9.0 : 1 so I could just change the heads out from the turbo engine and use the short block from the carb engine. That high of compression in a turbo situation will result in lots of detonation and possible engine damage... melted/cracked pistons... blown head gaskets from to much pressure..... Hush
January 10, 200521 yr Turbo blocks are (I think) 7.5 : 1 compression and I don't have an extra around or the resources to redo the one in the wagon right now. Carb blocks and also the rare mpfi non-turbo blocks are 9.0 : 1 so I could just change the heads out from the turbo engine and use the short block from the carb engine. That high of compression in a turbo situation will result in lots of detonation and possible engine damage... melted/cracked pistons... blown head gaskets from to much pressure..... Hush I said "Why? No turbo."(re piston destruction) not "Why no turbo?"
January 10, 200521 yr Turbo blocks are (I think) 7.5 : 1 compression and I don't have an extra around or the resources to redo the one in the wagon right now. Carb blocks and also the rare mpfi non-turbo blocks are 9.0 : 1 so I could just change the heads out from the turbo engine and use the short block from the carb engine. That high of compression in a turbo situation will result in lots of detonation and possible engine damage... melted/cracked pistons... blown head gaskets from to much pressure..... Hush So I guess I'm in trouble with my carb shortblocked turbo motor with the TD04 on it eh? BTW, Turbo motors are 7.7:1. I was under the impression that the Carb motor was 8.5:1. Anyone here with an 87 FSM that could give me a definite answer? My 88 and 89 FSMs don't have any carb info.
January 10, 200521 yr Carb specs are the same as SPFI, compression-wise. I don't see any reason why you couldn't use a short block from a carbed engine, mated to the MPFI/Turbo gear from your defunct engine. I agree with you, that you shouldn't run into any longevity issues if you disable the turbo. Better still: Remove the turbo completely. That would improve exhaust flow, giving you a tiny bit more power. As near as I can tell, the turbo doesn't provide any meaningful input to the ECU. The ECU would just see zero boost.
January 10, 200521 yr Author I said "Why? No turbo."(re piston destruction) not "Why no turbo?" Just no turbo short block around right now.... Hush
January 10, 200521 yr Carb specs are the same as SPFI, compression-wise. That doesn't make any sense.. My books say SPFI is 9.5:1 Pistons between carb and SPFI are different part numbers EA82 CR is based completely on piston shape. Does anyone out the have an 87 FSM with carb info in it?
May 4, 200520 yr I was under the impression that the turbo were the lowest compression engines, the SPFI were the highest at 9.5:1 and the carb's fell in the middle. Will the mpfi turbo intake manifold bolt up the the cab heads though?
May 4, 200520 yr I was under the impression that the turbo were the lowest compression engines, the SPFI were the highest at 9.5:1 and the carb's fell in the middle.Will the mpfi turbo intake manifold bolt up the the cab heads though? SPFI (1989 FSM) - 9.5:1 (domed - so I'm told) Carb/MPFI N/A (1985 FSM) - 9.0:1 Turbo (both) - 7.7:1 MPFI turbo intake will NOT bolt to carb heads - either need to run carb manifold or swap heads
May 4, 200520 yr If you use the block & bottom end, exhaust from the carb, with the heads, inlet manifold, air flow meter from the turbo should be ok. You'll have to block the water & oil pipes to & from the turbo though. don't know how the mapping of the turbo ECU will react to higher revs but no boost reading. Might go into a "limp" mode.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now