To UN TURBO an engine?

[sony2001]

I'm sorry for the slight deviation from this board but it could interest someone. An option is to bypass the turbo on a 2.2 liter Chrysler. I'm thinking it could be done if I replace the module computer for a regular 2.2 L of that year 1986, or would there be a whole host of changes to make?

 

[JasonJ]

Re: To UN TURBO an engine?

It won't run right. One of the main differences between a turbocharged engine and non-turbocharged engine is the compression ratio. A turbo engine has a much lower compression ratio to make up for the super heated charge that comes into the combustion chamber, thus preventing preignition. It also allows more of that charge to enter, thats where the power comes from. A non-turbo engine has a higher compression ratio because it doesn't have the charge being forced into the combustion chamber. Just hooking up a non-turbo computer won't help, it may not even run. The computer will be reading the MAP sensor, water temp, oxygen sensor, and knock sensor, as well as the throttle position sensor, all to try to inject the right amount of fuel for the air it is getting. With a wrong compression ratio, it will read out of the programmed parameters, and will run poorly or not at all. Either fix the turbo or replace with a non-turbo engine (if the turbo is broken in the first place). Good luck...

 

[sony2001]

Re: To UN TURBO an engine?

Thanks JasonJ, your explanation was very interesting.

 

[BayStLouis]

Re: To UN TURBO an engine?

Perhaps someone might know the particulars of that engine design (I don't... never had occasion to work on one), but there are tthree ways to cut the compression ratio for use with "artifically respirated" engines - larger combustion chambers (different cylinder head), dished pistons - or a combination of the above.<br /><br />If you find that the pistons are the same in both the turbo and non-turbo engines, you might get away with just swapping the head and the computer. Oh yeah... almost forgot: The camshaft will have to be replaced, too. Cam profiles that work well for supercharged and turbocharged engines just don't work in naturally aspirated applications.<br /><br />Good luck.<br /><br />-BSL

 

[kev_79]

Re: To UN TURBO an engine?

How well are you wanting this thing to run. Whatever you probably do, it probably won't run like a 2.2 liter non-turbo charged engine, at least within reason. Changing the computer, milling the heads to bring up the compression ratio, changeing the cam, etc. will probably run you into more money than the thing is really worth when you add in the time it is going to cost you. If it uses an o2 sensor to regulate fuel, I don't think the computer will need to be change to make it just run. The reason is that the o2 sensor regulates fuel/air ratio. No matter how much air is going in, it will regulate it to about 14.7:1 a/f. I think you need to mill the heads, or change them to get a better compression ratio, but I think it should actually run, without the turbo as is. How good, I don't really know, but I would try it like that first, just to see what happens. It surely can't hurt anything. What are you planning on doing with this engine? Good Luck

 

[sony2001]

Re: To UN TURBO an engine?

Upon inspection there is a exhaust leak probably from one of the seals on or near the housing. I noticed that the vucuum rod on the westgate has been welded in position. {that could be the cause of the blown gasket} The car is driveable but sluggish. Therefore the turbo should be working. Tomorrow it comes off to see if it can be repaired.

 

[sony2001]

Re: To UN TURBO an engine?

that should be "wastegate". The news is getting to me!