DodgeIntrepid.Net Forums banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,503 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,278 Posts
again I can sum it up in three little words

money money money

Prowler owners are generally wealthier than Intrepid owners and do not use their cars as daily drivers, therefore they can and do spend a lot more money getting performance out of their cars

The Prowler post says that the estimated cast for twin turbo setup is $10,000, how many Intrepid owners are willing to spend that kind of money on thier cars?

[ January 04, 2002: Message edited by: joekd ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,610 Posts
hmm, with all this talk about it being able to happen, I bet there are a few treps out there with a system installed on it. there are hundreds of thousands of treps in north america. pretty much if you can think about it, some one has done it.

[ January 05, 2002: Message edited by: blkbute ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I've measured under the hood of the Prowler, and believe or not, the Prowler's frame rails are further away from the engine than the Intrepid's. Also,the front suspension is different. There's not much room for the plumbing for a supercharger,etc. I still think it could be done with a Paxton "Prowler" kit, but it would take a lot more money and fabrication. I have the Prowler instalation manual, and I'm still thinking about it. For that kind of money, I think I'll wait for the 2003 R/T, and see what kind of motor/power options are available.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,960 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Warlord - I hear you and agree with you on this one. There are LOTS of happy customers using the Paxton SC at www.prowleronline.com. Just check out the performance discussion boards.

Now that Chrysler has officially killed the Prowler, maybe Paxton will look to the large number of Treps and 300Ms to recoup their R&D dollars on the 3.5L SC kit. All of the fuel management issues should already be ironed out since the engine is identical.

Even if a redesigned exhaust manifold, (or headers), and a revised hood with a bulge and/or airscoop are required to fit on an LH platform, there'd be some takers like me!

A guy named "Bobby" posted under "Modifications I have found" that he was checking into a Paxton SC installation with appropriate exhaust manifold/header mods for his Trep. No update for quite awhile on any progress, however...

An extra 100HP at the crank (which Paxton claims) would be worth dropping some major coin!! :D
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,574 Posts
Here is an idea to save some cash: You don't need twin turbo's on a vehicle with a V shaped engine. Need proof? Take a look at Turbo Buick's. 3.8L V6, single turbo and they are one of the strongest turbo cars ever producecd.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,503 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Originally posted by LHSer:
Here is an idea to save some cash: You don't need twin turbo's on a vehicle with a V shaped engine. Need proof? Take a look at Turbo Buick's. 3.8L V6, single turbo and they are one of the strongest turbo cars ever producecd.
I thought someone said that the way our engine is setup, that it would need to be twin turboed. I'm all for a single turbo. :)

platinum300M...welcome to the boards. I think you are the first 300M on this board. :)

I hope that turns out to be true about Paxton. Of course, a little cheaper wouldn't hurt either. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
973 Posts
twin or single turbo, if it could ever be done! Computers would need to be chipped, there is none, and what about the extra back pressure created by a turbo on one side only? GM spent a gazillion $$ figuring that out, do you think Paxton or anyone for that matter will worry about a very few DC owners that would honestly spend more than $20 on their cars? We are loaded up with people asking about cheap dual systems so why all the questions about expensive TURBOs? Get real and ask these companies to come up with a workable chip that will actually remap the fuel, spark, etc. I've edited this post and apologize to anyone that saw it before I made the changes. It sounded like I was really raging and it wasn't meant that way.

[ January 07, 2002: Message edited by: Don ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I don't mean to aggravate Don, or anyone else, but I would spend the big bucks for a supercharger system that could fit. Don't get me wrong, if I could pick up 5 H.P. for 20 bucks, I would be the first in line. I'm not kidding myself into thinking that there's hundreds of other Intrepid owners who feel the same way I do, or who are fortunate enough to be able to do it money wise. On the other hand, I'll bet there are one or two.

That's what this forum is for (I think.) I check in almost every day, but I don't post anything unless I have anything worth saying. I read every post, and I'm gratefull for everyone's comments on anything about Intrepids. I've learned a lot thanks to the thoughts, time, and efforts of others who post here.

So, regarding superchargers, I'm still interested in what others think about it, or find out. Thanks to people like everyone one this forum, I don't think that there's any "cheap" horsepower tricks left that haven't been found and shared. There's no doubt in my mind that the Paxton Prowler hardware will work if someone can make it fit. Someone, maybe Paxton, maybe me, is going to have to tear down an Interpid and see what has to be done. I just want to be sure that I've done all my homework before I start a project like this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,610 Posts
take your car to any company that can do custom work, show them money and they will do it for you
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,574 Posts
Unequal pressure from a single turbo on a V engine?

The compressed air from the turbo enters the engine the same way it does through an N/A car, through the throttle body(ies.)

Now if you meant exhaust, that is corrected by the gasses being piped to the turbo from the rear of the exhaust manifolds, where they join to become one pipe. Last time I had a look under a GN or any turbo Buick, it was a single into dual exhaust. The dual coming after all the turbo routing.

Really, not that hard to do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,503 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I am interested in any mods that can be possible be done to this car. It doesn't matter if they are cheap or holy hell expensive. As for what mods I end up doing to my car is going to depend on many factors. But, I like to have the whole picture shown to me so I can make informed decisions. I personally may not be able to afford a turbo or supercharger today, but tomorrow who knows. Also, someone who has some cash might be reading this and might realize that this mod could be done.

I like to know what all my options are. And like lcwjr said, if I could get an extra 5hp for only $20, hell yeah I would do it! Why wouldn't anybody do that? :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
One thing some seem to forget.....

Chysler Ultradrive Type Tranny

The Prowler has a heavy duty rear wheel drive setup with transmission cooling. I looked at one the other day at a dealership.

If you get 350+HP out of a 3.2L or 3.5L Trep/300M/Concorde with a supercharger Etc. think of the Front Wheel Drive system Torque-Steer! That steering wheel would jerk so hard when the tranny shifts! Probably would end up braking or damaging the tranny mounts!

It may be able to work better if a special tranny cooling setup was implimented and with stronger reinforcement but I steel doubt it would work that great for long.

I am pretty sure that the Ultradrive Type system would not be able to take the power. They already have issues and are already sensitive sometimes. I am sure that this is the main reason Chrysler hasen't done more with the high potential of the 3.5L for the LH platform.

But let's say it could work fine.... Think of the FWD burnout you could do! It'd be off the hook!

And yes $$$ is another issue unfortunately


Take care guys!
MoparPerformance :cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
973 Posts
No one will make me mad, that's why I edited my last post, lest someone else took offense. Back pressure in the exhaust system! A supercharger stands a far better chance of working. The exhaust thing - our cats are mounted up high on the header pipe area so changing to a 2 into 1 to fit a turbo would be tough. Then you take into account the distance between a turbo and the TB, I don't have figures but I do know that the distance becomes a factor. Now, a supercharger! I too might be interested, but a chip has to be in tha package to get the true benefits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
I like this thread! It gives me hope that there's a market for a superchargers for Treps (and 300Ms).

From my point of view, the advantages to the Paxton SC kit are:

1) It's already developed for our engine (and transmission). That shortens time to market, and increases the odds of having a real performance upgrade option
2) The fuel management and timing issues have already been resolved developing this product for the Prowler.
3) Chrysler has killed off the Prowler, so this may provide additional incentive for Paxton to work with Intrepid and 300M owners.
4) The feedback for this SC product has been very positive on the Prowler boards. The HP and Torque gains have been very large. The 1/4 mile time improvement has been very large.
5) The Prowler has the SAME 42LE transmission as Treps and 300Ms, just mounted differently for a RWD configuration. (Not sure about transmission coolers on the Prowler, but this would be a minor addition). I haven't heard of the tranny flying apart on any Prowlers on cars equipped with SCs and Nitrous after lurking on their message boards for several months.

A couple other observations. Either a single or dual turbo charger configuration "would work" if it could be developed and fit. One reason that Audi, Mitsubishi and other went with a dual TC approach on V6's is that 2 smaller TCs have lower mass impellers than 1 large TC. This yields quicker boost and less turbo lag! As a former owner of an '84 Dodge with a 2.2L turbo, it had hideous turbo lag characteristics. The engine had zero grunt until it was over 3000RPM, than it flew. The only window of decent torque was from 3000RPM to 5000RPM. Try driving an Audi S4 with the 2.7 twin turbo by comparison. From 1850RPM up to the redline it pulls ferociously! (2 small TCs are better than 1 big TC)!

I think getting a TC setup is unlikely in that we're already 4 model years into the lifecycle of the current 3.5L engine, and it would be fairly complex. In theory, taking an existing Paxton SC product and making minor mods for fit would seem to be a more hopeful outcome. Less investment for Paxton, and quicker time to market for both Paxton and their eager customers!

Thanks for letting a 300M owner in on this thread. There's a lot of interest on various 300M boards as well in SCs, TCs and other performance mods. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
471 Posts
I read all about this somewhere as to why the 300M Special didn't get 300HP.

Chrysler had no trouble getting 300HP out of the 3.5L engine without turbos or superchargers but the problem was they kept blowing up the trannies therefore only 5 more HP to put it ahead of the existing 300M. But the dummies fell short of the Acura 3.2TL & the Maxima. This tells me don't expect any major power gains until the LX comes out. And you wonder why it's going to be RWD now. AKA Prowler :) I bet a bunch of manufactures are going do dump FWD on V6 & V8 powered cars, too many tranny issues. I wonder if a CVT tranny would work better with a RWD car?

Also they fitted 300HP 300M Specials with a mercedes tranny, 0-60 in the 5's. Ah well it would have been nice.

2002 they don't offer Autostick in the ES's anymore, guess too many people were blowing up their trannies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
BTC909 - I read the same info about the tranny issues at:
http://www.car-truck.com/chryed/buzz/b091201.htm

I'm not yet convinced that car-trunk.com sources are reliable, but it's certainly possible. They'd have to first convince me how they got 300HP from the current SOHC 3.5L with no turbocharger, supercharger or any variable valve timing. They're not getting an extra 50HP from just improving basic "breathing" and running premium gas.

The ZF transmissions they reference would certainly do the trick. Check out:
http://www.all4engineers.com/all4engineers/pdf/at/at_zf.pdf

and
http://www.audiworld.com/news/00/zf/content.shtml

ZF's new 6-speed automatic transmission targetted for Audi and BMC is what we need! More efficient, lighter, smaller and stouter than the 5-speed tranny on the current A6. Handles over 440 lb-ft of torque!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
I am personally convinced that the Ultradrive FWD configuration would not last with that type of power, the RWD configuration of the Prowler is setup to be much stronger with heavy duty cooling. Yes a 42LE but I'm sure it's modified in some way. FWD, just FWD in general would have a hard time accepting that type of power proprely.

I had a 225HP 3.2L 99 ES and sometimes it felt as if I was overpowering the tranny or pushing it past it's limits. I hotrodded it a few times and the tranny had to be overhauled at just 33,000 miles. I had torque steer sometimes when accelerating hard when using Autostick. This is just w/225HP. I really cannot beleive that this setup would last long with that type of power but that's just my personal opinion.


Take care guys!
MoparPerformance :cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,427 Posts
Originally posted by platinum300M:

I'm not yet convinced that car-trunk.com sources are reliable, but it's certainly possible. They'd have to first convince me how they got 300HP from the current SOHC 3.5L with no turbocharger, supercharger or any variable valve timing. They're not getting an extra 50HP from just improving basic "breathing" and running premium gas.
they did some cam milling and various other tiny tiny changes to bump the 3.5 to 300hp. this is also how they de-tuned the 3.5 in the 2002 ES model.
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top