onecrazyfoo4u Posted December 9, 2014 Report Share Posted December 9, 2014 http://www.autonews.com/article/20141208/OEM06/312089962/chrysler-pentastar-v-6s-to-get-turbos-and-direct-injection-sources It's about freaking time Dodge! I can easily see the output being 350 for HP and Torque...while still getting over 25mpg. Go Dodge! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkeaton Posted December 9, 2014 Report Share Posted December 9, 2014 Whoop!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2late4u Posted December 9, 2014 Report Share Posted December 9, 2014 of course that means you have to run prem gas all the time. just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onecrazyfoo4u Posted December 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2014 of course that means you have to run prem gas all the time. just saying. That's okay. You'd probably even out with the extra mileage you'd be getting. With the added benefit of extra power on tap! I had a 240sx in college, with an sr20 motor swap and turbo upgrade running 18psi. Put out just over 300rwhp (~350hp at the crank). I got 32-33mpg in that thing (with the occasional throttle romping and fast passes). Yet I could still run 13 seconds at the 1/4 mile track. It's unfortunate it's taken so long for american companies to figure out the huge benefits of turbo's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webslave Posted December 9, 2014 Report Share Posted December 9, 2014 of course that means you have to run prem gas all the time. just saying. Not necessarily... I have a 1989 Chrysler LeBaron Turbo and it uses regular. All depends on how much they want to push the timing. If they are doing the turbo for increased economy, not performance, I would look for reduced boost, non-extreme timing and regular gas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkeaton Posted December 9, 2014 Report Share Posted December 9, 2014 I have to run premium in my Eclipse. I'm used to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B4ZINGA Posted December 12, 2014 Report Share Posted December 12, 2014 Not all turbos require premium. 1.4L Turbo Chevrolet cars run 87. Hopefully Dodge and Chrysler are better at designing turbo engines than Ford is. I've heard of a lot of Ecoboosted engines, at the least the early ones, having turbo problems. Turbo Mazdas as well... the turbocharged Mazdaspeed3 didn't even have warranty coverage for the turbo system, I'm told. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey_puck Posted December 12, 2014 Report Share Posted December 12, 2014 Not all turbos require premium. 1.4L Turbo Chevrolet cars run 87. Hopefully Dodge and Chrysler are better at designing turbo engines than Ford is. I've heard of a lot of Ecoboosted engines, at the least the early ones, having turbo problems. Turbo Mazdas as well... the turbocharged Mazdaspeed3 didn't even have warranty coverage for the turbo system, I'm told. The Pentastar V6 was one of the reasons I bought my Journey. There is no way in H.E. double hockey sticks I'd buy a turbo engine. I tend to keep my vehicles till the floor rusts out and after year 7 any turbo, even with the most care, is likely to have issues and you better get a Brinks truck of money, if it needs repair. I just have a natural aversion to anything that spins at around 100k RPM. Even European turbos with lots of miles tend to have issues. No thanks. BlindSquirrel, JoeyVegas, 2late4u and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtsr Posted December 12, 2014 Report Share Posted December 12, 2014 I just an article on MSN news about the 35 worst automotive recalls - not a Chrysler product in the lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onecrazyfoo4u Posted December 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2014 The Pentastar V6 was one of the reasons I bought my Journey. There is no way in H.E. double hockey sticks I'd buy a turbo engine. I tend to keep my vehicles till the floor rusts out and after year 7 any turbo, even with the most care, is likely to have issues and you better get a Brinks truck of money, if it needs repair. I just have a natural aversion to anything that spins at around 100k RPM. Even European turbos with lots of miles tend to have issues. No thanks. I guess it just depends on the manufactorer. My Nissan turbo was a boss. Never had a single problem running 18psi and abusing the heck out of it. Then again that was on 15 year technology/parts. Must be the fact that everything is made in China nowadays contributing to poor build quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webslave Posted December 12, 2014 Report Share Posted December 12, 2014 (edited) Turbochargers, for the most part, are "old tech". Been around for a lot of years (I've got an '89 LeBaron with Turbo; mid-80's IIRC when Chrysler started playing with them) and as long as the company doesn't try to over-boost the system, longevity isn't that much of an issue. Mine is an '89; still stock, but, I've always run synthetic oil and only rarely get seriously into the boost (mostly in passing). A lot of turbo issues can be attributed to old oil, cheap oil, or sticking your foot into the boost at every opportunity. Those bearings do spin fast and they are not designed (in general purpose passenger vehicles) to be run like CART series cars with WOT all the time. As for the Ford EB issue? They tried a water cooled twin turbo system and IMHO, did too good a job with the inter-cooler; it is so "cold" that it condenses the moisture in the air and then injects into the cylinders, hence, the misfires and lack of power. They'll get the kinks worked out, maybe smaller inter-coolers or using the hot side of the water pump for warmer water to reduce the condensation (I'm not a turbo engineer, but, those two areas would be where I'd look first). There are lots of "first year" engines that have issues and those are encountered by all the auto makers. New engines are usually a "miracle" of the latest technology and materials and there is no way that an auto maker can foresee all the various scenarios and thrashing the public will heap on those cars and engines. Would I stay away from a turbo car? Nope, I've got two, the '89 LeBaron and my 2011 Cummins Turbo Diesel in the RAM 2500 Long Horn, both of them proven tech on established engines. Would I rush out and buy the very first year of a Pentastar turbo? Nope. Then again, I wouldn't rush out and buy the first year production of any new engine, turbo or not (I waited until the Pentastar went through it's "growing pains"). I learned my lesson on a 1972 Toyota Corona; first year for their overhead cam 2 liter...they made the valve guides too small and it cost me two days of being without the car while it was in the shop getting a new head, pistons, arms and crank. Didn't cost me dime, but, the sound of that engine eating valves at 70 mph is indelibly etched in my mind...the look on my wife's was priceless :-D Edited December 12, 2014 by webslave dhh3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobitz68 Posted December 15, 2014 Report Share Posted December 15, 2014 I just an article on MSN news about the 35 worst automotive recalls - not a Chrysler product in the lot. That has to be a mistake... With all of the people stopping in to tell us they will never buy another Chrysler product...they HAVE to be junk. B4ZINGA, dhh3 and jkeaton 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B4ZINGA Posted December 15, 2014 Report Share Posted December 15, 2014 Turbochargers, for the most part, are "old tech". Been around for a lot of years (I've got an '89 LeBaron with Turbo; mid-80's IIRC when Chrysler started playing with them) and as long as the company doesn't try to over-boost the system, longevity isn't that much of an issue. Mine is an '89; still stock, but, I've always run synthetic oil and only rarely get seriously into the boost (mostly in passing). A lot of turbo issues can be attributed to old oil, cheap oil, or sticking your foot into the boost at every opportunity. Those bearings do spin fast and they are not designed (in general purpose passenger vehicles) to be run like CART series cars with WOT all the time. As for the Ford EB issue? They tried a water cooled twin turbo system and IMHO, did too good a job with the inter-cooler; it is so "cold" that it condenses the moisture in the air and then injects into the cylinders, hence, the misfires and lack of power. They'll get the kinks worked out, maybe smaller inter-coolers or using the hot side of the water pump for warmer water to reduce the condensation (I'm not a turbo engineer, but, those two areas would be where I'd look first). There are lots of "first year" engines that have issues and those are encountered by all the auto makers. New engines are usually a "miracle" of the latest technology and materials and there is no way that an auto maker can foresee all the various scenarios and thrashing the public will heap on those cars and engines. Would I stay away from a turbo car? Nope, I've got two, the '89 LeBaron and my 2011 Cummins Turbo Diesel in the RAM 2500 Long Horn, both of them proven tech on established engines. Would I rush out and buy the very first year of a Pentastar turbo? Nope. Then again, I wouldn't rush out and buy the first year production of any new engine, turbo or not (I waited until the Pentastar went through it's "growing pains"). I learned my lesson on a 1972 Toyota Corona; first year for their overhead cam 2 liter...they made the valve guides too small and it cost me two days of being without the car while it was in the shop getting a new head, pistons, arms and crank. Didn't cost me dime, but, the sound of that engine eating valves at 70 mph is indelibly etched in my mind...the look on my wife's was priceless :-D That was one of the deciding factors that got me into my Journey instead of a Cherokee. Beyond the Cherokee that I wanted being $5k+ more expensive, and not terribly spacious enough for my dog (the main reason I was looking for a wagon in the first place), was the engine and transaxle. The Journey's 3.6L/6-speed auto combination had already been use in a mass market vehicle (several, even) for a few years. Other than the occasional "thunk" we all get going from Park to Drive, I haven't had issues. The Cherokee is the first to use the 3.2L and 9-speed combination, in the first year of production. I wasn't willing to be a guinea pig... even the auto rags continue to point out how rough the 9-speed still appears to be. I want a Journey SRT, the first MY of which should be 2017, however I'll wait for the 2018 or 2019 MY. By then my Journey will have been paid off and I can take my time selling it privately without headaches for more cash to put down on the SRT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PapaG Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) GM has a V6 used in the Camaro and Cadillac that have a 300hp that uses regular gas. I would love to see Chrysler do this. Wouldn't that be cool.. That would be in my next DJ. Come on guys... If GM can do it, so can you. It is a 60 degree V6 engine.. The LLT engine has a compression ratio of 11.3:1, and has been certified by the SAE to produce 302 horsepower (225 kW) at 6300 rpm and 272 lb·ft (369 N·m) of torque at 5200 rpm on regular unleaded (87 octane) gasoline. Edited January 4, 2015 by PapaG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtsr Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 The Pentastar V6 (as in DJ) produces over 300 hp with a different intake and PCM tune in the Challenger. PapaG 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PapaG Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 regular gas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhh3 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Maybe they should think about Supercharging the Pentastar. The Hellcats have this on the Hemi: 700 HP+. I was just reading a story about Volvo coming out with all new engines. The low lines get a turbo; the high lines get a supercharger. JoeyVegas 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtsr Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Yes 87 octane @ 305 hp 298lbs torque. Mauldin 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossRoad14 Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 That's much better then the GM considering the difference in torque. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhh3 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 (edited) GM has a V6 used in the Camaro and Cadillac that have a 300hp that uses regular gas. I would love to see Chrysler do this. Wouldn't that be cool.. That would be in my next DJ. Come on guys... If GM can do it, so can you. It is a 60 degree V6 engine.. The LLT engine has a compression ratio of 11.3:1, and has been certified by the SAE to produce 302 horsepower (225 kW) at 6300 rpm and 272 lb·ft (369 N·m) of torque at 5200 rpm on regular unleaded (87 octane) gasoline. Both of those vehicles have the engine sit North/South. The Pentastar puts out over 300hp in the same configuration. The 283 is probably due to a restrictive exhaust because the engine sits East/West. Remember the days when Pontiac owners were bitchin because they had an Olds engine? Wait till the Cadillac guys figure they have a Chevy engine. What ever happened to the Northstar? Edited February 16, 2015 by dhh3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtsr Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 The pentastar is used in other Chrysler products i.e. the Challenger and due to a different intake and pcm tune develops 305 hp on 87 octane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.