90Q removing bolt from rear diff mount.

[TWFAUST at aol.com]

In a message dated 3/7/2005 8:35:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
kentmclean at mindspring.com writes:

> TWFAUST at aol.com wrote:
> >Now that I have mentioned my "Mopar  Madness", what do 
> >you guys think of the idea of a Chrysler V6 in my CGT?  
> 
> The magazine Grassroots Motorsports holds a contest
> each year to see who can build the best car for (this
> year) $2005.  One of the earlier contests had a Chrylser
> minivan with a 2.4(?)L turbo motor, built up with nitrous,
> that smoked most of the field.
> 
> If I were to stuff Chrysler engine into a CGT, I'd think
> hard about a 4-cylinder turbo and its cheap parts. But
> then, there is a lot to be said for natural displacement.
> 
> --
> Kent
> '94 100 S Avant, "Moody"
> '89 200 TQ, "Bad Puppy" is no more
> 

Maybe I should make this part of the thread, OT. I have one of those 
minivans. It is quite "pumped" but is not on laughing gas. I have never had it dynoed, 
but with the formula I used in the build up, it should be in 275-300hp range. 
I have friends who run in the 12's with theirs. Since I use mine on a regular 
basis (fetching Audi parts) I am not prepared to sacrifice the weight that 
they are, nor have I invested in a quaife. "Cheap parts" isn't the word for it. 
Since the MB takeover, Chrysler "Direct Connection" has disappeared along with 
their interest in the 2.2/2.5 fours. But, back to "cheap" Chrysler would sell 
you their 300hp "Super 60" kit for around $1200.00. That kit was developed in 
1987 for their Indy 500 pace car. That amount of money will still buy you the 
300hp, but with more developed parts.

As to using that engine in an Audi. It may not be as sacrilegious as first 
appears. I understand that motor was built under license from VW. That may be a 
rumor. My main objection is that it is still a turbo motor, and, when you 
stand on it; it sounds like it is coming apart.  Chrysler will still you a 300hp 
four, it is supposed to be a more refined motor, only very slightly related to 
the 2.5 in the minivan. the body on my minivan is beginning to fail and I am 
looking for another body. Since it is possible to retrofit the newer 16 valve 
head back to the '89 motor, I have given it some thought. I am in the midst of 
rebuilding my 1760 (with revisions) barn to hold these things, that leaves me 
with little spare time or work space. The repair to the 20V which started this 
thread is being done in the scuttle. The interior is full of crossbracing to 
hold it up while it comes apart.

Quite seriously, for an Audi I would want a more refined engine. In my post, 
I think I mentioned a '92 engine. I meant '02. That is an all aluminum, 3.5 
liter, DOHC engine, at 250hp. More important to me, it has torque down low. That 
is where I do most of my driving. The more I look at the engine compartment 
in my CGT (the minivan has an "engine room" ), the more I realize that with 
that CIS gone and a shorter motor to allow the radiator to be moved to the front, 
there is a lot of room in there.

I think we should get back to Audis. But, for those of you with a bit of 
"march hare" in your blood, have a look at this:
http://www.turbovan.net/turbovan.html
    
There are more nitty, gritty, sites which will show you the way to 300 cheap 
horsepower. 

Tom Faust