Page 2 of 2

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 4:08 pm
by drewboi
PontiacChris wrote:idk how to do that. nor do i want to. wouldnt i have 4 blow off valves going off repeatedly too?

no.. not unless you want 4

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 6:18 pm
by itsalaser
fuk homemades they get the job done but kits are more reliable it will cost more but you get every little thing..... talk to dave im sure he can get you a deal like 5 bucks off turbonetics kit or some shit :rockon:

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:43 pm
by BOOST3DWRX
Maybe 10 if your lucky!

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:49 pm
by PontiacChris
drewboi wrote:
PontiacChris wrote:idk how to do that. nor do i want to. wouldnt i have 4 blow off valves going off repeatedly too?

no.. not unless you want 4


quaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack quack quack quack

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:30 pm
by itsalaser
im a duck hunter ^^^^^^ ohhhh 10 what a deal JUMP ON IT

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:12 pm
by tC Manch
id really try to stay away from $43 ebay turbos. just wait and look around for someone sellin cheap. i found a t3 turbo, manifold, oil kit, and wastegate for $520 all brand new. and im lookin to get around the same hp 250-300. an intercooler that ive been watchin is 26x6x3 core. thats really all you will need. somethin as big as ur talkin may require some serious fabrication

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:07 pm
by Jrcz24
tC Manch wrote:id really try to stay away from $43 ebay turbos. just wait and look around for someone sellin cheap. i found a t3 turbo, manifold, oil kit, and wastegate for $520 all brand new. and im lookin to get around the same hp 250-300. an intercooler that ive been watchin is 26x6x3 core. thats really all you will need. somethin as big as ur talkin may require some serious fabrication



Cool, Good Info. BTW: I'm always up for a fabrication challenge.HeHe. I'm a certified welder so I can pretty much weld and make anything.LOL

I used to make prototype Semi Trailors for the SEMA show when i worked at MAC Trailor, and i was still in High School when i was doing this.

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:05 pm
by itsalaser
heres your cookie

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:37 pm
by craracer05
Well 250hp is within reach but you'll need serious internal mods to make even 300hp on an old school 2.2 motor. I've doen the research before trust your better off to swap in an ecotec and then later on turbo that that pushrod shit don't owrk to good on four bangers you know.

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:27 pm
by itsalaser
ohhh ahhhh ECOTEC

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:27 pm
by Jrcz24
craracer05 wrote:Well 250hp is within reach but you'll need serious internal mods to make even 300hp on an old school 2.2 motor. I've doen the research before trust your better off to swap in an ecotec and then later on turbo that that pushrod shit don't owrk to good on four bangers you know.



AGAIN in my previous posts on here i have said i am swapping the 2.4 LD9 in it and then doing the 2.3 head swap and the 2.3 Cam swap, and the 2.3 oil pump swap, then turbocharging it.

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:36 pm
by drewboi
why not go ecotec.. there way easier to work on,have more potential, and have way more support modification wise theres even a book :D . also.. dont forget about the transmission and tunability.. unless you got a 2000+ computer in that after the ld9 swap your going to have to bs the computer into reading boost and hope it works. and from what i know somewhere around 300hp is all that the transmission can hold really.even 250 scares me.. thats mainly why i gave up on my cav. but with the eco i think with some modification you can mount up a cadillac cts tranny i think the 4t60e-4t80e or something like that.



but if you want the ld9 ill sell you my cav $3000

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:40 pm
by itsalaser
go ECO :rockon:

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:07 am
by Jrcz24
drewboi wrote:why not go ecotec.. there way easier to work on,have more potential, and have way more support modification wise theres even a book :D . also.. dont forget about the transmission and tunability.. unless you got a 2000+ computer in that after the ld9 swap your going to have to bs the computer into reading boost and hope it works. and from what i know somewhere around 300hp is all that the transmission can hold really.even 250 scares me.. thats mainly why i gave up on my cav. but with the eco i think with some modification you can mount up a cadillac cts tranny i think the 4t60e-4t80e or something like that.



but if you want the ld9 ill sell you my cav $3000




I'd love to go ECO but it costs a lot more to work on. As for the 2.4 I already have one. Its a GM crate motor with about 70,000 on it but the person who had it before me threw a rod, so I'm rebuilding it and changing some thing along the way.


Also sorry I'm not interested in your Cav. and I'm not trying to be mean here but your not going to get $3,000 out of it, cause i see many different cavs in this area for sale and they only want 2k and they haven't sold yet. they've been for sale for about 8 months now.LOL

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:09 am
by Jrcz24
The 2.4 i have is a '99 and I'm going to get the EGR block off plate and wire the car up as a 2000+.

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:36 am
by drewboi
lol.. i have multiple interested buyers for it already :D.. hopefully it will sell.. but be carful with that tranny..

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:41 am
by Jrcz24
drewboi wrote:lol.. i have multiple interested buyers for it already :D.. hopefully it will sell.. but be carful with that tranny..



The tranny should be too much of a hassle, cause my friend Matt Gorman with the black 04 boosted cav he is having all kinds of tranny problems and he works for Big 3 Racing in Brunswick and he's fixed and replaced that thing so many times.LOL but then again I think he's pushing almost 400 with his setup so that could also be an issue.

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 1:50 am
by sohchottie
Image

Awwww shit ECOTEC ftw :thumbsup:

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:44 am
by Sprayed33
Jrcz24 wrote:I found this... Does anyone think i could make this work on my car? I was planning on doing a custom setup, and try and keep the cost down.LOL

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Parts-Ac ... 240%3A1318





Haha that turbo went for $43...lol

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 1:02 am
by drewboi
i have a volvo turbo :mrgreen:

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 4:26 pm
by itsalaser
volvo=rice man get real its all about the stock turbo off of a 1994 deawoo

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 9:06 pm
by BOOST3DWRX
itsalaser wrote:volvo=rice man get real its all about the stock turbo off of a 1994 deawoo


lol deawoo

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 2:34 pm
by itsalaser
DEAWOO FTW bitches

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 2:41 pm
by Deviant
itsalaser wrote:DEAWOO FTW bitches


Yeeeeaw
Image

Re: Is bigger actually better?

PostPosted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 8:09 pm
by njrupp
itsalaser wrote:go ECO :rockon:

agreed