1987 Dodge/Mitsubishi Raider TSi Build hehe - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum
 
Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum  

Go Back   Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum > Brand Specific Tech > Mitsubishi
Notices

Reply
 
Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-10-2011, 08:45 PM   #1 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Member # 185147
Posts: 19
1987 Dodge/Mitsubishi Raider TSi Build hehe

Converting a friends 87 2 door Raider to turbo. 2.6L Block is at the machine shop to be bored 30 over, balance internals, replace bearings and freeze plugs. We are all conquest starion guys so its getting a turbo and tbi injection from the conquest. Then megasquirt and a msd 6a box. Motor already has the balance shafts removed and has a unorthoadox underdrive crank pulley. Also getting the 105 amp alternator conversion/bracket, "Bolt-on" unit. He already has the alternator, no reason not to use it lol.....

Last edited by Quezzy; 10-10-2011 at 08:45 PM.
Quezzy is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-11-2011, 03:18 PM   #2 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Baldy110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104602
Location: Big Pine, Ca.
Posts: 119
Is this going to be a street rig or a true off road rig? turbos are not off road friendly. All the power is on top where you don't need it.
Baldy110 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Old 10-11-2011, 03:32 PM   #3 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Member # 154106
Location: Mesa
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldy110 View Post
Is this going to be a street rig or a true off road rig? turbos are not off road friendly. All the power is on top where you don't need it.
The Trail Gear KOH buggy is turbo'd isn't it and that thing does pretty good. If you get the right size turbo (probably a smaller one rather that a larger one) and have the right gearing spooling at low enough RPM's shouldn't be an issue, theoretically speaking.
__________________
'00 Montero Sport-2" suspension lift, 33 KM2's
'12 F150 xlt ecoboost - DD
Badmonty is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-11-2011, 09:28 PM   #4 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Member # 120954
Posts: 23
The 2.6 12A turbo starts making decent boost at something like 1800 RPM. The 14G makes more boost at a little higher RPM, but still on the relatively low side.
__________________
95 LS 3.0 24V MT | 87 2.6L Turbo I/C MT | 03 20th Anniv 17k miles!
FSMs at MitsubishiLinks.com
MontyMcV is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-11-2011, 10:24 PM   #5 (permalink)
I get up around 7
 
Guns_and_Roses's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Member # 153487
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 622
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldy110 View Post
Is this going to be a street rig or a true off road rig?
You deftly avoided answering this question. so what are you going to do with the pick up?

Off road it or just drive it on the street?
Guns_and_Roses is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-15-2011, 07:41 AM   #6 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Member # 191442
Location: SoCal
Posts: 283
The '87 Dodge Raider is the same truck as a Montero 2 door, The Starion/Conquest 2.6l turbo setup works well, stock gearing is 4.65 on the 2 door Monties!
Marty, SoCal is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-16-2011, 08:59 PM   #7 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Baldy110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104602
Location: Big Pine, Ca.
Posts: 119
Just my experience and the mistakes I made. I dumped probably $10,000 into my D-50 4x4 2.6 turbo project over 15 years. I never was able to produce the torque I needed for serious off roading and rock crawling. All the power was up high so I to learn to drive it that way. It was not money well spent. I fought overheating problems, detonation and had to drive it always above 3,500 rpm to keep any power on tap. It never was able to make the torque needed down low to turn the 38" tires I had. I finally gave up and dropped in a 350 small block. Night and day difference, all the low end torque I could want right off idle. I get better gas milage and I can find parts anywhere for it. It would have made a great street truck but not a 4x4. Good luck with your project.
Baldy110 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-17-2011, 10:28 AM   #8 (permalink)
I get up around 7
 
Guns_and_Roses's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Member # 153487
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 622
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldy110 View Post
Just my experience and the mistakes I made. I dumped probably $10,000 into my D-50 4x4 2.6 turbo project over 15 years. I never was able to produce the torque I needed for serious off roading and rock crawling. All the power was up high so I to learn to drive it that way. It was not money well spent. I fought overheating problems, detonation and had to drive it always above 3,500 rpm to keep any power on tap. It never was able to make the torque needed down low to turn the 38" tires I had. I finally gave up and dropped in a 350 small block. Night and day difference, all the low end torque I could want right off idle. I get better gas milage and I can find parts anywhere for it. It would have made a great street truck but not a 4x4. Good luck with your project.
Now i am looking at the stock 3.0 rebuild i am doing for mine and i wonder if i should just say frick it and dump in a v8. sometimes overkill is better.
Guns_and_Roses is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-17-2011, 08:11 PM   #9 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Member # 145567
Location: Farmington, UT
Posts: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldy110 View Post
Just my experience and the mistakes I made. I dumped probably $10,000 into my D-50 4x4 2.6 turbo project over 15 years. I never was able to produce the torque I needed for serious off roading and rock crawling. All the power was up high so I to learn to drive it that way. It was not money well spent. I fought overheating problems, detonation and had to drive it always above 3,500 rpm to keep any power on tap. It never was able to make the torque needed down low to turn the 38" tires I had. I finally gave up and dropped in a 350 small block. Night and day difference, all the low end torque I could want right off idle. I get better gas milage and I can find parts anywhere for it. It would have made a great street truck but not a 4x4. Good luck with your project.

Interesting perspective and good information Baldy. You make some very good points about the power band being at the top end in a 2.6 turbo. I know turbo diesels and supercharged gas engines are very effective off road, but they both make max torque at low rpm.

I am guessing that he plans on going with about 33" tires because they fit nicely on the Raiders with a small lift. If you go with tires that are any bigger than 33's you need to break out the sawzall. I am also guessing he plans on doing just moderate offroading. If thats's the case, then the 2.6 turbo would be great. It would also be great if he was planning to use it for overlanding or a high speed application. It would be nice to hear back from him so know what his plans are and maybe we can steer him in the right direction.
__________________
1985 Mitsubishi Pickup, 2.3 H.O. Turbo Diesel, Watercooled Turbo, ported and polished 4D56 Head with Roller Rockers, Custom '83 Injection pump, JK Rubicon axles w/elockers and disc brakes, 14" Fox Coilovers, Centerforce II, 5.0 Atlas II, ARB Bull Bar, 33x12.50x17 General Grabber Competition tires
4D55 Performance Inc is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-24-2011, 06:58 PM   #10 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Member # 170760
Location: Orange Park, FL
Posts: 85
Baldy was running 38's. I'm the guy was able to get it to roll forward with the 38's on rocks. Mud like we got here, no problem. But rock climbing If the guy is going to be running 31's or 33's the turbo motor will probly be more than sufficient. I can imagine a 350 will provide the needed torque
MudRaider is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-30-2011, 11:49 PM   #11 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Member # 185147
Posts: 19
Decided to go Weber Now just need to find a wiring diagram to hook up the msd 6a to it lol. Will be using the conquest 240mm clutch/flywheel setup.

Only got two pics of his raider lol...... an yea the other cars are his too




Last edited by Quezzy; 12-01-2011 at 12:02 AM.
Quezzy is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-08-2012, 03:20 PM   #12 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Member # 208450
Posts: 20
I have a 1987 Starion that has a ton of torque and good boost around 2000 rpm, I couldn’t even imagine what it would feel like with some low gears! I can hear the turbo screaming now!
plays4keeps is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-08-2012, 07:12 PM   #13 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Member # 120954
Posts: 23
Turbo Raider/Monteros are good for lots of grins...
__________________
95 LS 3.0 24V MT | 87 2.6L Turbo I/C MT | 03 20th Anniv 17k miles!
FSMs at MitsubishiLinks.com
MontyMcV is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-24-2012, 04:23 AM   #14 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Member # 102830
Posts: 209
Why not a 4g63 swap? I know you are conquest guys so, why not keep the cherry conquest for cruising and do a dsm swap in the raider? Better engine with better power, tranny, t-case options
Rockrenegade is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-27-2012, 08:16 PM   #15 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Member # 217327
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockrenegade View Post
Why not a 4g63 swap? I know you are conquest guys so, why not keep the cherry conquest for cruising and do a dsm swap in the raider? Better engine with better power, tranny, t-case options
The 2.6 can create boost a lot faster on a larger turbo, the 4g63 would require a smaller than stock turbo to produce the amount of torque at the same range.

I'm not an advocate for turbo 4x4's but I am an advocate for turbos in general, and if you can get it to spool quickly and apply boost at low RPM's it will work. The issue with turbos that produce boost at low RPM's would be increasingly frustrating though and create needless wear and tear. Just to name a few.
  • Excessive turbo wear
  • Excessive fuel consumption
  • excessive internal wear

To get true performance out of any boost application requires adequate cooling (intercoolers) which do not take well to sand or mud...

Off topic, thats a clean conquest (I have an 88 Starion waiting to be restored, that picture motivates me!)

Last edited by OBX Jeff; 04-27-2012 at 08:19 PM.
OBX Jeff is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-29-2012, 12:18 PM   #16 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Member # 102830
Posts: 209
I think it's pretty obvious they are just doing it to do it. As in not trying to build a fully capable rig
Rockrenegade is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-29-2012, 10:21 PM   #17 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Member # 217327
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockrenegade View Post
I think it's pretty obvious they are just doing it to do it. As in not trying to build a fully capable rig
Information value far exceeds the needs for this thread to exist, so I added some information for those who would come across it and think it was a good idea for true off road application.
OBX Jeff is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-02-2012, 07:16 AM   #18 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Member # 102830
Posts: 209
All I'm saying is the 2.6t is the worst swap you can do. You are trading a junk engine for a junk turbo engine. So I would save the 2.6t for the car and do a good swap, that will give the raider some off road capability. The problem isn't only the engine in the raider. It's the engine/tranny/t-case/axels. None of the drive train can be upgraded and it needs to be because it was designed to hold up to junk engines without any power. The fact is a 22re has almost the power the 2.6t does and every other Toyota engine has more. Plus they all bolt to the same good tranny/t-case. If you swapped a 4g64 with tranny from a mighty max you would have the same power as your 2.6t. Bolt on a 4g63 turbo head you would have another 60hp. Plus the tranny tailhousing might be interchangeable with a jeep(aw4) which means you might be able to run a dana300 or atlas t-case. If you are only after power, run a 4g63. 400hp is easily achievable with low budget mods and will still be reliable. But the potential is unlimited. Plus you can bolt it to a Toyota tranny via a bell housing adapter.
Rockrenegade is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2012, 06:52 PM   #19 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Baldy110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104602
Location: Big Pine, Ca.
Posts: 119
Well I just presumed since he was posting on a off road website the guy would be using his rig off road.

Last edited by Baldy110; 05-03-2012 at 06:52 PM.
Baldy110 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-08-2012, 10:04 PM   #20 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Member # 102830
Posts: 209
What's your final crawl ratio, baldy? Is your 350 carb? Just curious.
Rockrenegade is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-09-2012, 10:13 AM   #21 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Baldy110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104602
Location: Big Pine, Ca.
Posts: 119
87 to 1 and 1 am running a TBI.
Baldy110 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-09-2012, 11:01 AM   #22 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Member # 100758
Location: St.John, IN
Posts: 346
Any video of it in action, Baldy?
__________________
2001MonteroSport, D44-9", NP231D300, TWF37'sH1's, ARB/Grizzly, PSCAssist, Cage.
-Soli Deo Gloria-
Raole Duke is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-09-2012, 03:09 PM   #23 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Member # 102830
Posts: 209
So baldy. I know you have wheeled your rig plenty over the years and in the rocks on the con. Knowing what you know now, regarding wheeling experience and building your rig. Would you still have gone tgrough the headache and hard work of swapping the 2.6 or 2.6t for the v8 and dana44. Considering the fact that you only have a crawl ratio of 87 and a big 200hp engine and a relatively weak axel in the end. Or would you now consider keeping the stock 2.6, divorce mounting one or two Toyota cases behind a 2wd tranny and swapping a set of built Toyota axels. Giving you gearing options that are strong, relatively cheap, easy to install, with a good crawl ratio 175-200:1. It's important to note that proper gearing changes your hp/tq drastically. My deisel d-50 had about 70hp max. Was 300:1 (too low) on 47's and never had a problem with power or torgue, unless I wanted to go fast.
Rockrenegade is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-10-2012, 10:28 AM   #24 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Baldy110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104602
Location: Big Pine, Ca.
Posts: 119
Had I to do it all over again I would have done the Dana 44 front axle swap first. It would have made it easier on the engine swap which I still would have done. I like the 350 because believe or not it was cheaper to swap in the SBC than to rebuild the 2.6. Parts are easier to come by for the 350 and I can walk into any NAPA store and buy parts for it without having to order anything like I had to do for the 2.6. I would not have spent so much money trying to make the 2.6 work, it simply was not cost effective. And you cannot get the torque needed out of it. I was on a serious budget when the 2.6 finally died so I had to do everything myself for the swap and I mean everything, engine rebuilding, axle set up, tranny rebuilding, transfer case rebuilding, fabbing all mounts, brackets and welding. The only thing I bought made was the adapter for the transfer case. I have about $5000.00 total in the truck, that includes tires. Over the years I had dumped over $10,000 just into the 2.6 turbo set up. Yes gearing does work on the trail but what about the drive to the trail. With the 2.6 I spent a lot of time on the highway trying to keep the truck at 45 mph going up a hill in third gear. With the 350 just step on the gas and it will go faster. With the V8 I have the best of both worlds, great torque for off road and on road driving. I was getting 10 mpg with the 2.6 because it was floored all the time, I get 15 mpg with the 350. There is no down side to the V8 swap. I do know peole say the GM 12 bolt rear end is weak but it is stronger than a toyota axle and after 7 years of abusing the shit out it, I have not broken anything in it. I will keep it until it starts breaking parts then I will think about going to something else. People also told me the stock mitsubishi axle would never hold up to the V8. They were wrong it did hold really well, never broke anything on it, including the ARB locker I had in it. The only reason I swapped in the GM axle was it was what I had and lower gearing is not available for the Mitsubishi axle.
And the V8 looks so right under the hood.

I don't have video of my truck in action but I do have one of it being righted after rolling it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=myMoBsFNY6M

Last edited by Baldy110; 05-10-2012 at 10:46 AM.
Baldy110 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-11-2012, 04:21 AM   #25 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Member # 102830
Posts: 209
I understand the budget build. Plenty of guys daily drive thier (bullet proof) toyotas to and from the trail with 22r's. People should also note that a $1000, fully built Toyota axel is unbreakable up to a 37" tire no matter what amount of hp you are running. Ring and pinion won't hold up to a 40" tire. With a toy axel the housing is the weakest link. They will bend if you don't gusset them.
Baldy, Your axels are not as strong as you think. The fact that your t-case is only 2:1 saves your axels. Which is fine. If you had a 4:1'gears in your case, you would be breaking every trip. But wouldnt need so much hp on the trail. Your axel gearing is the norm for yota guys on 37's that drive thier trucks daily.
I've taken this thread off topic enough. The Mitsu section needs a "good swapp" thread. Good luck with the 2.7t swap. Prob be easier to drive on the road with the power increase. Don't expect any difference in the off road catigory, unless you mean dirt roads
Rockrenegade is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

** A VERIFICATION EMAIL IS SENT TO THIS ADDRESS TO COMPLETE REGISTRATION!! **

Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.