turbo on a 6 cylinder . . .

I'm wondering, if you took a small 6 cyl engine like the 200 or 250 and added a small turbo would that help or hurt gas mileage. I ask because so many new cars now are made with turbos and they get pretty darn good MPG.

 

Whats your definition of a small turbo? 5.0L Fox body guys usually run 60mm turbos but yet 1.6L Hondas run 62mm-65mm ones

If you can keep your foot out of it you can get good mileage, and the added power helps to "pass" with less effort. That seems to be where the mileage come from, the engine is basically working less to make the same amount of power.

Another thing is the learn burn in the EFI, you can get great mileage with that.

 

A turbo atomizes the air/fuel mixture much better, thus making the engine more fuel efficient. We all know that it would be less fuel efficient for the first several tanks though, thanks to the seat of the pants excitement the turbo would add. It would be several tanks before you got used to the extra power, and to start driving it normally.

 

Technically, it won't actually add any fuel economy. I remember an old Corky Bell book on turbocharging and he spent a good portion of a page to hammer that fact home. It can be a more efficient way to make power tho, so theoretically, it could make the same power as a V8 but use less fuel doing so.

 

Seeing how cheap you can get the 200 and 250's for I wonder how much power you could make on a turbo setup with a reasonable budget and amount of effort.

Plenty of room for installing a turbo under the hood with the inline 6 for sure.
I wonder what it would run you to get a forged bottom end and a little bit of work done to the top end.

 

I was speaking from my personal experience, not from the pages of a book. It seems everyone has a "book" to correct other people with.

Sorry injectedmav, but I had to vent. No offence intended.

 

The old Corky Bell book is the Bible of Turbocharging. He's still on some Forums also where you can ask him directly.

On fordsix there was a couple guys running 13s, the old mustang with the aftermarket aluminum head ran 12s IIRC.

Idiot's guide to turbocharging the falcon 6

Another Turbo 200 nears completion....

Mod-Log Turbo'd 250 Build



There's this falcon with a built engine running 10s.

 

And here are the dynos
http://www.classicinlines.com/DynoRoom.asp

Best Turbo Charged
445HP/502TQ 10.86@124

 

get mad horsepower from a 200 and 250 I think has been done several times. When I had my 6cyl there was enough information out there on various forums and in different books to make it into a torque monster.

 

The turbo will not help your cruising mileage at all. At best it will hurt it very little.

If you want to get better mileage and more horsepower why not put a turbo 2.3 in it? You get a smaller more efficient engine for good MPG cruising and it has way more power potential in stock form than the six. Plus parts for them are plentiful. Oh and it will cost waaaay less. A stock 2.3 with junk yard stuff and a better intercooler can get 250-300 HP and 25-30 MPG. JMO... This guy below did it

 

What kind of fabrication would you need to do to actually put the 2.3 in the maverick? Just wondering how big of a project it would be. I'm not to sure how easy it would be to find a 2.3t. I saw some info where people had tried to take a 2.3 and turbo it but had problems and were saying that you needed the 2.3t wiring harness and all the other mess to make it work.

 

Yeah. You need a 2.3T donor car. The guy in the vids I posted is a member here. Can't remember his name. I know the 2.3 motor mounts for a Maverick exist. They had 2.3s in Brazilian Mavericks. I think if you found a 2.3T Thunderbird or XR4ti donor it would be pretty easy. I don't think any fabrication would be needed. The 87-88 2.3 T-birds also had overdrive automatics I believe.

 

Oh nice. Thanks for the info man

 

No offense taken. My experience with turbocharging is that you can use a smaller displacement engine to get the horsepower of a larger displacement engine with better fuel economy than the larger displacement engine, but I have never seen someone bolt on a turbo and get better fuel economy on the same engine. With a turbo, more air=more fuel, no way around it.

...and I use books, and the experiences of myself and others for information. I wasn't trying to start an argument, just open a dialogue that may benefit all who are interested.

 

I can't speak about a turbo on a V8, I've only used roots type on a V8, 4.6L and Ford Flathead.
But as for the 2.3l.............I had a 88 Thurderbird Turbo Coupe and with a special head and bigger turbo it made a little over 400hp............which is almost double what it made stock..............with stock boost.
As for putting a turbo motor together on the cheap...............the more boost you make the more $$$$$$$ you spend. If you only want to make 5/8 psi then you can probably get away with inexpensive...............over 8 and it starts to expensive real quick.............you will need a better head, sometype of fuel delivery system(basically a fuel management system.....ie Electronic management), special intake manifold and exhaust, stronger rods, stronger pistons........................making HP has never been cheap unless you want to make a grenade motor..............run it once and blow it up.............
If you are going to do this use the 250, not the 200..................IMHO