re: turbo on a 92

Camaro Forums Camaro Classifieds Photo Gallery Members Search Forum FAQ Contact CF Sponsors
Camaro News Camaro Timeslips Camaro Recalls TSBs Register Login

re: turbo on a 92

Printable Version

Camaro >> Brand Review >> Engine & Internal >> re: turbo on a 92

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

re: turbo on a 92 - 6/15/2008 10:10:35 AM

Kevinschevy29

Posts: 18
Joined: 6/10/2008
Status: offline

hey guys i was thinking about putting a turbo on my 1992 camaro rs, it''s got the 3.1 v6. i was wondering if i need to do anything else to the motor in order to do this???? or is it just easy as putting a turbo on?? any motor work required thanks alot, sean.

Post #: 1

RE: re: turbo on a 92 - 6/23/2008 3:46:47 PM

31Bravo

Posts: 51
Joined: 2/26/2008
Status: offline

Why? it would be cheaper to drop in a V8, seriously to get a manifold and the turbo would cost you more then you could get a rebuilt 350 from someone. I''d say you could get a decent rebuilt V8 for 1500.

(in reply to Kevinschevy29)

Post #: 2

RE: re: turbo on a 92 - 6/23/2008 5:28:37 PM

73camaroSS

Posts: 511
Joined: 3/4/2008
Status: online

even with a turbo on your v6 it would still be slower than a stock 350,just save your money and get a crate 350 from gm and a TH350 tranny and a posi.this is a lot more practical than buying a turbo kit for your car not to mention your motor would need to be over hauled and have all the internals strengthned, that would cost thousands of dollars. just save your money and get a V8.

_____________________________

U.S.A. 1, love it or leave it. Muscle4Life!
Ford hahahaha. They Circled The Problem
http://www.youtube.com/user/73camaroSS

(in reply to 31Bravo)

Post #: 3

RE: re: turbo on a 92 - 6/26/2008 12:50:08 AM

sewerrat

Posts: 346
Joined: 7/4/2005
Status: offline

I''ll have to agree with the above guys. If you''re really set on the turbo idea then check out a website called 60degv6.com or something like that. There''s a member named "Forcedfirebird" who has a sticky on a 3.1 turbo.

(in reply to 73camaroSS)

Post #: 4