2.2L Tirbo engine Reliability??

[Jesse]

Hi everyone,
I know someone who has a 86 Chrysler New Yorker with 70,000 miles and a 2.2L
Turbo engine. I inspected and test drove it and looks great and runs very
well.
I was wondering if anyone had any feedback on the car or engine itself??

I currently own a '89 New Yorker (had it two months) with a 3.0L Mitsubishi
engine. It runs/looks great!

Thank you,

Jesse

 

[Daniel J. Stern]

I know someone who has a 86 Chrysler New Yorker with 70,000 miles and a 2.2L
Turbo engine. I inspected and test drove it and looks great and runs very
well.
I was wondering if anyone had any feedback on the car or engine itself??

Go ahead and get it.

I currently own a '89 New Yorker (had it two months) with a 3.0L
Mitsubishi engine. It runs/looks great!

The '86, overall, is of comparable quality. The 2.2 Turbo is an equally
reliable, more durable engine than the 3.0. The automatic transmission in
the '86 will be a 3-speed with much better durability and reliability than
the 4-speed unit found in many '89-up 3-litre cars.

DS

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

Hi everyone,
I know someone who has a 86 Chrysler New Yorker with 70,000 miles and a 2.2L
Turbo engine. I inspected and test drove it and looks great and runs very
well.
I was wondering if anyone had any feedback on the car or engine itself??
I currently own a '89 New Yorker (had it two months) with a 3.0L Mitsubishi
engine. It runs/looks great!

The engines are quite reliable. The only thing to watch out for is that
they have a habit of blowing the head gasket. I had the same motor in my
86 Omni GLH-T. Except for blowing the head gasket at around 100k, it was
very reliable. I sold the car with 153k miles on it and the motor was still
going strong.

 

[Steve]

Hi everyone,
I know someone who has a 86 Chrysler New Yorker with 70,000 miles and a 2.2L
Turbo engine. I inspected and test drove it and looks great and runs very
well.
I was wondering if anyone had any feedback on the car or engine itself??

I currently own a '89 New Yorker (had it two months) with a 3.0L Mitsubishi
engine. It runs/looks great!

Thank you,

Jesse

A *well maintained* and properly driven 2.2 or 2.5 turbo engine is
extremely reliable. The lower end of the engine itself shares the same
bearing sizes as the old 440 and 426 Hemi v8 engines and can deliver
well over 300 horsepower without mechanical failure (see some of the
turbo minivan and turbo drag race websites). The net result is that it
lasts forever at the normal output of <200 HP that the stock engine
produces. It is sensitive to loss of coolant (cylinder head warping) and
sensitive to certain types of abuse- namely shutting down the engine
immediately after a period where the turbo is producing boost, which
heat-soaks the turbo bearings and "cokes" the oil in the bearing. If you
idle the engine for 30 seconds prior to shut down- no problem.

The engine itself is vastly superior to the 3.0L Mitsubishi you
currently have, but the rest of the car is essentially identical. Any
non-engine strengths and weaknesses you notice in the 89 should be
similar in the 86 Turbo car.

 

[Steve Raft]

My '85 dodge Daytona 2.2 turbo was still going strong at 196,000 miles. The
3-spd tranny in my '88 Daytona was going strong at 262,000 miles. All the
cars that were based on the K-car platform are pretty bullet-proof, as long
as modest maintenance is performed.

 

[mark french]

I have owned an 86 Dodge 600ES convertible with 140K miles, an 84 convertible
Lebaron with 120K, and currently a 85 Lebaron convertible with 118K, all
turbos, none ever had any turbo work done on them. The 84 blew a head gasket
at about 100k. The 86 was still running like a top when I donated it to
charity. I'm driving the 85. By 86 lots of improvements had been done to
these engines in general for longevity and the turbo was better controlled. So
70,000 on a well-maintained 86 is not a great risk, these are water-cooled
turbos and are pretty darn sturdy. And being on a New Yorker it probably had
an easier life than if it was in Daytona...Frenchy