2.2L Tirbo engine Reliability??

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by Jesse, Dec 3, 2003.

  1. Jesse

    Jesse Guest

    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
    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, Dec 3, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Go ahead and get it.
    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.

    Daniel J. Stern, Dec 3, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. 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.
    Alex Rodriguez, Dec 3, 2003
  4. Jesse

    Steve Guest

    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, Dec 3, 2003
  5. Jesse

    Steve Raft Guest

    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.
    Steve Raft, Dec 4, 2003
  6. Jesse

    mark french Guest

    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
    mark french, Dec 13, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.