3.0 turbo motor price ck & questions

[gumba]

Thinking of swapping out my 3.2 w/pmo's and crankfire ignition for a 3.0 turbo motor for my '68 vw crewcab. Reason being, I moved from sea level to 7,000 ft (N.M) a few years back.
A few questions:
The going price of a complete running 3.0 turbo motor.
Will the motor directly bolt up to a '84 915 trans.
The trans is set up with a 7:31 r&p and early 5th gear, any issues.
I'd keep the motor stock, so the h.p. would be around 240, same as the 3.2 (at sea level)
Would probably run without the intercooler, unless it became necessary to install one.
I'd convert the ignition to crankfire.

[quattrorunner]

Any changes to the engine to make it more streetable and get rid of the lag issues, would make it more powerful which would shred that 7.31. It wouold bolt up fine if you use the 225mm clutch and makes great power (I have one), but there are tradeoffs with a laggy turbo compared to a rev carbed car. Change the trans to more stout, and build the engine with better turbo and headers and it would be a great van.

[quattrorunner]

3.0 turbo engines are worth slightly more than 3.3 because the case is more valuable, do a search on why. Harder to find too. I'd consider a 3.3 turbo

[krk]

gumba,

Not much to add -- I have a 76 turbo. As a 3.0/6:1, it was a little iffy to drive in town. Not much get up and go at stop lights/etc. It was of course, very happy once we were up in the revs!

It swallowed a valve, so it was rebuild time. At that time, we switched piston/cylinders from the 3.0/6:1 to a 3:2/7.6:1. Driveability was almost "magically" improved. Just a little extra torque made a world of difference in city driving.

Now, that's against a stock 930 tranny/etc. The 915 may have lower gears/etc, and you may not see exactly the same issues, and I'm not sure what the relative weights between the vehicles are. Just something to think about...

hth.

kim.

[gumba]

I was leaning towards the 3.0 to avoid using the i/c, but the 3.3 seems a better choice. The trans should handle up to 300 h.p. It's in a bus so it will live a low stress life. The bus weighs around 2800 lbs with the 3.2.

[timc]

Originally Posted by quattrorunner

3.0 turbo engines are worth slightly more than 3.3 because the case is more valuable, do a search on why. Harder to find too. I'd consider a 3.3 turbo

So what is the difference between the Case of the 3.0 and the 3.3? I thought they were basically the same????

If the 3.0's are more expensive, I'd definitely go with a 3.3.

[quattrorunner]

Not the same, it's the same case as the 3.0 carrera and is valued by the 2.8 and 2.5 race car builders, these cases are rare and in good shape are worth 5k alone as a core.
Turbo guys don't give it much credit, but the vintage racers love to buy it and build up race cars with it.

[M5guy]

Originally Posted by gumba

Thinking of swapping out my 3.2 w/pmo's and crankfire ignition for a 3.0 turbo motor for my '68 vw crewcab. .

Did you build a space frame for that engine/tranny or is it all bolted up to the van floorpan?

[quattrorunner]

BTW, the 3.0 is slightly more stout with stronger rod bolts. And can rev better with shorter stroke.

[gumba]

Space frame, looks pretty much like a 911 engine bay. The rear engine hanger was slightly modified, no mods to the engine or engine tin or trans.

No plans on hot rodding the motor.