New things to go with the old things for the Chrysler FWD crowd to chew on...Ver 2.6

  I'm pulling info from many sources.  Dr. David Zatz and his ALLPAR site, my friend Rob Carter's 3.0 Repair/Upgrade and his General Repair/Upgrade, Gary Donovan's site, Paul Berkebile's site, James Dempsey and his Chrysler 3 liter mailing list,  my own personal research, and many other sources and people and such.  Far too numerous to mention.  Including several Chrysler service techs who shall remain nameless for their own protection...

CHRYSLER 3.0 LITER V6 AS MANUFACTURED BY MITSUBISHI MOTOR COMPANY

I've done a fair bit of research into the variants of this motor. This motor appeared for the Chrysler minivans in mid 1987. Was included with the introduction of the stretched minivans that became the Grands. This motor was built by Mitsubishi Motor Corp., and was altered to Chrysler's specs. Our version is a Multipoint Fuel injection motor, and was later upgraded to Sequential Multiport. It uses a "Speed/Density" computerized system to regulate fuel, which has a Manifold Absolute Pressure sensor to allow the computer to "gauge" how much fuel to add. Not too bad of a system, but not real performance friendly. And the fuel mappings in the computer are geared toward staying environment friendly, as opposed to performance friendly. Check the links for power ratings by year and model...

The timeline for MAJOR changes is:

'85     June '85 Issue of Hot Rod magazine featured a interview article with Carol Shelby.  In the interview Carol admits to
          evaluating the new MMC V6 engine.  The article can be viewed here.

'87      Introduced mid year in the minivans, and standard for the lengthened minivans. (Although, there seems to be some
           evidence of 2.5 TBI in some and a verified turbo motor in another)

'88      Same as above, though some underhood wiring differences are noted. Also introduced in the AC body (Dynasty/
           New Yorker/Fifth Ave/Imperial) unchanged from the van.

'89      Introduced into other platforms. AA (Spirit/Acclaim), AP (Shadow/Sundance), AG (Daytona), AJ (Lebaron
           coupe and droptop). Due to hood clearance issues, the intake plenum was changed, the 52mm Throttle body was
           replaced by a 46mm unit, a small change to the electronics was made, exhaust manifolds were changed to exit into
           2.5" downpipes. Also, appears to be first year for the Imported Raider (Mitsubishi Montero).  The A604 4
           speed Automatic Transmission was also introduced.

'90       Roller cams introduced. Vans switch to electronic speedo like the other 3.0 equipped chassis’.  Introduction of the
           SBEC computer.  Van's Also received large motor mounts.  Introduction of the SBEC on the minivan's.  Gone is
           the SMEC with 60 way and 14 way connectors, and in with the SBEC with a single 60 way connector. Also,
           appears that fuel rail was changed.  The 3.0L as found in the Montero/Raider found it's way into the D50 pickup          truck for '90 model year.

'91      Apparently no change... Need info... Second Gen vans introduced.

'92      SMEC II Introduced, changing  from MPI injection to Sequential MultiPort Injection. Instead of two injectors
           sharing one driver, each injector now gets it’s own...  Motor introduced in the AP platform vehicles.

'93      And on through 2000 model year vans... As the other chassis’ were phased out for new model lines, the 3.0 was
           left alone in the vans. Just as it started.  Not all changes were done for power, most were done for economy and
           environmental reasons. New flashable trans controller introduced.  Flashable engine controller introduced on      California Emission equipped vehicles.  Last Year for the Dodge Daytona G body.

'94       Engine wiring harnesses updated on the '94 minivans to include a relay box instead of the traditional row of them.
            Other fuses were also found in this new black electrical box to replace the fusible links.  Flashable engine controller             introduced on the rest of Chrysler's FWD Fleet.  Last year for the Shadow/Sundance AP Body vehicles.

'95       Last year for the Spirit/Acclaim AA & Lebaron AJ based vehicles.

'96      HP increased to 150 mostly by a bump in compression.  Figures are sketchy but 9.3:1 seems to be agreed upon.
           Exhaust manifolds changed for new engine bay in the vans.  The minivans are the last remaining model line to use
           the 3.0L SOHC ending just as it started.  

The Mitsubishi version of this motor was used in cars and trucks, including the 3000GT flagship. This motor was available in their Montero and trucks as SOHC, and also in their Diamante sedan from about 91-94 and the base level of their 3000GT for most years of production, again as a SOHC. The 3000GT also was available with the basic block and lower end, but with DOHC and with or without Twin Turbos. As such, this basic motor could be had in flavors from 150 hp to better than 320 hp. The Diamante and Montero later received the DOHC versions and were later upped to3.5 liters. But the twin turbo motors were never offered, though, there are unconfirmed reports in the Montero community that Jackie Chan (yes, the martial arts actor) had a Pajero custom ordered with the TT motor… All versions in the Mitsubishi lineup used Mass Air Flow computer systems.  Other engines in the 6G7 engine family include the 2.5L V6 found in the Dodge Avenger.

For the remaining purposes of this discussion, I'll be referring to the SOHC version unless I specifically mention the DOHC or Twin Turbo (TT) models.  To mention intakes and plenums... For the Chrysler motors, there are two different lower intakes and two different upper plenums.  '87 & '88 and '89 and newer.  Two major differences are mounting tabs for the Fuel Pressure Regulator present on the older style, but not the newer, and for the PVC valve relocated to the newer intake.  In '87-'88 the PVC valve mounted in the valve cover.  This also means 2 different front valve covers too. Then there is the Sonata version. Then, there are two different plenums and manifolds for the Mitsubishi vehicles. One each for the truck/SUV and one for the sedans and base 3000GT. There are also differences in the oil pumps and filter locations, Chrysler has a pump specific for its use, with the filter located on the "front" (as viewed with the hood open) of the block, while the Mitsubishi cars use a pump with the filter located on the pump and various adapters are used to alter the filters position depending on application and whether there is are turbochargers used or oil coolers. Could such a pump be used on the Chrysler FWD applications? No, the right side halfshaft is in the way, explaining the difference.

There are 3 different styles of exhaust manifolds.  '87-'88  2.25" outlet w/EGR Valve on back manifold, '89-'95 2 5 outlet in EGR & Non EGR flavors.  On the later style EGR version a tube bolts to the back manifold and runs to the plenum where the EGR valve is mounted.

There were also 3 different fuel rails.  '87 which has a hose between the regulator and rail, '88-'89 has a metal line between the regulator and '90 & newer is a new style rail with the regulator intregrated into the rail.  The rails used between '87 and '89 is referred to the old style or parallel rail.  The older rails supposedly flow better than the newer style.

This motor has also been used in Mitsubishi made forklifts and other machinery, including generators and fluid pumps. Obviously, those versions are seriously different, as they usually run on LPG or Propane fuels. Since this basic motor is used in such applications, that tells me that it is a strong and reliable motor. And I’ve even seen a DUNE BUGGY (8 seats even, can you say "Minivan of the Dunes"?) with the industrial 3.0.  Kennedy Engineered Products supplies adapters for a variety of motors to mate to VW transaxles.

Rob Carter adds:  “I recently was in discussion via email with a guy who acquired an odd 3.0L engine for a sandrail project and he wanted to know more on what he had.  Turned out to be a forklift motor.  Upon cracking the oil pan open on this engine he discovered it received 4 bolt mains. This motor he has uses a carb and regular gasoline.  Digging through forklift parts sites the motor was available in both LP gas and gasoline.  Going through forklift pages when one of these motors was for sale rebuilt they carried a $2000 core charge!!!”

This motor is very capable of handling a lot more power than it has stock. It uses the same basic block, crankshaft (though in later years the TT version was Nitrile treated), and bearings and rods. The main difference was that the block was machined to accept a 4 bolt main bearing cap, instead of the two bolt mains, and the pistons are different for the SOHC/DOHC FWD, TT and RWD SOHC motor. Clearances are basically the same though regardless of pistons or application. The DOHC heads has slightly different water passages and it is unkown if it will bolt on the SOHC block. It may be a way to generate more power, but then you need the whole computer and wiring harness from the donor car. Same thing if you decided to get the TT DOHC setup as well. Or for that matter, the whole motor.

It also appears that the trucks got a different cam profile than the sedans did. Also, the Chrysler & Hyundai versions have distinctly different cam timing from the Mitsu applications. Since all the SOHC models used a distributor based ignition system, it would seem that the hot cam to get for us (minivans) would certainly be the one from the Mitsu Montero/trucks. I ask out loud for the first time, but for the untold countless times in my head, why didn't Chrysler offer some of this stuff? And why is there such a vast difference between the Mitsu application motors and ours? Is this due to the different computer applications?

Also, the cam profile for the 87-89 slider cam seems to be a little more aggressive than the profile for the roller cam introduced in 90.  I changed to the roller rockers from the 90 and up motors in my 87 motor and did notice a change.  I am looking into Whether this simple change affects camshaft timing like it does in the 2.2 motors.

Check out the little chart I gathered here:

Mitsu 3 liter V6 specs

Mitsu vehicles (From the online resource, Mitsubishi 6G72 FSM), there was an online manual available from a Montero site, but this has since been removed and at this time, I do not know how to access it…

SOHC Specs

FWD
Compression ratio                10.0
valve timing
intake open                       16 BTDC
close                                 66 ABDC

exhaust open                     56 BBDC
close                                 26 ATDC

injector                             N210H

RWD
Compression ratio             8.9
valve timing
intake open                       19 BTDC
close                                 59 ABDC

exhaust open                     59 BBDC
close                                 19 ATDC

injector                              B210H

SOHC Piston Clearance
Piston to cylinder                .02-.04mm (.0008-.0016")
Service Size (Overbore)     .25,.5,.75,1.00mm
                                          .010,.020,.030,.039"

APPROXIMATE HEAD VOLUME=14cc  (source Silvolite Pistons)           
 

DOHC Specs
Non-Turbo
Compression ratio                10.0*
valve timing
intake open                          16 BTDC
close                                    55 ATDC

exhaust open                        48 BBDC
close                                    15 ATDC

injector                                 BDH210

Turbo
Compression ratio                 8.0
valve timing
intake open                           16 BTDC
close                                     55 ATDC

exhaust open                         50 BBDC
close                                     17 ATDC

injector                                  BDL360

DOHC Piston Clearance
Piston to cylinder                   .02-.04mm (.0008-.0016")
Service Size (Overbore)        .25,.5,.75,1.00mm
                                             .010,.020,.030,.039"

All Mitsu versions appear to use a 60mm throttle body. 

 *10:1 compression built motor’s are interference meaning valves and pistons will collide if the timing belt snaps.
 

Chrysler version (According to my '87 FSM and Rob Carter’s 88 and 89 FSM)

Compression ratio                  8.85:1
valve timing
intake open                            19 BTDC
close                                      57 ABDC

exhaust open                          57 BBDC
close                                      19 ATDC

injector                                   Injectors through 91 are low impedance 19lb/hr
                                              Fuel injector part numbers used MD116218, MD156661(Info provided by Valiton
                                              Chrysler Parts Dept. Toledo, Ohio).

Piston to cylinder                    .02-.04mm (.0008-.0016")
Service Size (Overbore)         .25,.5,.75,1.00mm
                                              .010,.020,.030,.039"

Chrysler version (According to my '92 FSM) Apparently the differences is due to a switch from MultiPoint Fuel Injection with SMEC (Single Module Electronics) to Sequential MultiPort Fuel Injection and the SBEC (Single Board Electronics)

Compression ratio                    8.85:1
valve timing
intake open                              19 BTDC
close                                        59 ABDC

exhaust open                            59 BBDC
close                                        19 ATDC

injector                                     Injectors are high impedance 19lb/hr
                                                Fuel injector part numbers used MD168410(Bosch Injector), MD158484(Nikk Injector)
                                                (Info provided by Valiton Chrysler Parts Dept. Toledo, Ohio).

Torque                                     170 Lb. Ft. @ 2800 RPM

Piston to cylinder                      .03-.05mm (.0012-.002")
 

Hyundai version was used in the Sonata from 1988 to 1998.  These engines received a manifold based off of the Mitsu version and also use a MAF fuel injection system.

Compression ratio                    8.9
valve timing
intake open                              19 BTDC
close                                        59 ABDC

exhaust open                            59 BBDC
close                                        19 ATDC

injector                                     No Info
Torque                                     No Info

Piston to cylinder                      ('89-'95)0.03-0.05 mm (0.0008-0.0016 in.)
                                                ('96-'98)0.02-0.04 mm (0.0008-0.0016 in.)

Info from '92 Hyundai Service Manual
 

A BIG question that runs rampant through the mailing lists, and seems to be full of disinformation, whether these motors are interference or not. By interference, I mean if the timing belt breaks, will the pistons and valves hit. I'll let Robert Carter answer this one…

Read on: Straight from '88 Van FSM Page 9-51 "Pistons: Are aluminum alloy with a steel strut, short height, and thin wall so as to be autothermic and light weight. The piston head with valve recesses, in combination with the cylinder head, forms a compact spherical head WITH CLEARANCE FOR TOTAL VALVE LIFT WITH PISTONS AT TOP DEAD CENTER." I think this answer's the long debate on whether or not the 3.0 is an interference engine.   However versions of the SOHC motor with 10:1 compression pistons are interference.

And for the record, my 87 and 92 FSMs (Factory Service Manuals) back this up too.
 

Drew Beck has an excellent chart on applications for the minivans.

TRANSMISSIONS AND SWAPS

The A670 and A604 automatics share a common right side extension housing.  This housing includes the bearing and seal for the right side of the differential.  What is the significance here?  Um, well, the A604 was the only transaxle offered for the AWD minivans.  If you were to unbolt the extension housing from the the 3 speed automatic (A670), you could then bolt in the adapter for the AWD Power Transfer Unit.  Then, bolt in the PTU and there you have it, power transmitted to the rear of your A670 equipped vehicle.  But wait, if it fits the A670, what about the A413?  Why yes it does.  The A413 uses the same part # extension housing and bolts to the A604 and A670 Part number for the housing is 4431592. Anyone interested in finding the power limits of the AWD drivetrain with a turbocharged 2.2/2.5 four banger?  Wouldn't an AWD launch be fun?

I was originally told that the 3.0 shared bolt patterns with the 3.3/3.8. I know of a gent that was trying to mate the A543 5 speed to a 3.3. Didn’t fit... Back to the drawing boards. Although, I’d still like to know more about the 3.3/3.8 and the 3.5 sharing a common pattern. Anyone help me out here?

A handful of folks on the 3 liter list have already replaced their A604 or A670 automatics for the A543 5 speed. One of the latest to do this is the gent with the factory prototype turbo 3.0 V6 he installed in his P body. There are now THREE minivan owner’s who have done this swap.  More can be read about this swap here. Seriously, ALL the parts are available, so why not. And since I do a bit of driving in the mountains, I'd like an extra gear or two to choose from too. More on this as I think...

Computer and Fuel Issues

I'm learning what I can of the computer. So far I've learned that the computer isn't going to be an easy hack. Working that issue. We do know, thanks to Rob Carter, that the 88 Dynasty computer WILL run the 88 van. Might be good for someone to know… The computer for the 3.0 had a couple of revisions.  '87-'89 were SMEC based, '90-''91 were SBEC I (batch fired injectors), and '92-'95 the SBEC II with a newer SMPI system went into service.  '96 and up minivans use a newer style OBDII compliant SBEC III computer. Only ’87 & ’88 received a provision for the charge/temp sensor.

Fuel. Fuel pressure in 87 was only 26 PSI, raised in 88 to 48 PSI, supposedly to prevent fuel boiling in the fuel rails. It remained at 48 PSI until the last year of production, 2000…

PERFORMANCE ISSUES

For those looking to increase power from their 3.0s... Hot tips here. Also, see Robert DeLucas’ site...   But some of this data is becoming a little dated but still has some  great beginning 3.0 modification info.

-52mm throttle body. Look for those from the 87/88 3.0 vans, 3.3 and 3.8 vans. Also, the '98 and later model 3.8s in T&C minivans w/AWD seem to have 58mm throttle body, but this requires porting of the intake manifold where the throttle body mounts.  Also, Neon 52mm throttle bodies will physically fit, but don’t have the Idle passage machined in the body, instead it seems to be part of the intake manifold.  And another 52mm throttle body to avoid, is the pair found on first generation (93-97) LH car 3.5 liter motors.  Those motors have the idle control as part of the intake plenum (as well as a great flowing plenum with a Manifold Tuning Valve built in…).

-89 and newer Intake manifolds and plenums seem to flow more air. Especially with a mild to wild porting by Nitetrain!!!  If you have an ’87 or ’88 3.0L you can learn more on swapping to the later style plenum here. Some people have been removing the center divider in the newer style plenums with seemingly good results so far.  I haven’t tried it myself yet, but this would seem to be more effective with more modifications.  Keep watching for more info on this topic…

-http://www.fwdmoparmuscle.com offers Nitetrains's PHENOLIC spacers to replace the gaskets between the intake manifold and the plenum.  This is a proven mod.  It is supposed to reduce the angles in the curve and boost velocity, everyone that has them is VERY happy.

-'87-'89 parallel fuel rails seem to be able to flow more fuel than the '90 and later model fuel rails. (Thanks Nick)

-The fuel pumps we use are not the same fuel pumps used by the Chrysler turbo I cars.  Though they do have the same flow numbers for the most part.  Unless you are making OVER 300 horses, your fuel pump SHOULD handle it just fine. Make sure you change your fuel filter regualarly...

-While on the topic of fuel, I’ll raise the debate on fuel injectors. Our stock injectors are 19 pound per hour (lb/hr) units. These will only support 185-190 HP.  I switched to 27 lb/hr units from the 2.2 liter turbo 1 cars. Depending on which method you use for determining how much HP these will support, they will support 235-250. The debate wasn’t whether they will work or not, but whether there will excessive fuel consumption during start up and warmup phases when the computer is in OPEN LOOP mode. At first, the motor ran poorly.  It smelled rich and sputtered a bit.  But after resetting the computer, it runs quite well.  I still have a little stumble at throttle tip in from idle, but the fat midrange pull more than makes up for it.  Since I made the switch, others have done the same.  Including a friend of mine that swapped in turbo 2 32lb/hr after an engine rebuild which included a ported plenum (ported by me).  And not to be left out, after swapping in the 27 lb/hr injectors a fellow California resident even passed our TOUGH smog check!  The computers in these cars might not be the best for performance, but this shatters the myth that it doesn’t support added fuel requirements.

-Porting and polishing the heads. This is something I’m doing now. I have a spare set I’m working on. Others (Rick Lozier and Ron Adair) have done this with GREAT success. I’m just doing a little port matching and cleanup. Nothing radical.

-Camshafts. There isn’t an aftermarket cam available to us other than the ones from RPW in Australia. Available here in the States thanks to Phantom Racing. I’ll cover Phantom more indepth later... Though, Crower cams in Chula Vista. CA will regrind our stock cams to any spec within reason. Be careful of increased lift though, since we would hate to turn our non-interference motors into interference... Also, SOHC 3.0 Montero cams have better duration and would appear to have better torque.

-Speaking of torque... I’d like to find out more about the SOHC 3.0 Montero intake manifold and plenum It looks sort of like the last 5.0 Mustang plenum, but I’d almost bet that the Montero setup makes more torque than our stock units... Waiting to see...

-Exhaust. Well, not much available in the aftermarket for our motors.http://www.fwdmoparmuscle.com has a header set in the r&d phases for this motor, it could be used in ALL Chrysler 3.0 platforms. No changes needed... I was thinking the earlier SOHC Mitsu Diamante manifolds were going to be the ticket, but perhaps not. Clearance issues. Same too, with the Montero manifolds. Rick Lozier had a custom set of headers made. Developing...

-Nitrous. Well, I’m not a fan of Nitrous for many reasons.  Also, when the bottle is empty, your slow again. On the other hand, Rick Lozier had a good deal of success with it, dropping his Daytona 3.0 into the twleves on the squeeze... Just not for me.

-Supercharger. Seems to be a couple companies out there that have or will develop a kit for us. Sorry, when the price gets over $1000, I stop listening. But don’t let that deter you if that is the way you choose.  My buddy SIXPACKDAN in New Mexico has successfully mounted and runs a supercharger.  Seriously, a lot of fabrication went into this.   Also, Harv has his up and running as well, same idea, a little less fancy fab work, but still very much a runner.  And lastly, check out the worlds first supercharged 3.0 liter NEON!!!

-Turbocharging. Robert Hassler has a FACTORY turbo motor. He bought two of the engineering prototypes and installed one in his car.  He has since aquired a 3^rd one. Not all of us can drop that kind of change, but glad he could rescue these motors. But this doesn’t mean we are through with this discussion... No, not by a long shot... The biggest problem, is getting an exhaust manifold or header available to ease the process. I can’t weld cast iron, or I’d have been done long ago. Everyone seems to be concerned with routing exhaust back to the stock location, and I am beginning to think this is a Nirvana that won’t be reached... So, I’m about to abandon ALL of my previous planning and fitment for something new... Stay tuned...

While on the topic of the factory prototype turbo motor new information is coming to light.    From the Chrysler side of the fence all we know officially about them is it was a program in the late ‘80’s and was cancelled. 

As to the motor itself  there is some differences between the production SOHC engine and the prototype turbo engine.  In the valley of the block there are 4 holes taped just like the DOHC motors for the knock sensor bracket(is this motor a DOHC Block?).  Chrysler used 2 of the bolt holes to attach a knock sensor at the cylinder 2 & 4 locations.  Removal of the oil pan shows a different pickup with a center sump.  The windage tray was modified in the oil pan for this new pickup.  A different oil pump seems to have been used also.  The oil filter housing is also different allowing for an oil line for the turbo.  Water for cooling the turbo is tapped off of the back of the block where the block drain is.

As to the manifold arrangement.  The intake uses a lower with the same gasket pattern as the Mitsu car version of the intake.  Since the thermostat is on the proper side chances are this may be a stock Montero piece.  The upper intake has quite a few characteristics in common with the Montero also.  As to exhaust the front uses a log manifold with a flange.  A pipe with a 90^ angle attaches to it and then to the collector on the side of the block.  The back manifold makes a 90^ turn around to the side of the motor and a pipe attaches to it and runs to the collector.  The turbo sits on the collector and exits a cast pipe that runs at an angle down the back of the motor to exit in the stock location.  

More to follow as information becomes available…  

Problem area's of the motor.

As with anything mechanical age can show trouble spots.  And that goes for any motor.  Not just this one. Oil burning due to valve guide seals failing or guides dropping.  Chrysler TSB #09-18-92 Rev. A presently covers this.  From the TSB:

DISCUSSION:

Engines built since 11/15/91 (build code BDL7.067) have snap rings installed on the exhaust valve guides. Engines built since 10/2/92 (build code BDL7.416) have improved intake and exhaust valve stem seals in addition to the snap rings on the exhaust valve guides. The build code label is located on the intake plenum.

Some early indications of dampers failing and taking the crank keyway with it have been reported.  Rob Carter has some pictures of the aftermath here.  I had to replace my crankshaft for EXACTLY the same reason in Sept of 2001.  Others are also popping up.

Leaky cam cap seals & valve cover gaskets have been reported.  Over tightening the valve cover can distort it and cause it not to seal right.  If you have a leaky valve cover that you can't get to seal chances are someone over tightened it at some time.  Also some early valve covers baffles can clog causing oil to be forced out the valve cover gaskets and cam caps.  The baffles in the cover were changed.  A TSB #C09-15-9 covers the issue.

Other than that this motor is fairly troublefree.

CREDITS, THANKS AND NEEDS

I’d like to thank Robert Carter III, Robert Hassler, Adam Baumbach, Paul Berkebile, Drew Beck, Jay Storm, James Dempsey, Ron Adair, Rick Lozier, Gary Donovan and others IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER! Without the 3.0 list, and the subscribers to it, this information wouldn’t be available in 1 location. Shoot, without those that have access to Factory Service Manuals, lots of this wouldn’t be here. Also, I’d like to thank the folks at Ventura County Montero club for the FSMs and Haynes manuals on line for the Montero AND Conquest (2.6 turbo), and the folks at Club DSM for the 1993 3000GT motor FSM. All these references have been extremely valuable, and could lead to other developement for us as well. Certainly helps us with alternate parts (higher compression pistons and cams with different timing values).

As I get more information, I’d like to add the factory turbo info as a block. Also, I’d like anything anyone might have that could be of help for others. Even international versions of the motor including Export versions of our own Chrysler 3.0 liter V6. Thanks for reading.

  Keep in mind, I am NOT an expert.  This is the research I have done on my own, and with the help of many others.  I know for a fact it is incomplete because I don't have access to some information others may have.  I do know that this IS the beginning of a FAQ for the V6 mailing lists.  If anyone wants to add anything or use anything, please, let me know, and give proper credit if it comes from a book.  Getting more power from the 3 liter motor is a common goal for many of us.  We have many bright people coming on board to help us out.  This is a work in progress...

  Corrections?  Additions?  Thoughts?  Questions?  Email me at phatfoto@yahoo.com

Version 2.5.3 corrected trans tail extension housing information and fuel rail information.  07/16/02
Version 2.5.2 removed erroneous transaxle info. Added relevant manifold info, added computer, and fuel info. Dated Apr.29, 2001
Version 2.6 Major Update by Rob Carter on 12/08/2002

Version 2.6.2 Update By Roger Lister on 01/13/03