Mitsubishi 3000GT During it's production run, and after, the 3000GT was a pure sports car offering forced induction and all wheel drive, as well as smooth aerodynamic styling.

TT conversion

Old Aug 26, 2006 | 10:45 PM
  #11  
ictponder's Avatar
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 597
From:
Default RE: TT conversion

I'm talking about converting the whole car to what the vr-4 would be, other than AWD/AWS. Why would you only upgrade the engine? That is stupid IMO, you need to upgrade more than just the damn engine, and why the hell would you slap on a TT without at least a stage 2 port and polish? That alone is almost 3 grand (around here), new clutch, another 2,500, brand new set of td-04's alone are almost 2 grand. It adds up, and I don't believe in doing things half ***, either get the best, or don't do it at all.
 
Old Aug 26, 2006 | 10:52 PM
  #12  
Xavier's Avatar
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 64
From: Minnesota
Default RE: TT conversion

i said i was interested in a TT conversion not a full VR-4 conversion.
 
Old Aug 26, 2006 | 11:10 PM
  #13  
ictponder's Avatar
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 597
From:
Default RE: TT conversion

I never said a vr-4 conversion, but if you convert your engine, the rest of your car needs to withstand the extra power.

new td-04 turbo's/w oil line kit - $2,000
timer - $150 - 200
FMIC kit - $2,500
clutch/flywheel combo - $900
injectors - $500 - 600
fuel pump - $140
BOV - $150 - 300
td-04 header kit - $1,400
TT exhaust - $1,500

All that is JUST under $10,000 and that doesn't even include all the parts you need. Unless you're like the guys around here who screw on a big *** muffler tip and say their cavalier is badass, I suggest you save some $$$ and do it right.
 
Old Aug 27, 2006 | 12:23 AM
  #14  
davidmitsusrock's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,366
From: Boonville, MO
Default RE: TT conversion

i still say buy the vr-4 or stealth tt...
 
Old Aug 27, 2006 | 02:33 AM
  #15  
jlozano3k's Avatar
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 73
From:
Default RE: TT conversion

I Also Agree With Just Buying The TT Its A Whole Lot Cheaper, But If You Want To Go And Spend All Kinds Of Money Go For It Man More Power To You
 
Old Aug 27, 2006 | 02:54 AM
  #16  
jlozano3k's Avatar
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 73
From:
Default RE: TT conversion

OH ONE MORE THING IF YOU JUST MOD THE ENGINE LESS WEIGHT PUT AN LSD ON THE TRANNY
YOU CAN EVEN BEAT A VR-4

SL TT CONVERTION TIME
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mitsubishi-...slip-6621.html

VR-4 TIME
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mitsubishi-...slip-2453.html

LOOK AT THE 1/4 MILE 2 SEC. + OR -

SL BEAT THE VR-4
 
Old Aug 27, 2006 | 04:10 AM
  #17  
Xavier's Avatar
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 64
From: Minnesota
Default RE: TT conversion

i think i am just gonna hold out for a VR-4
 
Old Aug 27, 2006 | 06:35 AM
  #18  
Michaels_RT's Avatar
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 211
Default RE: TT conversion


ORIGINAL: ictponder

LMAO, aa TT conversion isn't simply bolting on something. You have to change more than just your engine, unless you want a half *** job. Sure, go ahead and bolt on a couple turbos and take the cheap way out. Hell, even the heads are different, the N/A head ports are smaller and the shrouds are larger, getting them ported is not cheap.

Here is a list of parts you will need just for the TT http://www.importprecision.com/tt.htm

that is of course you want to do it right and NOT half *** rigged like some people say you can <cough>
No offense man, but you dont know ANYTHING about this car. You know what, scratch that, TAKE OFFENSE! You have NO IDEA what you are talking about. Do you wanna know what the difference in TT vs NA DOHC neads are? 5 cfm! Do you think ANYONE will EVER see a difference at 5 CFM on boost under 20 psi? NO. Heads need nothing. Block needs nothing. 10:1 compression makes for more power at less boost. Pek boost levels have to be kept down due to detonation, but at a Daily Driven 10 psi...you will OWN any VR4 with 9B turbos! The SL/RT NA weighs a LOT less with better gearing. The traction is made up for after a 1.4 mile and MOST running of cars takes place on a surface street with the cars already moving. Launch isnt THAT important. I can tell you this, my COMPLETE conversion cost me less than $2500 TOTAL! I paid a little help in install, but did most of it myself. And that included the TT ECU, Apexi SAFC and a few extras here and there. Changing you engine for this is 100% NOT necessary. If you wanna do it, fine, but NOT mandatory to do in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. DO NOT GIVE ADVICE LIKE YOU KNOW ANYTHING! And you should SURE AS HELL think before calling out the ONLY person on this board who HAS DONE THE TT CONVERSION TO AN NA!!! Thats just common sense!!!! You can cough ALL YOU WANT. Dumbass.

jlozano- you are right about the parts necessary but you are missing a few.
1. The upper intake plenum is pretty much required unless you are getting custom piping made. The NA upper plenum is bigger and the OEM IC pipe doesnt fit.
2. You will also need the front motor mount BRACKET. Not the mount itself but the bracket on the engine. The NA one is more bulky and the DP and turbo wont fit around it.
3. The water housing is also required. Thats how the coolant is supplied to the turbos. Tapping the NA one is WAAAAY too difficult to do when you can just bolt on the TT part.
4. Boost controller isnt really necessary to be honest either. the wastegates are set to 6-7 psi and dont spike. On 10:1 compression thats equivalent to 14-16 psi. More than enough boost. 10 psi is fun, but 6-7 is plenty of power and will even help with gas mileage. (I got 27 MPG in mine on one of my tanks!)
5. stock TT injector resistor pack. The stock injectors are 360 cc injectors and low impedence. The TT ECU is low impedence. But all the harnesses are HIGH impedence. The car WILL NOT run properly without controlling the ohms. Wiring in the stock resistor pack works PERFECTLY and its relatively easy. SAFC is still needed for SOME reason though if you are gonna run the NA harness with the TT ECU of corresponding year.

There were a few other small things. Its not EASY to convert, but you would be VERY happy with teh results and the insurance premiums difference between saying VR4 vs. SL. The VR4 is a better ALL AROUND performer. But the NA TT is a faster straight line car and cheaper on insurance and gas. Can still handle pretty well. Hope that helps.
 
Old Aug 27, 2006 | 06:44 AM
  #19  
Michaels_RT's Avatar
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 211
Default RE: TT conversion


ORIGINAL: jlozano3k

I Also Agree With Just Buying The TT Its A Whole Lot Cheaper, But If You Want To Go And Spend All Kinds Of Money Go For It Man More Power To You
And I am gonna quote this line here to make a SMALL point.

I will put it in simple terms of COST only...

1gen VR4 < 2gen NA TT
1gen VR4 > 1gen NA TT
2gen NA TT < 2gen VR4

OBVIOUSLY

1gen NA TT < 2gen NA TT
1gen VR4 < 2gen VR4

My car I bought for $6900 from a DEALER in Los Angeles had 52,000 miles on it. 2 owners and Carfax certified. a 2gen TT AWD Stealth (cheaper than VR4 and looks better IMO) is WELL over $11k at those miles. To get it under $10K is HAS to have 80k or MORE miles. The 3000GT label is even more money too.

Just thought I make that point.
 
Old Aug 27, 2006 | 03:05 PM
  #20  
ictponder's Avatar
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 597
From:
Default RE: TT conversion

Michaels_RT, you keep doing things cheap, half ***...the guys around here with the spray painted cavaliers might let you join their club. But, hey, you saved a few bucks, good for you.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:17 PM.