Dodge Daytona

[badabing33a]

This isnt a classified or anything. i was wondering how similar are Dodge Daytona's and DSM's? my friend has one and he wants a DSM. then he was like "well i kinda have a DSM". Yea Daytona's are manufactured by Plymoth but they are not DSM's, right? or how similar are they?

 

[JayRolla]

Not even close.

 

[GRNDSM]

Not at all! I used to think that there might be some connection to the Conquest/Starion, but not even that!

Daytona is basically an Omni with a slicker body. Sort of like VW Scirroco was related to a Rabbit .

 

[nuclearr]

the dodge daytona and the true 1st gen lasers are totaly difernt animals. They run I belive the 2.2 chyrsler single over head cam engine and chrysler drive train.

 

[reardrv]

Not even close, they are based on the Chrysler EEK platform. Aka the K car platform (think plymouth reliant), the only thing they share in common with any Mitsubishi is that latter models use a SOHC version of the 6G72 that puts out 141hp. They also can have 2.2 or 2.5 liter 4 cylinder engines based on the Chysler slant 6 ranging from 93hp to 224hp in the 2.2 Turbo III engine. While most are slow as shit, certain models like the Shelby Z, the Pacifica, the ES, and the R/T (especially the R/T) have the potential to be extremely fast.

 

[JusMX141]

I have a buddy that runs a Dodge Daytona Shelby Z with a built 2.5 engine and a turbo that has a compressor wheel comparable to a 16G running @ 15psi, and it doesn't even feel as fast as a stock DSM. I don't know if they're heavy or what. He DOES have a RFL BOV on it, for all you ricers.

The Daytona has nothing to do with the Mitsubishi-based cars of that era. That would be the Conquest / Starion.

 

[GRNDSM]

Those 2.5s can be very fast when done right! I once dynoed with their car club and they put down some MONSTER torque. The 2 valve per cylinder kills their top end, but they make a LOT of torque down below.

These were the original fast 4 banger, long before DSM'ers discovered their power. But once we did, we passed them like they were standing still .

 

[LocknessMonster]

My buddy had one, the best part about those cars is the accordion shift boot. haha

 

[tkelly27]

These were the original fast 4 banger, long before DSM'ers discovered their power. But once we did, we passed them like they were standing still .

Fastest Shelby GLHS Charger on the Planet - Team Shelby Forum

It really depends on what you've done to it : D 12's are attainable with stock parts. DDG- The Turbo database page!

They really screwed up with the 8v heads though, they'd be a lot more popular without that choking them.

 

[Laysher91]

I think the misconception comes from the Dodge Daytona being closely related to the Chrysler Laser during the mid 80's. The Dodge Daytona was produced up into the early 90's but the Chrysler Laser was dropped around 87. A few years after dropping the Chrysler Laser the Plymouth Laser was born (and DSM). The only similarity between the two is the name.

 

[DSM_Aruba]

I had a N/A automatic Daytona 2.5. That car is heavy like hell and the engine doesn't have enough power for that heavy body. Wasn't good on gas neither. The doors are heavy too and the door hindges are weak. Tranny wasn't that bad after a good rebuilt. The Turbo Shelby Z isn't that bad. Before the Neons came out there was a popular Maserati Twincam Head upgrade for the 2.2/2.5 shortblock, but now they use the Neon 2.0 DOHC head as an upgrade

 

[cali]

like everybody says, not even close to being a DSM.

i think your buddy is confusing it with the regular starion/conquest (the esi-r is the widebody), which i admit, does look a lot like the daytona at first glance.

 

[JusMX141]

Those 2.5s can be very fast when done right! I once dynoed with their car club and they put down some MONSTER torque. The 2 valve per cylinder kills their top end, but they make a LOT of torque down below.

These were the original fast 4 banger, long before DSM'ers discovered their power. But once we did, we passed them like they were standing still .

I shouldn't say his car is a complete turd....it feels fast, but with the amount of time and money he spent on building the 2.5 and dropping it in place of the 2.2, I would think the car should be much faster than it is. If he spent that money on a DSM, it would be running 11's.

It does feel like a torque-monster, but past 5500rpms it has nothing. It doesn't feel like it has an upgraded turbo at all....the power signs off way early like a 13G or a T25 on a DSM.

The biggest setback of that series of Chrysler 4-cylinder would have to be the head gasket. Those cars absolutely CANNOT handle a large amount of boost, which is why he's only running 15psi. He ran 15psi on the stock 2.2 and the head gasket blew instantly.

 

[99Dodge1500]

I had one, they are nice cars, yes they are heavier than our cars, and no they are not as fast, I liked mine but the motor blew and I got one out of a old Plymouth station wagon the same motor but it was a piece of shit, so I just used it to mess around in it, running it into trees and jumping it, very strong body.

 

[DSMsOwnYourV8]

I had one, they are slow.

 

[GRNDSM]

The biggest setback of that series of Chrysler 4-cylinder would have to be the head gasket. Those cars absolutely CANNOT handle a large amount of boost, which is why he's only running 15psi. He ran 15psi on the stock 2.2 and the head gasket blew instantly.

Unlike 2.2 engines, 2.5s were actually pretty good at keeping head gaskets.

But we have established that Daytona had nothing to do with DSMs so I am moving this thread to hangout. As clearly, people seem to have a soft spot for these cars .

 

[DSM1G90]

Yea, had one kid, when he saw my Laser if this was the Chrysler Laser -I about hit him since that was a total insult to DSM's.

Told the kid that that Stovebolt 2.2L that was in the "K" cars was the disaster for the Laser - being as mentioned above - heavy, sluggish and horrible on economy..but "hey, typical Chrysler stuff"

Sorry, when you turbo a SOHC 2.5 with a longer stroke than the 2.2L and only muster 145hp out of the thing which all it was become a virus for that motor, it would have been better if they'd drop in the Mitz 4G54B, 2.6L turbo from the Conquest.

the DSM, D-22 body with the 4G63 turbo is what both companies really needed to get the MOPAR fans to pay attention again when these rolled out of the DSM plant in Normal, ILL, in late 1988 and headed to the dealers in early 1989 - being close to the same price and being a tons better vehicle for the sports car enthuasists.

Sorry, but stuff that rolled out of the Chrysler plants in the mid to late 80's, just didn't have the legs for endurance.

-DSM

 

[tkelly27]

Sorry, when you turbo a SOHC 2.5 with a longer stroke than the 2.2L and only muster 145hp out of the thing which all it was become a virus for that motor, it would have been better if they'd drop in the Mitz 4G54B, 2.6L turbo from the Conquest.

Sorry, but stuff that rolled out of the Chrysler plants in the mid to late 80's, just didn't have the legs for endurance.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ntbsg_frgP8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ntbsg_frgP8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

That has a stock 2.5 short block.

The 2.5 was not the performance model and was designed with torque for lugging heavy cars like the lebaron. It didn't get an intercooler or the larger garrett turbo like the more performance oriented 2.2 did.

Because of the piss poor cylinder head nothing really fun happens with these cars until 20psi or more. The daytona is about the same weight as a talon, and 30mpg isn't uncommon if you maintain them properly.

The stock head gasket was defective for a lot of years. Too thin in one section. That's fixed in the MP head gasket.

 

[JusMX141]

That has a stock 2.5 short block.

The 2.5 engine that my buddy used in his Shelby Z was from his 1989 Caravan Turbo. THAT project was abandoned when more than half the van's chassis was rusty and not worthy of a built engine. The Shelby Z chassis is mint.

 

[Hubbard 0]

I had a Dodge Lancer Shelby, one of 276 that year. It was definitely not slow and it was on a stock turbo.

The engines definitely didn't like to rev, and the bodies on all the cars rusted like hell. But the sport compact community owes a lot to those cars because they were the very first of their kind and started the turbo 4 cylinder craze in America.

What mine looked like, but without the headlight covers.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

 

[reardrv]

No need to diss these cars so much, they can actually be quiet fast with some stupid littles mods. I had a 1989 Shadow ES 2.5 Turbo I as my first car, with the Shelby CSX exhaust, a custom intake, an intercooler from a Volvo, the Mopar performance chip, and 15PSI on the stock turbo. I never ran it but I beat a C4 Vette and a few Mustangs and Fire chickens with it.

 

[DSMsOwnYourV8]

most of these Daytonas came with less than 150 hp, they had a special edition that came with 225hp, but it was rare. I'm sorry but it's going to take more than a few little mods to make a car that's 150hp, fast.

 

[Hubbard 0]

No need to diss these cars so much, they can actually be quiet fast with some stupid littles mods. I had a 1989 Shadow ES 2.5 Turbo I as my first car, with the Shelby CSX exhaust, a custom intake, an intercooler from a Volvo, the Mopar performance chip, and 15PSI on the stock turbo. I never ran it but I beat a C4 Vette and a few Mustangs and Fire chickens with it.

Exactly, mine had a full 3 inch exhaust, intercooler, intake, TII intercooler, and a boost controller. Never really got to race anything though since it never ran long.

 

[Defiant]

This, and only this is a Dodge Daytona. It's not an import, it's not a trim level on a goddamned pickup, it was only this. To hear the name tossed onto another vehicle boils the blood of some of us who've been around a while.
And this kind of crap is why some of us would not only allow Detroit's (and, many other) makers to sink into the swamp, but would be jumping up-and-down on the roof until out feet got wet. Think up some new names, you lazy, worthless sacks of shit.

 

[z24frank]

the good old superbird right?