Ive been embroiled in turbo discussions here most of the day so I can't pass this one up! Its not the turbo that'll kill the engine its the driver/operator. If the car was driven conservatively and the EGT's kept in check there is no reason this engine wouldn't provide decent service. I say this because other non-turbo designed engines have been successfully turboed and have faired pretty well provided the EGT's are kept in check. EGT's are a very good indicator of what is happening in the combustion chamber. Non-oil cooled pistons that aren't designed for turbo use usually start to melt when the EGT's exceed 1100* pre-turbo. Indirectly injected cast-iron engines should be limited to no more than 12-13psi (incidentally the upper limit for MB 5cyl turbos...) without intercooling. These are generalisations I realize..... That said if the 240 engine was healthy, kept at a max boost of 9psi, max EGT of 900* it SHOULD be fine. I doubt it would last as long as a NA 240 but it would definitely be a little quicker. The question you have to ask is would it be worth it in time/ loss of longevity for the small increase in power. Easier to throw in a turbo 5....... RT

__________________
When all else fails, vote from the rooftops!
84' Mercedes Benz 300D Anthracite/black, 171K
03' Volkswagen Jetta TDI blue/black, 93K
93' Chevrolet C2500HD ExCab 6.5TD, Two-tone blue, 252K