Sludge

Just had my 2.7 Intrepid die to the good sludge which seems to ails
these engines. My body and Interior are in great shape so a rebuild or
swap might be worth it. Finding a 2.7 is a quest however I see alot of
3.2 and 3.5 from 300M available @ lower price tags. Does anyone know
how difficult the swap from the 2.7 to the 3.2 or 3.5 is, and if any
other mods are needed for this swap? Not to thrilled about swaping
another 2.7 only to have same problem down the line again...can anyone
adivse?

 

Seems that someone out there thinks that replacing the 2.7 with a 3.2 is
not only good, but that they can make a profit at supporting it:

http://www.2-7-fix.com/4436.html

FWIW, the 3.5 is externally identical to a 3.2, so if you want the added
power you can go that route pretty easily.

 

Definitely possible.

This guy sells swap kits:
http://www.2-7-fix.com/index2.html

And these guys are talking about it:
http://www.dodgeintrepid.net/forums/showthread.php?t=39677

DS

 

If the state you live in has an emission test for your car, you may want to
look into what could happen if it fails the test, That would be considered
tampering with emissions if you swap out the engine and controller.
Glenn Beasley
Chrysler Tech

 

If that's what the law says, then, as the saying goes, the law is an
ass. What's magic about surrounding a given engine and control computer
with a given body? Answer: nothing. IOW, if the engine/computer combo
has trouble passing emissions in a green Intrepid body, then it would
have had trouble passing emissions in a pink donor 300M body.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

Could you provide a bit more info? Specifically: What year? Were you the
original owner? How many miles when it died? What was the maintenance
history, especially regarding oil changes? What type & supplier of oil and
filter was used? Were there any early symptoms of pending failure and if
so, what were they?

Thanks in advance since there are lots of us out here with the 2.7 and we
would like to learn what works (and more importantly what doesn't which is
where you come in). Sorry to hear of your problems. I also own an older
3.5L Intrepid and it is a nice engine if you decide to go that route. Good
luck with the swap.

Bob

 

Absolutely - almost constantly. You can find everything you need to
know about it there, including what years of what computers will work
with what years of what engines and vehicles, all parts needed, sources,
etc. Use their search function and the How To section.

Also, you may also be glad to know that the 2.7L engine core value is a
few hundred dollars due to demand (i.e., failure rate).

When you finish the swap, you will have a cherished combination: A
larger engine with the higher gear ratio that came with the 2.7L engine
(at the cost of lower fuel mileage). People paid extra money for that
combination in the 300M Special.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

In the state I live in if the Vehicle emissions label does not meet what the
car is equipped with it automatically fails, if the sticker says it has an
EGR and another engine was installed without an EGR it fails. If a 2.7 litre
engine fails a test and the label states it is a 2.7 and a 3.2 was installed
in its place, we are told that it fails. I don't write the laws and
regulations im just suggesting the original OP checks into it.......I agree
with you Bill But when it comes to politics. WE loose!!!
Send that to your congressman

 

Halfassed information from Glenn "Maxpower" Beasley, as usual. Federal
laws, which trump any contradictory state laws, say that engines with
emissions systems may be swapped as long as the replacement engine system
are of the same or newer model year as the original.

DS

 

As long as the engine was available in that car that year you can
safely do it with NO repercussions - as long as you change everything.
You will need to let the inspection station know - but if you don't
and the 3.2 / 3.5 passes the 2.7 spec, no foul.

 

Also, since the question related to swapping a 3.2 or 3.5 in place of a
2.7, if the manufacturer had certified the new configuration (which it
had in this case).

 

Since this is replacing one drivetrain with another drivetrain that was
optionally offered in the car, that isn't a problem.

 

As I stated in my state that is what we are told Lite Bulb.... The Op may
still want to look into it.......now run and hide

 

So Mr lite bulb, if the OP was to have put a 98 engine in a 2000 vehicle he
would be considered tampering, so by me suggesting that he looks into it
first would be wrong?? And by looking into it first your saying is not the
proper thing to do?? Are you on the bottle again?

 

The 2.7 L sludge issue may be a non-issue. FWIW, the reported failure rate
is something like 650 complaints out of a possible 750,000 engines. See the
ongoing discussion on allpar.com:

http://www.allpar.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=59368

I'm going to change my oil and not worry about it!

SpongeBob

 

Right, and the GM 3.1/3.4 engines don't blow their intake gaskets and
fill the crankcase with Dex-Cool, either.

Much as I like Chrysler, I have to say that you can get a decent feel
for when a problem is real and when it isn't by watching the number of
failures among people you know with the vehicles. I remember seeing a
2.7 engine ripped open in a local dealer within a year of the engine's
introduction, and I thought at the time "oooh, that aint RIGHT!" And now
enough complaints are showing up in discussion forums that I think its
pretty clear that its a weakling of an engine design.

Does that mean the numbers warrant a full-out recall? Maybe not. GM
still hasn't recalled their 3100/3400 family, and those things fail a
LOT more than the 2.7 does. But then that's GM, I expect nothing else.

 

You just made a sh**load of assumptions there as to it being a
non-issue. Are you assuming that 100% of owners of failed engines filed
a formal complaint? That would not be a wise assumption. What if only
1 out of 50 owners of failed engines complained? That would represent
almost a 5% failure rate.

You would have to look at percent of owners of other engines (known not
to have a design problem that would lead to failure) who filed
complaints (that wouldn't be scientific either, but a better inidcator
than just looking at raw percent of compliants). IOW, if engine X
(known to have no design problems) had a failure complaint rate of
0.87%, comparing that to the failure complaint rate indicates that the
2.7L is of similar good design. HOWEVER, if the engine of known good
design has a failure complaint rate of only 0.02%, then it could be a
reasonable conclusion that the 2.7L has a problem. As it is, you don't
have enough data to go on.

Not saying that the alleged 2.7L problems are real or imagined, but I
certainly am not prepared to lean towards there not being a problem
based on "only" 650 complaints out of 750k owners. And I say that as an
owner of a 2.7L with 140+kmiles on it that runs as good as the day it
left the factory.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
(snip)

State code can be more stringent than Fed code but never less stringent.

 

I wonder what the failure rate is for properly maintained 2.7 litre engines?

 

engines?

We have done a couple in the dealer, the ones that had problems were not our
regular customers. Yet the funny thing is.....they claimed they changed
their oil or a regular basis but were not able to show receipts, we didn't
buy it and neither did Chrysler. I own a 2.7 and I think it is a good engine