Thread: Dodge Ram V6..

Tweet

Can anybody give me any information on 90's Dodge V6 engines at all?? Are they a good unit?? I believe they are virtually a small block V8 with a couple of cylinders missing.. Interested in reliability,,and economy,,torque,etc.. Thanks,guys..

Robin,
Chrysler had two engines that were essentially V8's with two cylinders removed. The better one is the Jeep/Dodge 3.7L V6, which is the 4.7L engine minus two that originated in 2001 in the Jeep Liberty and replaced the 3.9L V6 that had been the mainstay in the mid-sized trucks from '87 to 2002. The 3.9L was derived from the 318 V8 and was pretty much a stone, developed because of the limited room under the early Dakota hood not allowing a V8 or in-line six. The later ones improved with sequentially fired multi-port injection, but the entire line was only marginally acceptable with a manual tranny where you tended to lug down the rpm's and have all kinds of vibrations. I think that the older 3.9's held together OK, but the performance was not the best.

Here's a link to the newer 3.7L information - Allpar presents the Dodge/Jeep 3.7 liter V-6
and here's one to the older LA engine series which had the 3.9L - The 3.9 liter LA-series Dodge V6 engine

Thanks,Roger.. I wondered about them,cos I hadn't had anything to do with them,,and the availability of a 1990 Dodge pickup at a reasonable price led me to ask.. It's good to know where not to go.. Have been looking for a new work truck,that will be able to do what I need,and not be too big and thirsty..

Robin, just saw this post, sorry for coming in late. I have a 95 Dakota 3.9, bought it new in Dec 94. To date it has 215,000 miles on it and still runs like a top. It has never had the heads off, have had to replace the water pump, clutch, 4 ball joints, at 190,000 miles, and fuel pump. It is not a power house but pulls heavy loads up hill fairly well if revs. are kept above 2,000. Hope this helps you at this late date. Carrying heavy moving boxes from Seattle to Boise for 4 trips now my milage has averaged 18.5 MPG, one trip got just short of 20 MPG, lighter load, more drafting? Empty on trips I still get 20+ MPG.

Jack.

Thanks,Jack,,but decided not to go ahead with it anyway.. The whole idea of selling my F100,was to put the money into Lynda's Customline,,and if it means I get a cheaper Aussie Falcon ute,,I have enough cash to finish her car,and have a little bit left over to start the Galaxie that is waiting it's turn...

I don't know... but in my humble opinion a little 318 is hard to beat. Lasts forever, can have a little torque if not de-tuned too much for the EPA... I had a 69 model that routinely achieved 18-20 mpg in a Coronet (I could also make it get 3 or less (smile).

Robin, my 95 V6 Dakota has 213+K and is still going strong. It has never had the heads off and the only part replaced has been the water pump at about 110K. You are right about the 6 starting out as a 318 V8, the 6 now is 239 CI and rated at 175 HP. We have been using the Dakota to move boxes of stuff we are keeping in our move from Puget Sound to the Boise area over to our storage unit. We have the bed, with canopy, loaded to the gills and have to go over 2 main passes and it handles the trip fine. However on our last trip over I bought a car hauler trailer and brought it back so we could take more stuff over per trip. Well, the Dakota struggled going over the passes with just the unloaded trailer. I was wanting to get back to a full sized PU anyway so now I have a good reason. Bottom line, the V 6 is a good engine but like any engine it has it's limits.

Jack.

Sorry, Didn't notice my previous post, however this post has some added info.