3.5L HO in First gen - collected info thread. - DodgeIntrepid.Net Forums - Dodge Intrepid, Concorde, 300m and Eagle Vision chat
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
post #1 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-08-2010, 11:54 PM Thread Starter
Intrepid Pro
 
gearhead291's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: georgia
Posts: 5,642
Feedback: 2 / 75%
                     
3.5L HO in First gen - collected info thread.

well guys, ive been looking everywhere for info on 2nd gen engine swap into a 1st gen.
so, for future reference, i will post all info i can find about the swap in this thread.
please, if you have more info, post it.

what i have so far _---- ( collected from other threads)



Quote:
Originally Posted by ACR View Post
What gives power on second gen engine is not only the different intake manifold that will give more torque with the long runner setup, the short runner setup will only use 1 throttle body. I think that the 1st gen intake (2 throttles bodies) gives more horspower to the car. The use of two throttle bodies gives a better throttle response.

I think that most of the horspower from the second gen. engine is from those points:

-The piston weight for the second gen is 438 grams for the A size. On the first gen engine, they weight 515 grams. Total weight lost: -77 grams
-The connecting rods for the second gen weight 647 grams. On the first gen they weight 626 grams. Total weight gain: 21 grams

So the total weight lost per piston/rod is 56 grams for each cylinders. Here you gain alot of hp from the weight lost in the engine.


-The second gen camshaft has the same exhaust valve lift that the first gen camshaft. (.2571 in.) It's another thing for the intake valve lift that is .3367 on the second gen. On the first gen cam it was .3209. (On the second gen camshaft, you have .016 in. more lift)

-The exhaust valves are the same on both engines. On the intake side, valves are different: On the second gen, valve size is 1.4319 in. on the first gen it's 1.3728 in. Valves are .059 in. bigger on the second gen engine and there are 2 intake valves per cylinders.

-On the second gen engine, you will find softer springs. That gives horsepower by the fact that valves are easier to open.

-Compression ratio is also different, on the second gen it's 10:1 and on the first gen engine it's 9.6:1 (obdII)

You can find an aluminium block on the second gen, it's lighter so your hp/weight ratio will be better.

Engine mounts:
-Driver side have the same bold pattern on the block on both generations. (Even on the 3.3)
-Passenger side is different on the second gen, only 1 bolt is not at the same place. So with a minor mod, you will be able to use the second gen mount.

The exhausts manifolds are the same, they will bolt right on.

By plugging 1 hole you can bolt the first gen. intake on a second gen. head. So you can put the 1st gen plenum on the second gen engine.

On the second gen engine you can also find 1 knock sensor on the block. If you use the 1st gen computer with the second gen engine, you will need to drill a hole to use the second knock sensor. You will also need to swap the camshaft sprocket and the flywheel to get the right timing marks to use the 1st gen computer.



Just use a first gen engine controller that has had the fuel maps adjusted for the higher-flowing 2g engine.

the ignition and everything can just be transferred over from the 1G engine.. ther is no rule that it HAS to be coil over plug...

The only real problem with swapping, using the same equipment is Lean under WOT. all other running modes on the engine automatically adjust for the lean running due to the Oxygen sensor readings. So the pre-programed fuel maps need to be "richend" up a little bit.


.................................................. .....................



The first generation Pcm doesn't have output device for the SRTV Valve. The MTV valve work at 3000 rpm with 1st generation and for the 2nd generation the valve work at 5000 rpm. My felling about that, is to keep the 1st generation intake whit the 2 throttles bodys. Maybe you will lose some torque ( the 1st generation doesn't have the short and long runner design) but you will gain more HP


.................................................. ...................................




Quote:
Originally Posted by ACR View Post
The first generation Pcm doesn't have output device for the SRTV Valve. The MTV valve work at 3000 rpm with 1st generation and for the 2nd generation the valve work at 5000 rpm. My felling about that, is to keep the 1st generation intake whit the 2 throttles bodys. Maybe you will lose some torque ( the 1st generation doesn't have the short and long runner design) but you will gain more HP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Furball View Post
PLEASE take this with a grain of salt.

First off, the power gain from 336 grams of steel is negligable.
Rules of thumb:
Losing 8 lbs of carrying weight (body mass) will give you 1hp, as will losing 4lbs of rotating weight.
You need a gain of 30 hp to run .5 sec faster in the 1/4 (assuming everything else is equal, but then its only relative)

Softer valve springs dont give you more hp, they 'might' offer less of a parasitic drag loss, but will also make your valves float (hang ten if you get my drift) faster at higher rpm's.

OBDII has nothing to do with comp ratio (nor hp either), most cars still come out with OBDII.

Block weight has little to do with hp-weight ratio, less than the actual weight of the car does. Less weight up front will help handling, but if youre not talking couple hundred pounds, then the difference wont be noticed. Save for the freaky people who have data loggers built into their butt....

Over boring a block will increase your displacement, generally only gains in a few hp (7 sounds about right), you will see more tq though. But you can gain more hp by upping the comp ratio. Think about it, .2 liters from 6 cyls=.33l per cyl, not much of a 'jump'.

Remember kids, the more air that goes THROUGH an engine, the more power it makes.

all i have so far......
please add/correct as needed.


Last edited by gearhead291; 06-09-2010 at 01:20 AM.
gearhead291 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 12:00 AM
1st Gen FTW - It's AutoMedic!

 
cdmccul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Garrison, ND
Posts: 15,449
Feedback: 18 / 100%
                     
It is now stuck...

Nice place to gather the info, too bad some of it is counter argued and no real conclusions, but still a nice collection.
cdmccul is offline  
post #3 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 12:03 AM Thread Starter
Intrepid Pro
 
gearhead291's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: georgia
Posts: 5,642
Feedback: 2 / 75%
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdmccul View Post
It is now stuck...

Nice place to gather the info, too bad some of it is counter argued and no real conclusions, but still a nice collection.
yea, but i thought i was atleast somewhat relevant
gearhead291 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 12:06 AM
Dain bramaged

 
Veeb0rg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Maryland
Posts: 7,183
Feedback: 6 / 100%
                     
Don't forget the 2g oilpan won't clear the 1st gen engine cradle. One of them will have to be modified.
Veeb0rg is offline  
post #5 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 12:23 AM Thread Starter
Intrepid Pro
 
gearhead291's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: georgia
Posts: 5,642
Feedback: 2 / 75%
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veeb0rg View Post
Don't forget the 2g oilpan won't clear the 1st gen engine cradle. One of them will have to be modified.
so im assuming that the 1g oilpan wont fit on the 2g block???
gearhead291 is offline  
post #6 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 12:31 AM
Intrepid Pro
 
MegaTrep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: M'waukee, WI
Posts: 2,792
Feedback: 2 / 100%
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by gearhead291 View Post
so im assuming that the 1g oilpan wont fit on the 2g block???
IIRC, it will, but the oil passages are different or something. So it may bolt up, but it wont actually work.

Like I said in the whore thread, it is an absolute crap load of work, and theres only been a few people who have even attempted it, just to either pull their hair out afterward, or remove it because it was more trouble than they figured.

I've never seen those posts before, so thanks for bringing them to light! that is a lot of interesting facts that I did not know before.
MegaTrep is offline  
post #7 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 12:43 AM
Intrepid Pro
 
MegaTrep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: M'waukee, WI
Posts: 2,792
Feedback: 2 / 100%
                     
MegaTrep is offline  
post #8 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 12:44 AM Thread Starter
Intrepid Pro
 
gearhead291's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: georgia
Posts: 5,642
Feedback: 2 / 75%
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by MegaTrep View Post
IIRC, it will, but the oil passages are different or something. So it may bolt up, but it wont actually work.

Like I said in the whore thread, it is an absolute crap load of work, and theres only been a few people who have even attempted it, just to either pull their hair out afterward, or remove it because it was more trouble than they figured.

I've never seen those posts before, so thanks for bringing them to light! that is a lot of interesting facts that I did not know before.
so the crap load of work consists of what ?
i know it will bolt in, bolt to the tranny.
one motor mount has to be modded.
and the oil pain.

the only thing i can figure that would be so bad is the wiring, in which case i believe ACR said you could just use 1st gen upper/lower intake manifold & solve most of those problems. am i missing something ?

edit: reading other threads...
gearhead291 is offline  
post #9 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 01:13 AM Thread Starter
Intrepid Pro
 
gearhead291's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: georgia
Posts: 5,642
Feedback: 2 / 75%
                     
see, i couldnt even find those threads... now this thread seems pointless lol
i feel like such a noob right now
gearhead291 is offline  
post #10 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 01:18 AM
Intrepid Pro
 
MegaTrep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: M'waukee, WI
Posts: 2,792
Feedback: 2 / 100%
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by gearhead291 View Post
see, i couldnt even find those threads... now this thread seems pointless lol
i feel like such a noob right now
Not really, just the sticky is imo lol.

I couldnt find them either when I searched, so I had to go through the project forum and found them all. I'm very glad the pics still work though, might wanna save those on your comp just for the hell of it.

But yes, see what I mean that it is a serious PITA?
MegaTrep is offline  
post #11 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 01:21 AM Thread Starter
Intrepid Pro
 
gearhead291's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: georgia
Posts: 5,642
Feedback: 2 / 75%
                     
THOSE threads need to be sticky'd.
!!!!!
gearhead291 is offline  
post #12 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 01:39 AM Thread Starter
Intrepid Pro
 
gearhead291's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: georgia
Posts: 5,642
Feedback: 2 / 75%
                     
yea, wayy more of a pain in the ass than i was expecting.
i think ill go another route with my performance mods lol
gearhead291 is offline  
post #13 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 01:53 PM
Intrepid Pro
 
Squilliam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Greater Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 15,047
Feedback: 2 / 100%
                     
Man thats a shame too. A 1G weighs less than a 2G. That wouldve been a quick car.
Squilliam is offline  
post #14 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-09-2010, 05:02 PM
Intrepid Modder
 
re330's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: quebec,canada
Posts: 760
Feedback: 2 / 100%
                     
could a first gen 3.5 intake be fitted onto a 2.7L fore more responce?
re330 is offline  
post #15 of 18 (permalink) Old 06-10-2010, 12:41 AM Thread Starter
Intrepid Pro
 
gearhead291's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: georgia
Posts: 5,642
Feedback: 2 / 75%
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by re330 View Post
could a first gen 3.5 intake be fitted onto a 2.7L fore more responce?
seriously doubt it. im sure there are 1st gen 3.5 & 2nd gen 2.7 in a yard near you, you could go do some experimenting
gearhead291 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the DodgeIntrepid.Net Forums - Dodge Intrepid, Concorde, 300m and Eagle Vision chat forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Member names may only be composed of alpha-numeric characters. (A-Z and 0-9)

!!ATTENTION ADVERTISERS!! If you intend on advertising anything on this forum, whatsoever, you are required to first contact us here . Additionaly, we do NOT allow BUSINESS NAMES unless you are an Authorized Vendor. If you own a business, and want to do sales on this site via posting or private message, you will need to follow the rules. Shops, Stores, Distributors, Group Buys without being authorized will see your account terminated.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Linear Mode
Rate This Thread:



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome