DodgeIntrepid.Net Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
587 Posts
a 1st gen can beat a 2nd gen? sweet! Other than the power curve, is the 2nd gen much heavier than the 1st gen? Or is it lighter?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,279 Posts
94IntrepidES said:
You guys always ask how a 3.5 1st can beat a 3.2 2nd gen. Here are the power curves for you guys to point out and see why.

[[/url]
Cool. I've wondered how to get these. Thanks a lot. Got one hiding anywhere for the 3.3?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,217 Posts
ive seen 3.3 vs. 2.7, the 3.3 slightly outpowers the 2.7 in both hp and tq until about 5k when the 3.3s powerband dies off the and 2.7s keeps on climbing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
791 Posts
Where did you get those.

I want to find one for 95-97. It should be different because the peaks changed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
623 Posts
3.2 rulez
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
791 Posts
BUMP

Can anyone help with my question on the change between 94 - 95?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,279 Posts
FunkRider said:
MMM TORQUE!

It looks like the Second gen 3.2 and 3.5's could use a higher redline.
I disagree. 6400 is high enough; who wants to beat their engine to death winding it out to get power? What they need is more torque at lower RPMS. Maybe some of you can afford to replace thrashed out cars, but I can't do it that often. I'd be happier if DC had put the 3.8 (215HP) from the Caravan into the Intrepid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,217 Posts
ditto that, and the pacifica, and the new lx's(2.7 in THOSE cars? are they RETARDED?!!)

or they should finally stroke the 3.5 out to 3.8 and tune it run on premium like they SHOULD. doesnt matter what it makes on midgrade, nissan sells a million VQ's because of their numbers on premium. believe me, everybody loves 4th gen maximas, for example, but on cheap gas they are SLOW and make almost 40 less hp at the crank. pretty much all of dodges v6s make their rated numbers on regular or mid grade gas to begin with, so in a way its more accurate for some people, but i would rather have it tuned to take advantage of higher octane and compression than just make decent power on regular gas. :/

hell, if the 2.7 wasnt designed to run on regular it may make 225hp, who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,498 Posts
CluelessinMO said:
I disagree. 6400 is high enough; who wants to beat their engine to death winding it out to get power? What they need is more torque at lower RPMS. Maybe some of you can afford to replace thrashed out cars, but I can't do it that often. I'd be happier if DC had put the 3.8 (215HP) from the Caravan into the Intrepid.
I disagree to that. I'm just saying they could get more power if the revlimter was a little higher. Belive me, the 3.2 and 3.5 could sping to 7000+ without ill effects.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,279 Posts
Vigo said:
ditto that, and the pacifica, and the new lx's(2.7 in THOSE cars? are they RETARDED?!!)

or they should finally stroke the 3.5 out to 3.8 and tune it run on premium like they SHOULD. doesnt matter what it makes on midgrade, nissan sells a million VQ's because of their numbers on premium. believe me, everybody loves 4th gen maximas, for example, but on cheap gas they are SLOW and make almost 40 less hp at the crank. pretty much all of dodges v6s make their rated numbers on regular or mid grade gas to begin with, so in a way its more accurate for some people, but i would rather have it tuned to take advantage of higher octane and compression than just make decent power on regular gas. :/

hell, if the 2.7 wasnt designed to run on regular it may make 225hp, who knows.
Love that quote from Carroll Shelby. Wish I could agree on the premium gas, but around here it's 20 cents a gallon more. What a gigantic ripoff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,279 Posts
FunkRider said:
I disagree to that. I'm just saying they could get more power if the revlimter was a little higher. Belive me, the 3.2 and 3.5 could sping to 7000+ without ill effects.
Since we're in diasagree mode, I disagree again. I don't want to have to run around with the shifter locked into a lower gear so I can be at an appropriate RPM to have power. Torque rules!
You're undoubtedly right that the 3.2/3.5 could stand 7K without much modification. I just don't want to have to go there to get my power. :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
1st Gen power! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,052 Posts
FunkRider said:
MMM TORQUE!

It looks like the Second gen 3.2 and 3.5's could use a higher redline.

Absolutely true! You sir are a Steely Eyed engine man.

I washed my dyno numbers through a program that optimizes shift points and it came back with 6400, 6600, and 6800 as the optimal shift points for my 2nd gen 3.5 HO. I had my rev limiter moved up to 8000 but I still have the forced shift by the TCM at 6500 in the 1-2 and 2-3 shifts and 5700 :mad: on the 3-4 shift.

I need to figure a way to lock out OD while still letting the computer control the first two shifts. My 3.5 has seen 7500 during burnouts. She still rocks.

Don
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top