[oh2o]

tundrakiller, on Dec 24 2008, 02:06 PM, said:

has anyone heard any news of the ram getting the 3.6 phoenix v6 rated at 280hp i hope so the 3.7 is way out classed.

Not sure exactly when yet (either 2010 or 2011 MY), but the Ram is on the list for a 3.6L or two (base 3.6L and DI 3.6L). And later down the road, a V8 Phoenix :)

[superduckie5000]

Someday in a Couple of MY's.

TMD

[Erik Latranyi]

If the Phoenix engines give the Ram decent torque and best-in-class fuel economy, then expect to see it.

[superduckie5000]

A Question Will the Phoenix Engines Be the Only V-6's????????????????????????

And the Answer Too.



TMD

[BR Miller]

There's a rumor at AprilFools.com that the Phoenix is being canceled in favor of a turbocharged version of the 2.4. The 3.3 will be revived and will become the standard high-end engine. :lol:

[superduckie5000]

Have You got Any Idea How OLD Much of the Tooling is for the 3.3L & 3.8L Is ??????????????

And How Long It Was Run 24/7 for Years On End !

In a Couple Years I WILL Be at the END of It's Useful Life !

Kind'a Like a Car With 300K Miles with the Orginal Engine & Trans.

The Mad Duck

[93XJMOPARMAN]

superduckie5000, on Dec 26 2008, 07:43 PM, said:

Have You got Any Idea How OLD Much of the Tooling is for the 3.3L & 3.8L Is ??????????????

And How Long It Was Run 24/7 for Years On End !

In a Couple Years I WILL Be at the END of It's Useful Life !

Kind'a Like a Car With 300K Miles with the Orginal Engine & Trans.

The Mad Duck

Looks like allpar needs to get a MOPAR superduckie5000 master rebuild kit. :lol:

[Wizard]

MadDuck is right on the age of tooling of 3.3/3.8 age. Designed and used since '89; startup and manufacturing for 1990 introducation on caravans and other vehicles.

Now almost 20 years. Gee.

Cheers, Wizard

[CommanderFish]

oh2o, on Dec 25 2008, 03:09 AM, said:

Not sure exactly when yet (either 2010 or 2011 MY), but the Ram is on the list for a 3.6L or two (base 3.6L and DI 3.6L). And later down the road, a V8 Phoenix :)

Question: Why are they even bothering with non-DI Phoenix's?

(Unless they're for everywhere except NA and Europe, I just don't see the point)

[goodnightjohnwayne]

CommanderFish, on Dec 28 2008, 02:58 PM, said:

Question: Why are they even bothering with non-DI Phoenix's?

(Unless they're for everywhere except NA and Europe, I just don't see the point)

There's still a significant price differential between port and direct injection. Moreover, there is a noticeable clicking noise from a direct injected gasoline engine, and direct injection engines tend to use a little more oil that conventional engines.

[Wizard]

What are you gibbering about? Sounds like you are not talking about phoenix engines at all. You were referring to recent other makers who have DI engine for last few years. We're talking about chrysler phoneix IN PARTICULAR and we still do not have the information and chrysler is keeping this lid strapped down really good.

The ONLY difference is the location of injection of fuel, extra oil comsumpation have NOTHING to do with that, this sounds like a maker have DESIGN issues with rings or piston even the block casting design. For example saturn 2.0L engines in past has the oil burning issues.

Cheers, Wizard

This post has been edited by Wizard: 28 December 2008 - 04:00 PM

[Mike V.]

goodnightjohnwayne, on Dec 28 2008, 02:33 PM, said:

There's still a significant price differential between port and direct injection. Moreover, there is a noticeable clicking noise from a direct injected gasoline engine, and direct injection engines tend to use a little more oil that conventional engines.

You know this is true for the Phoenix engine? Please give us your "credible source or independent testor" since you insist it from everyone else... but you never have one.

Comparing the GM 2.0 DI to the Phoenix is an apples and oranges comparison... especially since there is probably no way in Heck that you have actually seen or heard a Phoenix DI actually running in front of you.

Mike

superduckie5000, on Dec 26 2008, 07:43 PM, said:

Have You got Any Idea How OLD Much of the Tooling is for the 3.3L & 3.8L Is ??????????????

And How Long It Was Run 24/7 for Years On End !

In a Couple Years I WILL Be at the END of It's Useful Life !

Kind'a Like a Car With 300K Miles with the Orginal Engine & Trans.

The Mad Duck

Sadly, as terrible as everyone claims the 3.3 and the 3.8 to be, they take a licking and keep on ticking. This includes all the manufacturing equipment too. ;) Not bad for 20+ years if you include all the design and testing phases of the engines.

Mike

This post has been edited by Mike V.: 29 December 2008 - 10:27 AM

[superduckie5000]

A Little More On the 3.3/3.L Tooling. There are 2 Block Lines for these Engines. Dept 621 & 521. 621 Was Put in as the a Combo 3.3/3.8L Line. It has Had a Number of Upgrades, Machines that had Major Rebuilds, and Machines that Were Out Right Replaced.
621 Has a New Final Hone ( For Better Bores To Help Help Meet Emissions Requirements), a New/Upgraded Final Bore, Major Rebuilt Rough Bore & a New OP 40 (The First Transfer Machine in the Line). This Was All Done in the Last 4 to 5 Years. This Line Now Make 3.8L Engines Because it Can Out Produce Dept 521 that Now Makes 3.3L Engines. Dept 521 Started Life as the 3.5L OHC Block Line. It Was Converted to 3.8L OHV Line after the End of the Iron 3.5L. This Line Now Makes 3.3L Blocks. It Has Been Upgraded With Many of the Same Items as Dept 621. There Was a New 3.8L Crank Line Installed about 8 Years Ago. The Old Crank Line Got New Final Lappers (For Better Micro Finish) and a Number of Rebuilds & Upgrades. 2 Nice Landis Finish Main Bearing Grinders That Were About 1 1/2 Years Old Were Removed From the Old 2.0L Neon Line And Reworked for the 3.3/3.8L's Old Crank Line. That was Done Last Year. The Cam Line Had the Lobe Mills Rebuild In House and Helped Cam Quality A LOT. Dept. 638 (3.3/3.8L Assembly Line) Had Extensive Work Done Before the RT Mini Van and Jeep Umlimited Came Out. The 4.0L Alum. Engine is Make on the Old Rebuilt 3.5L Alum Engine Tooling & Assy. Line. However, They did Put in a New Finish Crank Line & Reused the Old New Final Lapper. But thats a Long Story About the "New Old" Crank Lapper. Someone Else Can Tell the Story About the Train Wreck. Also No One Got Got Hurt in That Event Thank God.

The Mad Duck

[ShadowRider]

superduckie5000, on Dec 29 2008, 12:41 PM, said:

A Little More On the 3.3/3.L Tooling. There are 2 Block Lines for these Engines. Dept 621 & 521. 621 Was Put in as the a Combo 3.3/3.8L Line. It has Had a Number of Upgrades, Machines that had Major Rebuilds, and Machines that Were Out Right Replaced.
621 Has a New Final Hone ( For Better Bores To Help Help Meet Emissions Requirements), a New/Upgraded Final Bore, Major Rebuilt Rough Bore & a New OP 40 (The First Transfer Machine in the Line). This Was All Done in the Last 4 to 5 Years. This Line Now Make 3.8L Engines Because it Can Out Produce Dept 521 that Now Makes 3.3L Engines. Dept 521 Started Life as the 3.5L OHC Block Line. It Was Converted to 3.8L OHV Line after the End of the Iron 3.5L. This Line Now Makes 3.3L Blocks. It Has Been Upgraded With Many of the Same Items as Dept 621. There Was a New 3.8L Crank Line Installed about 8 Years Ago. The Old Crank Line Got New Final Lappers (For Better Micro Finish) and a Number of Rebuilds & Upgrades. 2 Nice Landis Finish Main Bearing Grinders That Were About 1 1/2 Years Old Were Removed From the Old 2.0L Neon Line And Reworked for the 3.3/3.8L's Old Crank Line. That was Done Last Year. The Cam Line Had the Lobe Mills Rebuild In House and Helped Cam Quality A LOT. Dept. 638 (3.3/3.8L Assembly Line) Had Extensive Work Done Before the RT Mini Van and Jeep Umlimited Came Out. The 4.0L Alum. Engine is Make on the Old Rebuilt 3.5L Alum Engine Tooling & Assy. Line. However, They did Put in a New Finish Crank Line & Reused the Old New Final Lapper. But thats a Long Story About the "New Old" Crank Lapper. Someone Else Can Tell the Story About the Train Wreck. Also No One Got Got Hurt in That Event Thank God.

The Mad Duck

what year did Dept 521 become Dept 821? I know it was before I got there in '99.

[Wizard]

I know these 3.3/3.8L are very good engines.

And, goodnightjohnwayne, out with the bias. And state your reasons. And I saw you have strong bias for western vehicles and small engines. Why? You have to consider whole thing not just for western stuff.

Cheers, Wizard

[eekamouse]

Mike V., on Dec 29 2008, 11:25 AM, said:

Sadly, as terrible as everyone claims the 3.3 and the 3.8 to be, they take a licking and keep on ticking. This includes all the manufacturing equipment too. ;) Not bad for 20+ years if you include all the design and testing phases of the engines.

Mike

Actually, I know several people who had terrible problems with the 3.3-3.8 engines. Granted they were high miles, near 200,000 miles, but the aluminum heads, and iron block strike again. I don't know what it was with Chrysler's choice in aluminum back then, but pourous transaxle cases, and lots of heat expansion and cooling, caused a lot of warp on the heads resulting in blown head gaskets.

I hope the phoenix rises in the Dakota before the Ram.

[Jim Z]

Quote

Actually, I know several people who had terrible problems with the 3.3-3.8 engines.

it's only anecdotal, but the only common problem with the 3.3/3.8 I ran into while wrenching was the tendency for the accessory belt tensioner mounting bolt to snap.

[ShadowRider]

eekamouse, on Dec 30 2008, 05:22 PM, said:

Actually, I know several people who had terrible problems with the 3.3-3.8 engines. Granted they were high miles, near 200,000 miles, but the aluminum heads, and iron block strike again. I don't know what it was with Chrysler's choice in aluminum back then, but pourous transaxle cases, and lots of heat expansion and cooling, caused a lot of warp on the heads resulting in blown head gaskets.

I hope the phoenix rises in the Dakota before the Ram.

Not that many years ago a 100,000 miles was about average for an engine to go before it needed major work so I would say that the 3.3 and 3.8's are holding up just fine. All it would take to warp the aluminum heads would be for the coolant to get rather low. Not unheard of on a high mileage minivan.

This post has been edited by ShadowRider: 30 December 2008 - 10:09 PM

[Truth]

Phoenix Engines absolutely coming for RAM in 'bout 2 Years