The 3.3L/3.8L are pushrod motors with a torquey low-end. They're light truck engines, really, and serve that purpose well. The 3.8L actually made it into some passenger cars in the early 90s in the AC bodies -- Dynasty, New Yorker, etc. They were long lived in that application too.
The 2.7L and 3.2L/3.5L are overhead camshaft design engines. It turns out, the marketing of cars is such that you'll sell more of them when your engine is perceived to be "high tech". GM even has a "high feature" engine family, I believe it's a 3.6LV6 with DOHC and 4 valves per cylinder. Engine design is largely driven by marketing targeted at the sort of folks who buy new cars. People who want to buy a snappy new car want to be able to tell their friends how cool the engine design is, even if they don't understand what it means. Truck engines, on the other hand, are designed to serve a different market, one that places more value on torque and towing performance. You'll notice that the Hemi is a pushrod design; this is no accident. The 4.7LV8 in Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dakotas, however is an ohc engine. Why? Because those vehicles have more of an expectation to be used as passenger cars! Same for the low-end Ram pickups that get that engine. --Geoff On 4/12/07, Craig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > My 94 Intrepid had the 3.3 and I loved the whiney turbine sound it > made on acceleration. When it was totalled by a hit and run driver in > a stolen car, I replaced it with a 95 Intrepid ES with the 3.5 which > was more powerful, but wasn't as smooth. Seemed to growl and rumble on > hard acceleration. But a great engine, nonetheless. > > I also had a 94 Caravan with the 3.3 which was rated at less > horsepower. Smooth runner! > > Trouble was, the 3.3 had been around a LONG time already, and was old > technology. 2 valves, instead of 4, per cylinder. Pushrods, instead of > overhead cam. Etc. Not to mention gas mileage was never good on the 3.3 > > I have the 2.7 in my Sebring Convertible, and get great mileage with > awesome power. Other than that, It's just my opinion. I truly do not > know why Chrysler ditched the 3.3 Isn't it still in Caravans and > Voyagers? > > Craig C, > > > > > > > Web: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dodge_intrepid> > Subscribe: <mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Unsubscribe: <mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Moderator: <mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- --Geoff MML Moderator/Admin/Website Admin/Map Keeper '92 Acclaim; '03 Grand Caravan; '04 Jeep Grand Cherokee http://www.moparmailinglist.com Gizmo Project (Free VOIP): ggariepy68 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Web: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dodge_intrepid> Subscribe: <mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unsubscribe: <mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Moderator: <mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dodge_intrepid/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dodge_intrepid/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
