Chrysler group CEO Tom LaSorda says that the company is considering developing a new line of V6 engines -- a decision he expects will be made by the end of the year. The engines will likely fit the Chrysler 300/Dodge Magnum/Dodge Charger platform, which is expected to go through a redesign in 2009. The plants being considered for the business are the Trenton Engine plant in Trenton, Mich.; Toledo Machine in Perrysburg, Ohio; and Kenosha (Wis.) Engine, but Chrysler's big boss says that the UAW has to be willing to change the work rules and stay competitive.
Unlike the company's four-banger that currently hauls around the Dodge Caliber and will serve to power the Jeep Copmass and Jeep Liberty, the new V6 engines will be developed completely in-house. The V6 lineup may also contain a diesel, but that has not yet been confirmed.
[Source: Autoweek]
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
In the Autoblog Garage: Aprilia RSV 1000 R
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jason @ Jun 21st 2006 8:10AM
They need to focus on learning how to make a car interior and forget everything else for a year or two.
GhostDoggy @ Jun 21st 2006 8:23AM
I thought their lacking was in the transmission department.
Michael G @ Jun 21st 2006 9:28AM
It does NOT have a HEMI!
DJ @ Jun 21st 2006 9:41AM
"#2. I thought their lacking was in the transmission department."
Chrysler has a 6-speed coming out toward the end of this year. It's going to be available first in the restyled Pacifica with the sorta new 4.0L V6 (it's apparently a bored out version of the current 3.5L). After that, it'll spread throughout the lineup.
It will be interesting if these are truly new engines or reconstituted blocks from the Mother Ship.
Mike @ Jun 21st 2006 10:15AM
the Phoenix engine project has been well known for quite some time. This is a from-scratch design and should be incredible engines.
"I thought their lacking was in the transmission department"
^^^ their transmission problems in the cars dissapeared in the FWD vehicles after a reworking in 2001. The RWD vehicles (LX) have a bulletproof transmission. This is an old, common misconception, carried over from the 80's and early/mid 90's.
Mr Fletcher @ Jun 21st 2006 10:51AM
#4 I thought the new 4.0L V6 was a clean sheet design.
I wish DCX would do one good design and create a series of engines from that one design like Nissan did with their VQ series. I'm tired of the "we have these truck engines and we have these other engines over here for cars" mentality. Seems a waste of engineering resources to me.
Having said all that I hope they take what they learned from the New World Engine (the new 4 cylinder) and apply the good stuff to these new V6s.
#1 I'll agree with you on the interiors. The designs and layouts themselves don't seem bad, but DCX needs to make it look nicer by using better materials.
Todd Blumel @ Jun 21st 2006 1:38PM
Isn't the world engine destine for the "Jeep Patriot" not "Jeep Liberty"?
MarkWeb @ Jun 21st 2006 1:53PM
You hit the nail on the head:
"They need to focus on learning how to make a car interior and forget everything else for a year or two."
I think the current V-6's are really competitive - look at the output, and even the acceleration (Charge with 3.5 is surprisingly quick in the test I saw).
The 2.7 is a terrific engine - it just needs wider distribution (how about in the PT, and in the standard size van instead of the anemic 4 they use in the base model?).
Chrysler's weaknesses right now are its automatic transmissions (I just discoverd how much better the GM automatics are, when we got an Impala) and its interiors. Not its V-6's. (But they'd better start work now on the V-6's because it will take years to bring them to market; and, yes, the 4 cylinder is a good model, with vvt, to follow.)
PJ @ Jun 21st 2006 3:54PM
Count me in the "V6 upgrade needed" camp. The 2.7 and 3.5 aren't bad engines in isolation, but they definitely have a coarse, ragged edge to them in direct comparison with a Toyota, Honda, Nissan, or Mitsubishi V6.
The 2.7 is becoming especially outdated as midsize family cars get bigger and heavier. It works okay in the Stratus/Sebring, but still doesn't feel particularly strong. And in the 300/Magnum/Charger, it's simply an embarrassment. 0-60 times for those models are in the 11-second range, if I remember correctly. V6 Accords, Camrys, and Altimas do it in a little more than half that (although they arguably don't need to).
The 3.5, on the other hand, is pretty good. But it still needs some NVH work, and engines like Nissan's VQ feel markedly stronger despite the similar HP figures. It comes down to whether DCX wants to lead this class, or simply keep up. The current 3.5 is fine for the latter ambition, but not for the former.
Frank @ Jun 21st 2006 7:23PM
Chrysler may sh*t bricks also....one never knows.
MikeW @ Jun 21st 2006 7:33PM
The 4.0 is a stroked version of the 3.5, not bored out.
Ironic considering the 3.5 has 4.45" bore centers, ~17mm between cylinders. BMW N52 91mm bore centers, 85mm bore ~6mm between cylinders.
The new six speed automatic will probably be the worst 6 speed auto, because fundamentally it is still the 4 speed automatic. 2.842, 1.573, 1, 0.689 R 2.21, chrysler made an 'anti-overdrive' ratio of 1.452
So 1st is 1.452x2.842=4.127
2nd is 2.842 by itself
3rd is 1.452x1.573=2.284
4th is 1.573 by itself
5th is 1:1
6th is 0.689
and a 4th Prime is the 'anti-overdrive' ratio of 1.452
Chrysler's V6 are non-competitive because of no variable valve timing, or camshaft switching.
Chrysler also removed the EGR for the 2002 model year of the LH2 platform.
Maybe Chrysler should borrow the cam lobe switching system from Mitsubishi's 3.8 V6s.