Chrysler: 98 Concorde LXi engines

John Gregory wrote:
 


I personally would opt for the 3.5 (or 3.2 if buying a used one, the 3.2
is no longer available) instead of the 2.7. It does seem to have some
reliability issues that the 3.2 and 3.5 do not, mostly relating to the
fact that its an interference engine with a very long chain-drive to the
overhead cams which is prone to lose tension, jump time, and wreck the
engine. The 3.2 and 3.5 are belt-timed, but they're non-interference
engines. Also there have been lots of reports that the 2.7 tends to run
a higher oil temperature than most engines and as a result tends to
create sludge (which may be responsible for the timing chain problems,
too). I would think that religious oil changes with synthetic oil would
take care of that, but to me that seems like a band-aid.

50K repair free and trouble free miles on my 2000 Intrepid with 2.7L
using Mobil 1 5W30, PureOne PL14670 or Wix 51085 filter and 8 ounces
Marvel Mystery Oil with each oil 5K mile change. Add an additional 8
ounces MMO at 100 to 500 miles before oil change. No oil consumption
between changes noted. Have inspected under valve cover with flexible
bore scope. No sludging seen. Everything nice and clean.

Do same with the wife's '96 Intrepid with 3.5L at 98K miles (10W30 Mobil
1). Noted a 1/2 qt oil loss at last 5K miles oil change.

Important thing is to get the engine up to normal operating temp each
time you start it. Boils off moisture caused by internal combustion
process.




Steve wrote:
 

Thanks Steve. I appreciate the opinion. Question though; what's "an
interference engine"?

"Steve" <thanks> wrote in message
news:net... 
to 

John Gregory wrote:
 

An engine where the valves and piston occupy the same space during
different parts of the cycle. If the timing chain or belt breaks, the
cams stop rotating and a valve (or valves) will remain open, but the
crank keeps spinning and smashes the heads of the open valves off when
the piston goes up on that cylinder.

A non-interference engine is one where the pistons cannot strike the
valves even if the valves are fully open when the piston comes up to
top-dead-center.

Just to add, historically, interference engines would use chains (and
not belts) because chains last a long.long time. Honda is known to
build interference engines with belts. If you don't follow
maintenence interval in changing belt you will lose your engine some
day. Toyota's belt engines historically on non-interference. When
the 2nd generation Chyrlser 3.5 liter engine came out some people
thought it was a belted interference engine unlike its non
interference predessor. I believe poor documentation was the
culprit. According to belt suppliers it is non interference.



"Steve" <thanks> wrote in message
news:net... 
"an 
the 
when 

Mike Behnke wrote: 

I'm just over 100k miles on my '99 Concorde with the 2.7. I also use
MMO and Purolator Pure Ones™, but use Castrol GTX (mix 10W-30 and
20W-50). Did have one episode of clogged bend in PCV hose just upstream
of PCV valve, but I think that happened before I bought the car at 58k
miles. Engine runs great, clean inside.

FWIW, I'm of the opinion that, to fight sludge, you only need either MMO
*or* synthetic - not both (Ithough it won't hurt to use both) since
synthetic does a good job of cleaning things up and/or keeping them
clean due ot its inherent properties.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Art Begun wrote: 

And (I believe) every Hyundai and Dihatsu engine ever made has a belt
driven cam and has interference. Imagine that - a low end vehicle
bought by consumers who are the least likely to do regular maintenance
or understand the implications of a belt breaking beign the most likely
to self destruct from a scenario inherently designed to void the
warranty.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Art Begun wrote:
 

Are you sure about this? When I last checked the Gates list, the 2nd gen.
3.2L & 3.5L were both listed as interfererence engines. The service
manual doesn't seem to say one way or another, but I infer that indeed
they are interference. Why do you suspect that they are not? I am
curious.

(Either way I will get the belt replaced before the 105,000 miles are up.
For some reason CA emissions vehicles, which a number of states now
mandate, list a very slightly increased interval between timing belt
changes. Spark plug wire (which are thin and low voltage in the LHs)
replacement intervals are also very slightly longer for CA vehicles..
Anybody know why?)