I m another unfortunate 99 Intrepid owner.
It looks like we are finally going to get some help.

Attorney David Roloff is already working with some experts to identify the defect in the engine that is causing the sludge build up. He needs to get one that will be will to testify on our behalf against Chrysler. YOU NEED TO ACT NOW.

Call him to be part of the lawsuit. He is serious about this problem. CALL ATTORNEY DAVID ROLOFF AT 1-800-321-9199

Please go on the internet and pass this info to as many people as possible there are thousands of us out there. Let s get them together. We deserve justice. Remember it s also for anyone who owns a Dodge 2.7L engine with sludge (Intrepids, Concordes, Stratus)

Mine just poped and is full of metal shavings

 

at my dealership we have been warranty them since day 1. the changed several things with the new 2.7L. all oil gallerys are a little larger and engine runs 10-20 degrees cooler then earlier 2.7L to avoid future lawsuits.

 

what year did they do that?

 

I have heard on other forums from Intrepid owners that if you run synthetic oil (like Mobil 1) in the 2.7l V6, the engine will not sludge. What do you think?

 

I'm running Mobil 1 extended performance and its holding up for me so far. just as a precaution i use motor flush every oil change too.

 

Good idea. I really wish they would have just carried over the 3.3L from the first generation for the base engine. If they would have done this they would not have had this problem in the first place. Then my father would have ended up with an Intrepid instead of another boring Taurus![:'(]

 

the 3.3 lacked 40 horsepower to my 2.7L. for a base engine that 40 hp is very nice. your 3.5 which was the best offered on first gen only had 15 hp over my base model. it was a good improvement for the better. and when they designed it they didn't know ti would f*ck up, so you cant say if they never made it there wouldn't be this problem. my dad has always been an lh person. we had had our share of both first gen and second gen.

the 3.3 also pulled 19/27mpg. my 2.7 manages 20/28mpg even after the extra 40 hp. the 2.7 even though it has f*cked up is a much better engine.

 

The 2.7L does produce more horsepower, but it produces it at a higher rpm and less torque as well. If the 1998 model had the 1998-2000 version had the specs of the 3.3L from the mininvan. This would have had 158hp and 203ft-lbs of torque which would be down 42 hp but 11 ft-lbs more than your 2.7L. The hp would have been down 3 but the torque would have been up 22ft-lbs. In 2001, the 3.3L received an update with the current 180hp and 210ft-lbs. In this case you would have had only 20 hp less but 18 more ft-lbs of tq. When this happened they were able to get 2 extra mpg in comparasion to the older model.

I have driven both the 3.3L and 2.7L powered versions of the Intrepid and I found that the 3.3L felt better at the lower-end (a characteristic of a OHV enigne) but the 2.7L was better if you push it more. As for the fuel economy ratings that you listed. The pre-96 version also had 20/28. They really made no really changes to the engine that I know of so I don't know why the drop 1/1 mpg. The fuel economy rating changed a lot on the second generation though. In 98, the 2.7L was at 21/30 and the 3.2L was at 19/29. I think the 3.2L would have been the best base engine though 225hp & 225ft-lbs of torque at those fuel economy ratings.

It depends on what you value more. I just prefer the 3.3L after seeing so many with well over 200,000 miles with no problems. My 3.5 might only produce 14 hp but it produces 29 ft-lbs of torque more as well. The SOHC design helps to bring the hp & tq at a lower rpm than a DOHC, but the DOHC tends to maximize on the amount of hp & torque that can be produced with an engine. I knew a person who owned a 3.5 first generation Intrepid and traded it in for a second generation Intrepid 2.7L, and they said they could not believe the difference between the two in the acceleration. VVT fixes the low end grunt for DOHC most of the time, so I am hoping that if they are planning on using the 2.7L in more cars in the future. That they will use the Dual-VVT technology that they are using on the new "World Engine" 4 cylinders, on the 2.7L as well as the 3.5L.

 

There is nothing wrong with the design of this engine. What Chrysler failed to do was indicate that this particular vehicle/engine requires a more stringent maintence schedule, and probably should have specified synthetic oil for schedule "B" on 2.7L engines.

I have many 2nd gen Intrepids come into the shop that are RELIGIOUSLY serviced and have well over 100k on their 2.7's

I have seen a small handfull of chain guides breaking, and NO sludge. Definitely not a maintence issue there.

My point is, DCX failed to convey this to their customers... Serviced properly, the 2.7 is a fine engine. It's just that "proper" service intervals are much more stringent than most consumers are used to, or were informed of.

The newer 2.7's I see have oil coolers on them also. We all know these run hot. Hell, 190bhp from 2.7L is pretty impressive. It's just working it's *** of to do so.

I feel if you can prove you did the required oil changes, and you have a sludge problem, Chrysler should step up to the plate.

 

I have also heard that they increased the oil passages, which should help eliminate the problem.