How many different "families" of 4 cylinder inline engines has Chrysler built since the K-car days, and, what are their available sizes? Which ones are considered highly reliable and which are shitpiles? I know that's a broad question, but is there a simple basic overview?
Do they share the aft bolt pattern with the V-6's? Are some adaptible for RWD and some not?
The 2.4 l 150 hp 4 in the PT Cruiser is very dependable if not just a bit underpowered. In 70,000 miles I have never had an issue and it still displays low oil consumption. I have always used Mobil 1 5W-30 and I change it twice a year. At 40,000 miles I changed the ignition wires and put in dual plat plugs. That's it.
There is a full description of the engines used in Chrysler products on allpar.com.
I believe that "K" cars from the early 1980's, started with the 2.2 and the Mitsubishi 2.6. The 2.6 was later replaced with the 2.5. 1995 was the last year for the 2.2 and 2.5. A new 2.0 and 2.4 were introduced for the cloud cars and the re-designed van for 1996. The 2.0 was not available for the van.
The 2.2, from 1981 through 1995. Chrysler-designed, Chrysler-built. Sturdy and durable. Power ranges from 80hp in the early carbureted versions to
224hp in the '91-'93 DOHC turbo version.
The Chrysler 2.5, from 1986 through 1995. Chrysler-designed, Chrysler-built. Study, smooth and durable. Power ranges from 100hp in the plain TBI version to 170hp in the seldom-seen intercooled turbo version (150hp in the non-intercooled turbo version). Also built in a RWD version for use in base-model Dakota pickup trucks.
The Jeep 2.5, from ?? to date. Not made in a FWD transverse version, only mentioned here because it can be found in Dodge Dakotas, too, and is not at all the same as the Chrysler 2.5.
The 2.0 and 2.4, from 1995 to date. Chrysler-designed, Chrysler-built. Reasonably dependable; earlier versions tended to eat head gaskets. No RWD version.
There was also the 2.6 (1981-1986), but it was a Bitsushitti design/build unit. No RWD version.
I think you're right, and *some* of those mitus used the Chrysler "baby
904" rear-drive transmission- which is the good old A904 in a more compact case. But given the fact that the 2.6 had a new head casting every other year, there's no telling if the block had the same bolt pattern on the Mitsu cars as it did on the FWD Chryslers, either.
My guess is the 2.5 Jeep shares the bolt pattern with the 4.0 and 258 Jeep engines, a venerable design originated at Nash when MM was in diapers.
Everyonne likes to rag on Mits, but their diesels are reliable, tough little powerplants, as are at least some of their gas engines. Morbark chippers used them for a long, long time. Thermo-King apparently used a few as well, though most are Isuzu or MBZ powered.
How hard would it be to mate the FWD 2.5 or the current 2.4 to a RWD trans and fab some motor mounts?
Correction Mr Stern - there was indeed a RWD 2.6 - was installed in the Challenger/Sapporo and mini Ram pickups and Raiders. Also installed in the "fire arrow" and several RWD Mitsubishi branded vehicles
1) No. The Jeep 2.5 is not the same as the GM Iron Duke.
2) There were *two* 2.5-litre 4-cylinders and a 2.2 used in the Dodge Dakota. From 1987-1988, a longitudinal version of the Chrysler passenger car 2.2 was used. From 1989 through 1995, a larger 2.5-litre longitudinal version of the Chrysler passenger car engine was used. Starting in 1996, this Chrysler engine was replaced by the AMC-Jeep 2.5, manufactured in the Kenosha, WI plant.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.