Would the 2.6

[88AriesLEwagon]

I've wondered if a late 1.8/2.0 Mitsubishi DOHC would make a good substitute?
However you would be stuck with the Mitsu automatic or manual trans,
and have to wire up for OBDII and have all the exhaust,trans computer and everything else.

Shame Chrysler/Mitsu didnt offer something else decent back then (80s),but it seems the 2.6 was as "good" as it got,for that application.
Of course the 2.2 is far superior....but thats another story.

With all Mopar's focus on Hemis,big blocks,magnum small blocks as new long block/crate engines,
why no replacement,performance engine for pre OBDII FWD cars?
I'll tell you why,price!
Imagine at least $5K for a new engine....
Nobody would spend that on an old K based car.
MAYBE a mint Daytona/Laser,or original minivan,but NEVER a P car,K,or E.
But really,a Brand new,non balance shaft 2.5 (or even bigger) with bigger cam,high compression pistons,and provision for carb,TBI,MPI with proper SMEC availability would be a boon to vintage FWD(rich) owners.

[89ARIES]

Lack of knowledge can kill the best intentions. Look here at this link. One
can get a rebuilt 2.6 for much less than $5000.

http://www.gotengines.com/blog/mitsubis ... r-engines/

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/MITSUBIS ... 1c18893335

[nszotovich]

A good thing to keep in mind for all 2.6 owners.

[88AriesLEwagon]

I wasnt saying that you could or should buy a 2.6 for $5000.00
What I was trying to get across is Mopar is reproducing performance small blocks,big blocks,Hemis,
but nothing for the 4 bangers,or slant 6s for that matter.
I guess in reality,Chrysler is a bit ashamed of those.
However,its the bread and butter that brought them to the dance.
For every Hemi and 440,there was probably 500 slant 6s or 2.2s sold.

[K-CAR_WAGON]

Its probably just a matter of simple economics - not a matter of being ashamed of the 4 and 6 cyl. engine. Enormous amounts of money seem to be flowing into the large engine performance Mopars especially from the 70s to produce some of the highest quality restorations possible - well beyond factory original condition.

[capev86]

it is the whole mindset these days. mopar is banking on flashy retro muscle cars. and people wanting economy and value expect a foreign brand name to be attached to the product, although GM has managed to mix fun and economical (relatively speaking). the best competitor to the imports that chrysler ever built was the neon. it had great aerodynamics, mpi, irs, and with more torque it was a better bang for the buck than a honda civic.

i personally think the 2.6 is a stone age leftover compared to the 4g series of engines and i'd ditch it if i had an early k car w/ one. a 2.4 swap would get you better mpg without any real loss in performance. i like vintage k cars, but i prefer to run the later year 2.2/2.5 engines, especially the common blocks.

[capev86]

if you have a heavier car (like lebarons, 600's, etc with all those luxury extras) or hampered by an automatic, you should only be interested in the 2.4 and 2.6. the 2.0 and smaller motors have no low end power due to smaller displacement and shorter stroke. with a 4 cylinder you want as much torque as possible to make up for the size of the engine (reason why my 2.5 k wagon was so spunky in its day). the 2.4 is an evolutionary step forward over the 2.6 as it has a 100mm vs. 98 and the smaller pistons makes for a more efficient engine. you get the same torque and nearly as much hp without being a gas hog. just like with the dodge 2.2/2.5, the later years benefited from years of refinement and innovation. so why mess with early junk when it comes to engines and chassis' when you can just swap it out for bigger and better things? k cars just aren't valuable/collectible enough to worry about matching numbers and you can keep it looking factory on the outside. most restorations these days involve some tweaks for better drive-ability unless it is something super valuable like a vintage packard or duesenburg.

[88 aries]

Do you constantly run your freaking mouth all the time about the 2.4 liter and these newer engines? WHO GIVES A RATS ASS!!!? certainly not me

[Butch]

Do you constantly run your freaking mouth all the time about the 2.4 liter and these newer engines? WHO GIVES A RATS ASS!!!? certainly not me

People from small towns have SMALL minds.

[Baron]

The slant 6 engine had an excellent reputation, there is no way Chrysler would ever be ashamed of it. In fact, they could probably bring it back like they did with the Hemis and have a ready market for it. But engineering has come a long ways since then, and I suspect what made the slant 6 good in its day would not make it good now. If nothing else, I'm sure it would be much too heavy, not near as economical to build, nor as efficient to run, as a modern 4-cylinder or V-6 engine putting out the same amount of horsepower.

But man, you could shoot those engines with an elephant gun and they'd still keep running.