Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

300 2.7 question

killertomatoeskillertomatoes Posts: 1
edited September 2014 in Chrysler
I am looking at a 2006 Chrysler 300 base with the 2.7 liter V-6. My question is, are these motors any better than the horror of the 98-02 version of the same motor?


  • The Chrysler 300 is a great car, but the 2.7L V6 is far too underpowered for me to consider in a car half its size. If you don't want the HEMI for some reason, go with the 3.5L V6. It is the same high performance engine that used to be standard in the 300M's, mated with the same 5 speed auto-stick transmission. You are not going to gain any mileage advantage with the smaller 2.7L engine if it has to rev up all the time to make maximum horsepower just to drive normally. The 3.5L engine has power to spare and doesn't have to work as hard, and actually gets better mileage than the 2.7L in a real life driving situation. I own two 300C's with the 5.7L HEMI engine, and they both get 1 mpg less than the 3.5L, but has nearly 90 more horsepower on tap when needed. They run at about half the RPM's of the V6's to make the horsepower required for normal driving, and last a lot longer. ;)
  • winter2winter2 Posts: 1,801
    The 2.7 in the 300 is nearly the same engine found in the 98-02 Concorde LX.

    It is a good engine with proper care and the proper oil. My wife has a 98 Concorde LX with the 2.7 and except for a leaky oil pan gasket and a PCM update, the engine has been bullet proof.

    Oil is changed every 4000 miles and we use a good synthetic like Amsoil or Valvoline SynPower 10W-30. Avoid Mobil 1. The timing chain tension is controlled using oil pressure and there is a filter screen that must be kept clean. If that sludges up, you are screwed. The 4.7 V-8 uses the same system.
  • djm2djm2 Posts: 712
    Good Morning:

    Do a detailed search on the "net" on the 2.7 engine. ----- Make your own decision based on this investigation! --------- Best regards. -------- Dwayne
This discussion has been closed.