v-6 in early A-body

-

Claydart

MOPAR to the very bones
FABO Gold Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
599
Reaction score
358
Location
Brockton, Ma.
Hi everyone, I was just sitting here wondering if anybody has installed a v-6 in an early a-body? And I was also wondering if anyone has tried to fit a A-833 to a v-6? From what I was just reading, the first Mopar v-6 was just a cut down 318, and I was wondering if they kept the same bolt pattern for the transmission. I just think that would be kinda cool and certainly different. I think that those engines stock put out anywhere from 150-215 HP in different configurations. A little better than the slant 6 anyway.
 
Yes. The 3.9 is an EXACT match to a 318 less two cylinders. They share a lot of internal parts. Pistons, rods, pushrods, rockers, valves, oil pump, timing set and external features like water pump, motor mount bosses and bellhousing pattern.
 
Your right, I think that would be a great combo in an A-body. Should make a hell of a daily driver too!
 
Yep. Dart64GT did a 3.9 in a 66 wagon. Unfortunately someone took the car for a joy ride and wrecked it. That v6 looked right at home under the hood.
dart64gt1.jpg
dart64gt2.jpg
 
I think if I was wanting to do a V6, that I would try one of the new Pentastar V6 engines currently in new cars. 300 HP and torque to match.....plus they get 30 mpg. I wonder if Hotwire is making a harness for them yet?
 
I have done that, not quite an A body, but I took a carbureted 3.9L V-6 from a 1986 Dakota (last year for carb) and installed it in a 1941 Dodge half ton pickup. The found a used A-904 transmission from a 1978 Aspen, and it bolted right up. Makes a good driver and gets good mileage. Lots of V-6 engines out there since they replaced the slant six.
 
Get a nv3500 5 spd to go with it. Late 90's to 2003 dakota. Low 1st gear, pulls my 2003 3800 lb dakota with 29" tires and 3.23 gears all day. 20mpg at 70 at 1900 rpm. Would love to see what that would do in a lighter A model with shorter tire
 
Well that does sound interesting for sure! I was going to do the slant 6 to v8 swap, but now I'm not so sure that is what I will do. How hard is it to find a good running 3.9 anyway?
 
Try to find a decent low mileage dakota. Change the timing chain and if a manual the clutch while out of the vehicle. I bought my 2003 new, 288,000 miles and still 20 mpg. Have to keep an eye on the oil consumption but that 3.9 is a great motor
 
3.8 is a great motor too out of a minivan. Small, smooth, Powerful, efi. Put a carb on top and you got a factory crossram intake but will have fuel puddling issues, just like the old version...... . Don't know about trans bolt pattern. 3.9 is a drop in.
 
Well that does sound interesting for sure! I was going to do the slant 6 to v8 swap, but now I'm not so sure that is what I will do. How hard is it to find a good running 3.9 anyway?
Yep, like Racerdan suggested, a Dakota is the best donor. Lots of older 2 wheel drive trucks out there. I have a 1996 and 2000 Dakota 2 wheel drive trucks. The 3.9's and overdrive automatics would be good. The 96 and older trucks don't require a module to operate the tranny though. (I don't think). Those transmissions would require modifying the tunnel but worth it in the long run. Heck, you could use the driveshaft and rear end also. Cheap parts. Most of those 3.9's have timing chain rattle so a new chain and gears and a tensioner would be good. Keep us posted if you start the project.
 
I have thought about this as well as we have a little over 200,000 mile 93 Dakota 4WD with the 3.9 we bought brand new. Hmmmm!
 
Hi everyone, I was just sitting here wondering if anybody has installed a v-6 in an early a-body? And I was also wondering if anyone has tried to fit a A-833 to a v-6? From what I was just reading, the first Mopar v-6 was just a cut down 318, and I was wondering if they kept the same bolt pattern for the transmission. I just think that would be kinda cool and certainly different. I think that those engines stock put out anywhere from 150-215 HP in different configurations. A little better than the slant 6 anyway.

My company has done magnum swaps in Jeeps since 1998 and we have done several CJ's with 3.9's, both At and MT. The A-833 would require a zero balance flywheel with reluctor ring which we have. The 3.9 is a "cut down" 5.2 so performance parts from 5.2 wil work and we can grind a custom roller at .520" 215 @ .050 that will wake it up nicely. V8 throttle body, pcm flash and you should hit the 250 HP mark. We build harnesses for them as well The wagon looks cool except the guy didnt ditch the PDC(black lunch box on fender) and didnt put pcm under dash like we do it. This is a much cleaner look IMO(with exception of old wires I havent removed yet..

65 more door.jpg
 
Well that does sound interesting for sure! I was going to do the slant 6 to v8 swap, but now I'm not so sure that is what I will do. How hard is it to find a good running 3.9 anyway?
They are everywhere and super cheap as most dont want them. Look for them in Daks, Durangos and Rams. Get a 96+ thats OBD II so you can flash the pcm to remove emissions and other things you might not want. Get a Tanks Inc FI tank so the pump is in tank and you are good to go. PM if you need help, advise or parts. Evan

3.8 is a great motor too out of a minivan. Small, smooth, Powerful, efi. Put a carb on top and you got a factory crossram intake but will have fuel puddling issues, just like the old version...... . Don't know about trans bolt pattern. 3.9 is a drop in.
Until the balance shaft eats itself, or any of the 100 other issues they have/had. Next time you are behind a caravan observe blue haze when they leave the light, it aint from the tires....they are good at keeping mosquitoes at bay...slightly better than the mitsubishi caravan but not by much.
 
Last edited:
I had one for 7 years, 180k and it never even hiccuped. 3000 mile oil changes showed half a quart burned. Only reason we offed it was because the trans started to slip. I should have scrapped it and saved the motor. Got a grand for it as a trade in at Carmax.maybe I had a good one.
 
I bought a 92 Dak new and when it was time to replace it I considered keeping the drive train just for an early A. But I sold it instead.
 
I had one for 7 years, 180k and it never even hiccuped. 3000 mile oil changes showed half a quart burned. Only reason we offed it was because the trans started to slip. I should have scrapped it and saved the motor. Got a grand for it as a trade in at Carmax.maybe I had a good one.
you did, you wouldnt want to be the guy that bought it from carmax though...on the other hand the 3.9 is pretty much bullet proof as long as it was maintained, 250K is not uncommon and I have seen a few make 300K!
 
all this 3.9 v6 talk is greatand milage is the goal . but a 250 hp 318 ( 76 issue with 360 hp cam 340 intake carb n exhaust manifolds 2 1/4 throw flowmasters ) a 64 a833 gearbox 10'' clutch , 2.76 to 1 8 3/4 r/e in a 64 burracuda with 10''breaks , roll out on the freeway at 70mph pulled 21mpg everyday 60 miloes each way . if a really got to it it could have putted up 2-4 more per mile with todays fuel inject packages . hell maybe 30mpg , lol. that might be stretching it a bit , but hummmmm. plaining a 340 6pck for it now , got a freash 340 port'd x heads custom cam , 70 6pck . and more info for the remaining parts from here , dual disc clutch , juice release bearing set up , head'rs , ect..... thanks to all here .
Scan0013_0013.jpg
Scan0014_0014.jpg
 
70 swinger with 5.2 magnum, 42RE, injection, 3.31 would regularly get 25+ cruising at 80 with AC blowing cold, I would think a 3.9 would be capable of more than that since they were capable of that in Dakota.
 
i agree with fuel injection and o/d tranny would be a big plus on that cruz mpg as well the speed . this barracuda was all old school , even had a 52 dodge 241 hemi dual point type ignition in it . a electronic ignition would help clean the cylinders better as well . i asked the guys at fitech about a 6pck type injector package , but he said no two bbl injectors yet , its one , or two 4's for now from them .
 
I understand the thought behind going with the 3.9, but you probably are going to have all of the same clearance issues in the early A as the V8, plus I dont think you will be able to find headers that will work and the stock manifold will probably be an issue also. So why bother?

Find a nice 318 magnum and go with that.
 
Read the Allpar site first. The Magnum V-6 was a quickie solution for the new Dakota pickup because the V-8 wouldn't fit. They later found room and dropped the V-6. Since they just lopped off 2 cylinders, it wasn't an optimal V-6 design and had vibration issues. I see them often in RAM vans at PicNPull. Seems Mopar often used surplus parts in later full-size vans and campers. But, the fact that it bolts up to a 1970-80's 904 style tranny is attractive, though you then lose the crank pickup and thus modern controls. It sure looks at home in an A, though to use its tranny may require re-fabbing the car's tunnel (true for V-8 Magnum). The Magnum V-8 engines suffer cracked exhaust valve seats, which might affect the V-6 as well.

The 3.8L V-6 is a better design, having a 60 deg V angle, so much less vibration. It was used in minivans (my 2002 T&C), but a better source is the RWD version used in Jeeps. Some Jeepers deride it as "a minivan engine", which seems silly. The FWD versions may be missing some motor mount holes and the intake ducting may not work. Not sure what tranny the Jeeps used, but they long used Mopar trannys. Look for a 2WD Jeep. The 3.8L is still a push-rod design, so might still fit under an A-body hood, though the shallower angle makes it sit taller than a Magnum. Indeed, the rockers and shaft look like in my 65 383 engine. Speaking of that, get a later one. They added a rocker post to the head since early ones suffered cracked posts. The 3.3L is almost identical, but I don't think a Jeep version. The Engine Builder site has a great writeup on the variations.
 
-
Back
Top