Getting RID OF that 2.7 in a Sebring vert ? .... !!

....any EZ swaps out there? ...a bud found TWO of these cars SUPER CLEAN except for that junker-motor and I would like to consider one for meself .... what to do ? suggestions ??

Put a 440 Super Stock motor in it and run GT class with it.

More fun than a 2.7.

Ask around if a 3.3, or 3.5 would bolt in, they are really good engines.

At 14 years old it should have already nuked itself if it was going to... ? Did you pull the dipstick or see how nasty the coolant looks ?

I will not defend the design, it is a POS but supposedly they got them 'fixed' by 03-04.

The 2.7 reminds me a lot of the ultradrive transmission. Almost 30 years later and the ignorant armchair experts of the internet still swear every single one of them is a ticking time bomb that will fail without warning.

I've got a 2001 Intrepid with 279,xxx miles on it. Still going strong ... and with the original 2.7 engine!

Those cars came with the 2.4 4 banger, too. You could do a complete drop-out. The 2.4 is a good engine IMHO.

maybe poke around www.sebringclub.net

I want to say I've seen it discussed over there but don't recall much detail as I was hunting for 200 (aka G3 sebring) info.

The wifegod had a 2.7 convertible for 11 years, no issues EVER with the engine/trans. Only problems were the strut spacers in the rear made of aluminum, turned to dust in the rust belt and window motors, besides that not a hitch in the giddyup, all that ever needed to happen to keep those engines in good shape were oil changes on time every 3K miles...

The 2.7 developed a bad reputation for several reasons. The earlier 2.7 Intrepids had the converters to close to the oil pan. This overheated the oil, causing problems. I have not heard of the Sebrings having this issue.

Most of the other issues with the 2.7's involved the timing chain and the components around the timing chain. The water pump is driven by the timing chain. If it fails, it dumps coolant into the oil. The tensioner for the timing chain would also fail causing a loss of oil pressure.

I believe Chrysler suggested changing the timing chain and all the related components every 100,000 miles. This can increase the odds of the engine holding together. There was also a spacer available on the aftermarket that was advertised as preventing the problems with the tensioner failing. I never installed one. I can't seem to find the advertisement now....

As Rhinodart mentioned, the 2.7's had small oil passages. Changing the oil frequently was also crucial to longevity.

The original question was about replacing the 2.7 with a better engine. In the Intrepids, the 2.7 could be replaced with the 3.5 engine. The 3.5 is in the same engine family, but has a better reputation. I have NOT heard of anyone installing a 3.5 in a Sebring.

Another important factor in the durability of the early 2.7s appears to be the way they were driven. Our local PD had a couple of Intrepids with 2.7s that went well over 200K each.

At the same, we were seeing them with 80k at the auctions that were knocking, had low oil pressure, or were inops.

It seems that the ones that were used for short hops around town and not getting the chance to fully warm up, suffered the worse. The ones (like the cop cars) that got to full temp and were able to spend enough time there, did okay with proper maintenance.

I buy newer ones than that for pennys on the dollar because of blown 2.7s. I currently have in my fleet a 2006 magnum and 2010 charger, both of them got 3.5 swaps with real low miles by me. All the suposed fixes never fixed anything, the water pump still dribbles coolant in the oil and causes sludge that clogs up oil screens, and head return passages and wipes out bearings as well as about 700 feet of timing chains and plastic timing chain guides that break apart and allow the chains to jump bending lots of valves.

Yes, a 3.2 or 3.5 conversion is possible and has been done. Not quite a bolt in deal, but doable. Tom Vago used to have his own Sebring website and has done the swap. http://tom-viki.com/1C3EL75R62N/engine.html
Have fun as my 2000 was the biggest pain in the ass to work on of any car I have owned.