The story on my coupe.
I built my 48 Plymouth business coupe in 2011. The car started life as a 90 Dodge Dakota with a 3.9 V6, 5 speed. I bought the Dakota as a parts truck from a young girl with a baby. Her boy friend dumped her, and stuck her with the manual transmission truck she didn't know how to drive, as her only transportation. I showed her how to drive it, she got just enough info to get by. When she got her tax refund, she wanted to buy a car she could drive, they wouldn't take the Dakota as a trade in, and she was a bit short of the money she needed. I gave her the money she needed to get the car and get insurance on it, in trade for a truck I didn't need, or really didn't want at the time. It sat around in my yard for several months before the truck I was using developed a problem. I used the Dakota as transportation for about a year before the clutch quit moving the truck, then it got parked back in the yard.

Back when I was a kid, our local track used to race the old coupes. I loved those old dirt track coupes, the vision of them coming off that 4th turn and coming down the front straight to get that green flag is forever burned into my head. Those old coupes are what got me into old cars and that was what got me through high school. All I wanted out of life was to have a dirt track car and race. By the time I got out of high school, the old coupes were long gone, but I was still addicted to dirt track racing. As soon as
I got out on my own, I built my first dirt track car and raced for 20+ years. Old cars have provided me with a pretty good living over the years. By the time the Dakota arrived, my dirt track racing days were over with as well, but looking at the truck sitting on my side yard hatched a plan in my head.


The Dakota was still a mechanically and structurally sound truck that needed a few things fixed (like the clutch). At the time, I had been running my welding shop for around 16 years. I had already done a few Dakota front clips on a few hot rods for customers. I knew the platform pretty well, and thought it would be the perfect platform for a quick and dirty replica of an old dirt track car, to cruise around in our town with on nice summer days. The idea was to use as much of the Dakota as I needed, put a 4 point roll cage on it, and hang an old Mopar body over top of the chassis, and attach the body well enough to get by for a couple of years of Sunday cruising (which was all I expected the car to last). When I told my wife about the plan, she told me to go for it, it sounded like fun.
The search was on for an old Mopar car body. The guide lines were pretty simple. It had to be a 1953 or older body (the mid 50s car were too big), I wanted the body to have as many of the body panels present as possible, though their condition was not very important, and it had to be as cheap as possible (at a time when scrap was $200+ a ton).
The body I found was about 100 miles away, a 48 Plymouth business coupe all of the body panels were present, but almost all of them had rust holes (even the roof had rust holes in it), or was missing the bottom 6" of most of them. The price was $200. The guy's comment was, I can get $200 scrap for for it, if you want it, that is the price, and I will help you load it. I think he thought I was crazy when I told him it was perfect and I would take it!
The car got built on the Dakota chassis. I originally had a 4 point cage in the car, but one faithful day during the build, I hit my head on that roll cage 3 times, and out of the car it came. That required more effort to attach the sheet metal to the chassis better. The car was painted with a brush, I painted the number on it myself, so the entire thing looked pretty crude, with the big honking 1/8" steel plate bumpers with over run bars attached and all. I painted over dings and dents, welds, cut out wheel openings, and rusted fenders. The car looked pretty authentic.
I put license plates on the car in April 2011. The car just plane worked well, it drove nice, the V6 with the 5 speed was enough to be sporty, but not enough to get me into trouble. We started taking the car on vacations! The car has been in 27 States, and has logged over 100,000 miles. In 2018, I had to go back in and repair a few things I didn't bother doing when the car was built (remember it, was only going to last a year or two). That included new paint, newer seats, door panels and carpet. It also included new brakes and new tires.

Now, here we are another 6 years past that. The V6 is showing its age, the new tires I put on it in 2018 are wearing out, and aging out. I had the car repainted in 2018, and its still presentable, but it was overdone, and the car lost some of its original crudeness. Its too refined to be what it was intended to be. I used to have regular plates on the car because we drove it everywhere, and pretty much any time I had the urge. We have dropped the plates back to "Extended Antique plates" which means we are only suppose to drive the car between April and Oct. We also have the 49 Dodge truck for our long distance driving now.

Since the car will probably no longer be a long distance driver, I am considering taking it back to more represent what it was originally suppose to be. I'm thinking changing out the nice seats and interior for a more old race car like interior. Loosing the inner door panels, changing the dash out for something simple and possibly even putting a roll cage back in it. Even considering changing out the tires and wheels for something wider, to look more like the mid 60s dirt track theme. Might go as far as swapping out the V6 for a rumbling small block. I've had an old street car that looked like it was trying to be a dirt track car on the street for a long time and it was fun. Now I'm thinking I would like a more authentic old dirt track race car that is trying to be a street car for a while.

What do you guys think?
A few pictures of what it is now.

sounds good to me !
i like the idea of the rumbly small block, but have you considered a rumbly inline flathead six ? those things, back in the day, humbled many a flathead ford and early small block chevy.
keeping a 5 or 6 speed standard box would allow a somewhat deep rear gear that would allow peppy acceleration, but having overdrive would allow the inline to loaf on the highway.
my best friend has a 54 chevy custom that is powered by a 235 six with dual single carbs, split exhaust manifolds, [fenton iron headers if i remember right] coupled with a 700R4 transmission to a 3.73 geared 55 chevy rear, and that thing runs really strong from a stop if one jumps on it, but loafs along going down the highway.
there is a 40 ford coupe a couple of towns over that is done in an early "jalopy racer" theme, and it's always a crowd pleaser, although it's WAY nice, and has straight body panels plus a gorgeous black paint job.
whatever you decide to do, please keep the looks of the car as it is now.

I believe going with an inline 6 all hopped up would be a step backwards. The current 3.9, though mine having nearly 170K miles on it, was factory rated at something like 175 hp. The 3.9 is a 318 with two cylinders removed, so the 5 speed already has the SBM V8 bell. With the high miles, it has the tell tale blue smoke at startup and you can smell burning oil as the rpm increases, the motor is just getting tired.

I suspect the car weighs in pretty near 3,000lbs (I can push it around by myself). The 5 speed manual trans is an OD 5th gear, the car already has a 3:55 gear limited slip rear. The current tires are 225 75 R 15 on 6 1/2" wide wheels. It has disc front brakes, 10" drum rear, and has power rack & pinion steering

As is, the car is peppy and fun, (can still chirp the tires going in 3rd gear, if you don't mind the blue haze in the mirror ) and actually pulls down 20+ mpg on the highway @ 65 mph (17 mpg in town). The rumble at idle idle would just be more pleasing to me. The car has a real muffler and tail pipe on it now, dual exhaust and glass packs would be an improvement, but a V6 with glass packs, at idle, just sounds like a stock V8 idling smoothly at 1000 rpm (I've had that set up before). I want it to sound like it has power, but not have much more then what is there now. Back in the 1990s, you used to be able to buy performance cams for the V6 that had the rumble. Can't imaging finding one those old cams these days, and I sure wouldn't want to put it in this V6 without a major rebuild. Building the 3,9 costs the same as building a 318 or 360, but there I am, adding more power then I want for this ride.

All out performance probably isn't going to be in the plan. I would just get myself into trouble. My reaction time isn't what it used to be, and I'm afraid the stupid teenager from my past would come out of hiding if there was actually power at hand.

Here are a couple of pictures of the coupe in its first brushed on paint job.

I agree changing seats and wheel tire combination would go far for the look you're after.

Being a welder, you could probably reverse the wheels yourself. Classic look and method.

Is the 3.9 a magnum? A 318 magnum would be an easy swap and correctly chosen mufflers can get the right sound without the raggedy idle.

Hard to beat the rumble of a V8. And Gene, you convinced me the 5.2 Magnum was a better engine to develop and plan for my 56 pickup (Dakota chassis). So my vote goes to the 5.2, easy to buy, easy to mod, reliable runner, decent MPG when set up right. Plus like you've said the EFI on the 5.2 is easy to live with and handles the types of fuel we have available in the midwest. Looks wise I too love the look of the old dirt track cars with the reversed steel wheels and wider tires, maybe even set the stance a bit lower. Maybe paint the steel wheels a contrast color like the red on the coupe. Perhaps a bit cleaner/lighter look to the bumpers?

This 3.9 is a 91 LA motor, its 2 years before the Magnum (a 93 model year change over in the Dakota). Still has the small block Mopar factory hydraulic bell, clutch and flywheel. Would I need a Magnum flywheel? The motor has the throttle body EFI OBD1 system, don't know if that would convert over to the Magnum or not, but the current system has nearly 200K miles on it.

Never even gave any thought to reversing the current wheels, but the front wheels are a 1/2" more narrow then the rear. The front were 90 Dakota wheels, the rear are the older 7" wide Chrysler 5th Ave wheels. The rear wheels look a bit more reversed then the front, the Dakota wheels have a deeper offset and are not as wide. The current wheels are all painted the same color as the body, and that red has faded a lot, probably could never match it.

Oh, sure! Throw my stuff back at me.

The red & white coupe and the blue and white coupe are both the same car, currently the car is red and white. The white wheels are the same as the car body, but that isn't a pure white, I could probably never match it. Any change in the wheels probably means they will come back with a spray bomb color, which won't match any colors of the paint on the car (maybe I could match the tan on the number). I will post a picture of the coupe just out of the paint shop with the blue wheels and the freshly painted number. I pulled the tires off the wheels, had the wheels sprayed with the white body color, and put new tires on the old wheels and put them back on the car.

Headers (I don't really like headers, but a good set may outlast the car) and glass packs would go a long way towards that rumble I would like. I could probably get by with the stock cam (which would be a huge plus). Guess I need to start looking for a 5.2. My current 3.9 is an LA motor, so an LA motor would mean I could adapt the current ignition system and use the current flywheel/clutch. The Jefferson swap meet is next weekend.... A good set of used Mopar small block headers (the motor in the coupe was moved back 7", there isn't anything to interfere with the headers except the small starter, wide open spaces under there). Maybe a 318/5.2, and another pair of the 7" wide 5th Ave wheels, with a more centered hub, would go a long way towards the goal.

The bumpers will probably stay, that look was what I remember the old coupes having (from way back in 1966/1967) at our local track. I will do some research, I was only about 10 when the local track changed from the coupes to the late models and all the early late models had the big bumpers. There was a lot of bumping and banging going on back then around here. Also, the dirt track race cars around here all set up as high as my coupe does, lower race cars didn't show up around here until much later.

Put in a more healthy 5.2 with cheap headers and glass packs, pull the door panels, swap out the carpet for a rubber pad, change the seats to simple buckets, rid myself of the Dakota dash and add a flat panel with temp, oil pressure, maybe an old round speedometer (instead of a tack), a gas gauge (because I don't like to walk). Could mostly be done by spring!

I'm sort of getting excited, since that last considered project didn't materialize (too many questions, too many variables, too many miles between, too much money, and more work then I was looking for).

Pic 1) This is red & white coupe with the new color and the freshly painted number, still wearing the blue wheels from the previously painted same car.
Pic 2) This a close up of the left rear, 7" wide standard off set Chrysler 5th Ave wheel on the coupe.
Pic 3) This is the left front 6 1/2" wide Dakota wheel with the rear back spacing, on the coupe. If I exchanged these two wheels with the wider, standard offset 5th Ave wheels, the tires would sit about 1 1/4" farther out then they currently do, which should put the edge of the tread about even with the edge of the cut out fender. The tire to fender clearance would remain the same.
Pic 4) This is what the dash and the steering wheel look like, except the current version is gray instead of black, and the magnetic junk on the passenger side is not there. There is however a glove box door there now. That dash cover can be removed, and the glove box and its door can be removed again (my wife wanted it for easy to access of some stuff on long trips).

Before tearing the dash apart, you could make a cover for the gauges that might make them look more like separate gauges vs a cluster.

Small sheet of aluminum with appropriate size holes? Could dummy it up with silver duct tape as a quick experiment. Maybe thin plywood?

Regarding the TBI vs magnum swap, it's probably easier to maintain whichever injection system is already present.

Might be more work than you want but a wider rear axle might help.

Yup, old style dash would suit that coupe much better. Simple round gauges like a old race car would have would look more natural in there.

I like the idea of revisiting the coupe.....a thought on the motor (maybe not a good one but a thought none the less). I saw an early 50s Plymouth at a car show years ago.the car looked like it had a 1st Gen Hemi in it. Turns out they were just valve covers over a later 318 (he'd done a good job the engine compartment was so narrow the valve covers were about all you could see without a real close inspection. There was a conversation a while back about using some of the earlier 318 Poly covers on later engine. It seems like the Dodge red ram (Poly) Chrysler spitfire or 318 Poly covers might be made to work to disguise a later engine. That way you have the look without going backward.

As far as tires I wonder how the tire on the left would look on the car? It's a Futura (made by Cooper). It's a 235/70R/15 so should be close to the same height as what you have. As shown it's mounted on a 7" rim. Actually both tires are 235/70R/15 mounted on identical wheels and at the same tire pressure.....I actually took the picture to show the difference in actual tire size between brands the on on the left was about 1/2" shorter and had a 1/2" wider contact patch.

I like the color scheme of the car. Back when I was a kid (50s and 60s) most of the cars that ran on the tracks back home were usually a little newer (mid 50 thru early 60s cars) as I recall the majority were were either built/owned or sponsored by either a local gas station or small business and had the company name on the car (maybe something like that either painted or a magnetic sign? I like the idea of a cage in it too!

Mike, I'm not seeing any pictures of tires. Tire size is something that has been something that has been running through my head. I cut the wheel openings about an inch and a half higher then the tires that were on the car at the time, which was how we did tire and fender clearance back when I was actually racing. The tire I used as a guide was probably a 235 75 15. Pictures would probably be useful to me.

As far as an under the hood vision of the motor, I'm not so concerned about that, I don't open the hood very often. There is a lot of stuff under there that wouldn't have been on an old dirt track race car, that I'm willing to give up (like a firewall mounted power brake booster).

The main reasons I would be addressing the motor at all is because, 1) The current motor has around 180,000 miles on it, and its starting to show that. There is a blue haze in the air near the tail pipe on start up, and a hint of blue in the rear view mirror if I'm into it a bit harder then normal. 2) The current 3.9 V6 out of the donor Dakota still has a single exhaust with a real muffler and tail pipe. Its pretty quite, and very mellow. I would like a bit more noise (not big noise, just a higher level then it has now) and a bit of rumble in the exhaust. I have had a 3.9 V6 with dual exhaust and glass packs before, lets say its not impressive. At idle, the dual glass pack V6 just sounds like a stock V8 with glass packs, idling at around 1,000 rpm.

Back before 1966 (or 1967) our local track raced the coupes. The rules stated the cars had to be older then 1950. After 1966, the track went to "late models" and the cars had to have bodies newer then 1950, but most of the cars were mostly newer then about 1964 model year. Back then many racers were complaining that the old bodies were too hard to find, so that was the given reason to go with the later models. I don't really remember seeing a lot of 50s and early 60s car run there. We kind of skipped the tri-5 Chevy thing and went right into the 62-64 and newer cars.

Years ago I thought about adding a sponsor name on my car, but couldn't decide if I should have a made up sponsor, a real sponsor from back in the day, or someone current, so I didn't add one. That and painting a name on the car can get expensive pretty quickly if you want it to look good. Even the current vinyl stuff isn't cheap.

I'm still pondering the cage. I had one in the car during the first build process and I have not forgotten how much it hurt the day I hit my head ion it 3 times, and cut the cage out. I'm not nearly as flexible as I was in 2010/2011 when the car was first being built.

I don't know if Haneline is going out of business or just not updating their website. What doesn't show as sold out, is on sale. I remember their instrument panel ads in Street Rod Magazine from a lifetime ago. I've had a thing for engine turned anything since then.

https://www.hanelineproducts.com/shop-online/haneline-hollywood-dash

Kevin

A Gen 3 Hemi will bolt up to that 5 speed you know...

Kevin

For some reason it didn't post. Try this.


23570 15 1 by M Patterson, on Flickr

I took a look at those insets. a piece of sheet metal with holes cut into it fits my budget much better.

Oh, yea, I know... i have a lot of excuses why I won't put a Gen 3 in this car...
The 5 speed is a light duty trans out of a V6 Dodge pickup (GV2500 maybe?) A Gen 3 Hemi has more power then me or the 5 speed needs. My son messes with the Gen 3 Hemi stuff, for the money it would take to make one work in this car, I can build a 5.2 that would bolt in and would get me into plenty of trouble, and still have money left over (maybe not enough to pay the fines these days, tickets get expensive faster now).

And, the real reason... I'm not sure I'm disciplined enough not to push the Hemi hard. What has kept my license and my insurance costs good all these years is the simple fact I have limited myself on the amount of power on hand, to keep me from getting into into trouble. Its probably wise to remain on that proven path. A pretty much stock 5.2 in a 3,000lbs car may be border line. A guy has to know where to place limitations on himself...

Thanks for the picture Mike. The tread pattern on the tire on the left looks more like a dirt track tire as well.

That was kind of my thought too.

My 2001 Dakota has a 4.7 V8 in it, and right after I bought it used back in 2011 I installed a single large body Flomaster s/s muffler on it. Gave it just a bit more rumble at idle, much like a current stock Ram 1500, and just a bit more sound on heavy throttle. No steady speed drone at all. I'd actually like a bit more sound. So for the 5.2 going into my 56 pickup I have a used set of long tube headers and I'll run dual Flomaster or Magnaflo s/s mufflers that make a bit more sound. Maybe one step louder than their quietest mufflers. Surely don't want any drone sound, or much crackle on decel or throttle chop, but some more rumble down low.

I believe the muffler on the coupe is a Thrush Hush baffled muffler with 2 1/4" inlet and outlet and the car has a 2 1/4" full length tail pipe, it is pretty much a Dakota single exhaust system (the converter was gutted). It looks like a shorter version of an ordinary muffler. I expected it would have a bit of rumble, but nope, its very quite. I was really pretty disappointed, but it and the tailpipe have both been on the car since 2011, so there is that.

My 49 is also sporting a Dakota factory large pipe factory exhaust for its 5.2, but it has a Cheery Bomb glass pack ahead of the tail pipe. It has a bit more rumble, but not much.With that in mind, I suspect the coupe may end up with dual glass packs with dumps in front of the rear tires. The coupe is probably not going to see a lot of long trips anymore, that is what the 49 is for. The longest road trip its likely to see is about a 2 hour round trip drive. The 5 speed should cut back concerns about an exhaust drone, and most round trips within that 2 hour round trip window is hilly country. A drone is one of those things I WILL address pretty fast!

As a side note, I may have a lead on a 5.2, its in a 90s Ramcharger, so it could be either an LA or a magnum motor. The details are pretty sketchy at this point, I should know more by the end of the week.

I was on Speedway's site earlier today and they sell engine turned sheets of metal in various sizes, you cut to fit. Might be an option there.

So just a little update on that 318 I had a lead on,
It is a Magnum 5.2. it is still in a Dodge Ramcharger that last lived as a snow plow. The Ramcharger was purchased as a parts truck, mostly for the interior pieces. The story was, it was running but quit one day. The codes said it was a bad sensor, but installing a new sensor did not make the truck run, but it does turn over with a good battery. The instrument cluster is gone, so I have no idea how many miles are on it. They found a different truck, and sold this one for parts. The current owner is into the Gen 3 Hemi, so he has no interest in the 5.2, and didn't waste any time trying to get it to run. If I want it, its mine for free, and I can take as much stuff connected to it as I want. I'm off seeking more info on what will interchange and what won't.

Well, you convinced me to go with the 5.2, and I got lucky to find a complete low miles runner for $600. If you get that 5.2 for free that leaves lots of budget to tune it into exactly the engine you want.

So, lots of evaluating going on here right now.
That motor is in fact a Magnum 5.2 and its free to me. That is the good news.

Now the bad news. I really want to keep the 5 speed manual trans that is on the current 3.9. Everything I've read says the 3.9 manual trans stuff bolts onto the 5.2 Magnum and would work except the motor won't run. The ignition uses pick up points located on the flywheel. A 3.9 has 9 pickup points (what I have been told ) but the 5.2 flywheel has 4 pickup points. The timing will be fired differently between the V6 and the V8 because of the pickup points. The 3.9 stuff will work on the 5.2 IF I use a different ignition. One option I have not looked into is to see if I could find a different way to pick up the timing signal, like maybe through an old lean burn locked distributor.

Not a big deal, right? Simply buy a 5.2 flywheel, new ones are even available! Except there are two versions of a 5.2 flywheel, a 92 and 93 or a 94 to 02. I don't know what year the motor actually is, but there is another slight problem. The 5.2 only has an 11" clutch (14.5" outside diameter flywheel). The 3.9 only has a 10.5" clutch (13.5 outside diameter flywheel). I suspect the 14.5" flywheel is not going to fit in a bell intended to use a 13.5" flywheel. The 3.9 bell is the only bell that matches this transmission. Are we having fun yet?

So, lets look into the ignition options so maybe we can just bolt the 3.9 stuff onto the 5.2 for however long it lasts (I have two of these same 3.9 transmissions here). There are lots of electronic ignition systems available for the 5.2. Unfortunately, most of the current after market ignition systems don't "talk" to the Chrysler fuel injection systems. I also want to keep the fuel injection.

The next option I looked into was scrapping the Chrysler EFI and going with an aftermarket fuel injection like Holly system or one of the others, but most of them are throttle body injection and use an intake manifold with a Holly carb bolt pattern. The 5.2 has the keg intake with port injection, and any SB intake around here is the old spread bore that would need modification to work on the Magnum motor and an adapter to use the Holley based throttle body. I am also unclear as to if those aftermarket systems still use the Chrysler ignition pick up off the flywheel, which wouldn't help me any way. I'm really having fun now.....

I suppose the next logical step would be to do a compression test on the 5.2 and be sure its worthy of all this effort. The reality is, this car will probably not see another 30,000 miles put on it. A new motor is not necessary, just need a good reliable used motor that is good for another 40,000 miles. I don't think the current 3.9 has that in it without a rebuild.

The Holly programmable efi system has an option for the ignition, an intake with port injection for the Magnum motor, the throttle body, wiring and sensors in a kit form for somewhere around $1600-1800. It still doesn't tell you if it uses the ignition pickup off the flywheel or not. I need someone with one of these systems to chime in here.

In addition to that price, I would need to add what ever it takes to bring the 5.2 up to snuff, tires, wheels, seats, and what ever else I may need to do with the car. The aftermarket EFI was not on the radar with this project and almost doubles the planned budget.

Another thought that is crossing my mind is the old lean burn locked (no vacuum or mechanical advance) distributors. They had the 8 point pickups in the spinning shaft the used a magnetic impulse to instruct the brain box to fire the coil. I ASSume the flywheel pick uses a similar technology, is that a direction I may be able to get the timing to function? Someone way smarter then me can probably help here as well?

If you can get the magnum and the computer and wiring for free get it.

As for fitting to the 5 spud, I'd keep looking for a smaller flywheel. Clutch itself isn't an issue.

Come to think of it, the newer 11 inch Clutch is probably really a 10.95 which should have the same bolt pattern as the 10.5. The true 11 inch did need a different flywheel. NEED TO FIND DETAILS, not just go by nominal information. I don't think the true 11 was around after the 70's.

This may just be a bolt together deal. Do they list different tooth counts for the starter ring?

Alternatively, does the 5 spud bell have dual starter bolt patterns and support pockets?

The biggest issue is, there is only one flywheel size for the V8 magnum (2 different flywheels, one for the 5.2 and one for the 5.9) but both are the same outside diameter at 14.5" The flywheel for the 3.9 only comes in one diameter, and the outside measurement for it is 13.5" The tooth count on both are the same, 143 teeth. If it was just the clutch, I'd buy a new one, but that 1" larger outside diameter isn't going to work with the bell I have.
According to everything I have read over the last two days (and that was a lot of reading) tells me the transmission I have only bolts to this bell. I have a GV2500 trans and it is the "light duty early transmission". The next step up was the AX15, which is a trans & bell combo, but also requires a flywheel with a 13.5" outside diameter. Everything with a 5.2 or a 5.9 has the larger flywheel, and a larger bell, and the full size trucks got the GV3500 trans with a matching bell, or the 4500 trans with its matching bell. During the mid 1990s, manual transmissions were hard to come by the V8 trucks got the larger diameter flywheel and the V8 got the smaller flywheel (until 97 or so, then the V6 also got the bigger flywheel, but it also got a different bell and transmission, and each manual transmission version had its own bell. There was no interchangeability except the trans and bell combo, is what I'm reading.

Both 3.9 bells I have is transmission specific, only one bolt pattern. one bell & trans was in a 90 Dakota with a 3.9, and the other was in a 91 Dakota 3.9. I haven't measured, but I don't believe that 1" larger diameter flywheel is going to even fit inside this bell, let alone have space for a starter. i replaced the clutch in this bell a little over a year ago. Its a pretty compact arrangement. everything involved with the clutch/trans is ID ed by the motor size until you get late into the 90s.

Edit: I can buy new smaller flywheels, but they are for the V6. The problem is, the ignition timing is ran off the "cam sensor" at the back of the motor, at the top of the bell. That sensor picks up the timing spots off the flywheel through a hole in the top of the bell. The V6 has 9 timing spots, but the V8s have 4 timing spots. The ignition timing won't even be close. If I could figure out a different way to notify the computer of the timing, I would just use the bell, flywheel, and trans I already have. i thought just buying a new flywheel would get the job done until I discovered the differences in the diameter. I will have to dig out my other 3.9 flywheel and have a better look at it.

They say if there is a will, there is a way. I have the will.

My 2001 Dakota has the NV3500 5spd manual behind the 4.7V8. But Dodge also put that NV3500 behind the 5.2 Magnum in the 1994 to 2004 Ram 1500. Not sure the bell housing is the same though for the 4.7 to the 5.2 Magnum. When I use my Dakota and the donor chassis under my 56 pickup build I will not be using the NV3500, I have a 8HP-70 automatic for that build.

Same tooth counts and different diameters doesn't make sense.

On the magnum engines, the CRANK sensor controls ignition timing and reads the notches in the flywheel.

The CAM sensor is in the distributor and controls injector timing.

On the TBI engines it was one sensor in the distributor.

Possibility, have the 3.9 flywheel rebalanced for the 5.2 and have the timing notches added?

I would not run that V6 trans behind a V8. I don't think it'll hold up especially if it's an NV2500 they were weak, even behind the V6.

Trying to get an LA based V6 TBI system to work on a Magnum V8 engine will be tricky, you will be making your own path here. Aside from the ignition issues you mention, the V6 throttle body injectors are too small. It would probably be much easier going megasquirt and using the magnum's stuff instead. It won't care about the flywheel issue if you run it in batch fire and not sequential and it can handle the ignition.

Yea, the crank sensor that reads the tone ring on the flywheel. Me bad.

The 3.9 and the 5.2 are both internally balanced, so as far as balance, they are the same. The 3.9 stuff bolts directly to the 5,2. The only problem is the crank sensor notches in the flywheel. I'll post more about that and what I've read just today. in my next post.

As far as the tooth count on the flywheel, I've looked at so much stuff the last couple of days, I may have that confused as well. Both flywheels use the same starter. There is also some debate as to the actual difference in the actual outside diameter of the flywheel. some locations selling flywheels sat there is a one inch difference, but some sites say there is only a 1/2" difference. The problem is, so much stuff changed between 91 and 95 and there were mechanical differences between the Dakota and the Ram during those years that were no longer different after 97.

I understand the concern about the light duty trans behind the V8. The deal is, I have two of these NV2500 transmissions here. I don't do high rpm clutch drops anymore, and I don't do a lot of hard gear banging anymore. I have fairly narrow regular street tires with pretty poor traction. I'm not too concerned about killing the transmission. If I kill the first one, I suspect I will be a lot more mellow with the 2nd one, but if the dumb kid rises up inside of me and I break the 2nd trans, I will just install a bigger trans, or park the car so I can keep my license. The word it both the NV3500 and the NV4500 both will bolt onto my bell.

As far as being on my own with the TBI or any fuel injection, I've been on my own with this car since 2010. The Ramcharger's Magnum system that is on the motor, along with the engine harness, and the computer are all available to me. I'm not afraid to break down the Magnum harness and see what I need to do to make it work on the coupe. The last Ramcharger listed was in 1999 or 2000. That should have been before all the BS started with the computer monitoring everything. The TBI only had 4 or 6 wires actually spliced into the regular wire harness when I broke it all down. As a side note, the early TBI was used on the late 80s trucks. I suspect bigger injectors are available, but making the TB function on the keg intake could be a challenge.

The problem while I'm sitting here on my chair, is that I really don't know the model year of the Ramcharger. I have just installed a new low pressure 90 EFI fuel pump with a return line on the car, I am a bit concerned if that fuel pump is up to the task.

I have been reading about my flywheel problem. I ran across a video (we all know those are absolutely factual and without errors). The guy was installing an LA 5 speed setup into his 95 V8 Dakota that was an auto trans. He was telling how he heated the town ring on the 3.9 flywheel a couple places so it would expand a bit, and knocked the tone ring off the flywheel. Then he just added the flex plate for a 5.2 on and bolted it between the crankshaft flange and the flywheel, used longer bolts, and torqued the flywheel down. He did state that he needed to raise up the crank sensor from the bell with a couple washers between the sensor and the bell. He said the tone ring on the flex plate sits up about a 1/4" higher then the now removed tone ring from the flywheel. He also stated that if you have a V6 computer in a 94 & newer Dakota (or Ram) the computer, it has active cavities for the #7 and the #8 injector wires already there. He said that if you have a harness you can get two prongs from and place the prongs into the correct cavities, you will have the #7 & #8 injectors functioning correctly.

I'll see if I can link that video. OK, I have no idea how to load a U tube video. The title is "3.9 to 5.2 swap flywheel answers" by Charles Field.

Mopar Action did a v6 to v8 swap on an early Dakota BUT both engines were Magnum style.

Thinking more about modification to a flywheel. Pretty sure the number of notches matches number of cylinders. Possible to fill the undesirable notches and make the needed ones? In other words, get a 3.9 Magnum flywheel and make it fit the 5.2.

Ruderunner, that was pretty much what the guy in the video did with the tone ring on the 3.9 flywheel, he didn't fill the marks, he simply removed the tone ring from the flywheel. He stated that the tone ring is pressed onto the flywheel and if you heat the ring itself, it nearly falls off the flywheel (he said it simply tapped it lightly with a hammer, and it fell off). Once the old tone ring was removed, he just added a V8 automatic trans flex plate between the crankshaft flange and the manual trans flywheel. The V8 auto flex plate has the correct tone ring already attached. Since it too has the one offset mounting bolt, it is automatically in the proper position for the V8. He does recommend that you use slightly longer flywheel attaching bolts because of the added thickness with the flex plate added. He also says you need to space the crank sensor away from the block the thickness of two flat washers at each mounting bolt, between the sensor bracket and the block because of the raised elevation of the tome ring.
I happen to have two 3.9 flywheels here, I'm not afraid to kill one of them, and a new V8 flex plate is $35 on line. I can have one here mid week.

The guy also says that the 6 cylinder computers (I assume he is talking OBD2 here) already have an identified pair of cavities built into them to run a # 7 injector and a # 8 injector. He gives the cavity numbers (I would have to go back and watch the video to remember which two they are). According to him, if you have a couple of matching pins with wire attached, you can seat the pins into the correct cavities in the computer and the other end attached to the injector feed. Then you need to connect the ground wire for # 7 & # 8 injector to the other injectors ground to have the other two injectors to function correctly. For me, that may not apply anyway, my 3.9 is throttle body, and OBD1. I have the wiring and computer available from the 5.2 and is port injected and should be an OBD2 (has the keg intake). I managed to splice the current EFI system into this car, I believe I can handle this upgrade as well (the Ramcharger should be before all the security junk the newer stuff has).

If I can remove the tone ring from the V6 flywheel, and the V8 flex plate (maybe use the current flex plate on the 5.2) sandwiched between the crankshaft flange and the V6 flywheel. I won't have an issue with using the NV2500 5 speed (until it breaks, and I have a 2nd NV2500 trans). At that point, I would probably splice in the Magnum harness and computer to replace the OBD1 that is in the car presently. Then, add the cost of what ever I do with the exhaust (might just be split the exhaust into duels and add glass packs), and maybe a couple wheels (not a requirement, but a desire). I'll probably replace the 5.2 timing chain, and do the plate thing on the bottom of the keg intake and a few new other gaskets, and its still a pretty inexpensive undertaking (lots cheaper then a full start up project). The new tires (which are probably the most expensive single portion of this project, IF I don't have to buy a stand along EFI system) would be coming anyway, the old tires are nearly wore out (have around 50,000 miles on them) and are now 6 years old.

I'm going to be looking deeply into the condition of 5.2 next week. Getting it out of the Ramcharger might be the biggest part of the project.

Didn't get to watch the video so can't comment on that yet.

But, using the flexplate for the tone wheel should work OK. Just watch for proper clutch operation since the flywheel is now deeper into the bellhousing. Starter engagement too but I think there's enough tooth engagement built in.
I wonder if the 5.2 tone ring would fit the 3.9 flywheel?

To clarify what seems to be a misconception, OBD2 didn't come about until 96 or so. Your TBI and early Magnum are both OBD1 and very different systems from each other. OBD2 is mainly a communications protocol and standardized codes that the government imposed on manufacturers.

Gene. The more I read about your possible project and the more I do my own thought process (AKA what I would do) I keep coming up with the same idea. Not that I completely understand all the tech information, that is way above my pay grade and my very limited knowledge, but it seems to me a complicated project, not impossible, just difficult. That opinion comes from me being old and lazy with not that much time left for lengthily projects. Your results will vary of course.

I understand your reasons for using your existing completed car and redoing it to new requirements but I wonder if that is the only way to skin the cat and accomplish what you now would like to have.

Just thinking out loud and also just food for thought with many reasons against it but if I was doing it (and glad I am not) I would start over again and build a brand new project exactly the way you want without some of complications of changing the old one. Drive the old when needed and then sell it later. Just a guess but the time and money might end up being much the same.

I will go back to my room now.

Disagree. He's not talking about going a completely different direction but updating what he's got. Or backdating as the case may be. Most of what is being discussed can be prepared ahead of time and changed over in a weekend.

One thing to emphasize, newer technology has it's own jargon. And that jargon needs to be understood, acronyms have distinct meaning. A CMP is not a CKP.

I know a few old time backyard mechanics and they make me cringe calling throttle body injection systems pressurized carburetor. My supervisor doesn't know a thing about hydraulics but talks fast enough to buffalo management into believing he does.

Old Ray, I have a 49 Dodge pickup that I have rebuilt on a Dakota 4x4 chassis. I just completed that in 2022. The next spring I put this 48 Plymouth business coupe on the market. For a year, no one showed any serious interest in the car. It was priced at what several people in the business told me was a fair price. Then this spring I dropped the price by $4000. I had 2 calls, both offering me less then 1/2 of my lower asking price. I pulled the car off the market and started driving it occasionally. That is what has brought me to this point.

Originally, the car was suppose to be my tribute to the old dirt track cars, but I wanted to drive it on the streets. I also wanted my wife to join me, so some compromises had to be made, which I happily did. In 2018 I had to do a few updates on the car (originally built in 2011), and along with those updates, it gained a few more creature comforts that took it farther away from the original concept then the first batch of compromises took it. Through all of that, my wife and I have enjoyed this car through 27 different states and over 100,000 miles. It has been a great journey, I wouldn't have wanted to do any other way.

Now, the 49 pickup has replaced the coupe as that ride we both enjoy. Since June of 2022, we have already enjoyed driving the 49 pickup more then 25,000 miles, and have covered 9 states. The 49 pickup likely won't see the number of states, or probably not see the number of miles the coupe has seen, we are both older then we were when the coupe hit the road in 2012.

Since it is apparent that the coupe has no current value as it is, and I still rather enjoy hopping in it to run across town, I have determined I needed to take it back closer to what it started life being. Essentially, I taking it from being a V6 to being a V8, adding duel exhaust with glass packs, keeping the same manual trans, and changing the tires & wheels to something more fitting to represent what an old dirt track coupe looked like in the mid 60s. Even at my older, slower pace, this should be able to be done over this winter (the entire 49 pickup build, less the body work and paint, took 11 months). I have some money to use, I have the V8 given to me. I have a car with a sound chassis, modern functioning brakes, and good modern suspension and steering that is already titled, insured, and licensed, none of which would exist with a fresh new build.

The biggest challenge is keeping the current electronic fuel injection and matching up the parts and pieces without spending thousands of dollars. I have built several ground up cars (including this coupe the first time around and my 49 pickup), so this really isn't a completely new experience, its just another twist in the big picture.

Follow along as I shake the cobwebs out of my head, and get this old body of mine busy again. I'm that guy that will spend hours of time trying to make something work (or not), before I will spend a couple hundred dollars to buy someone else's fix.

There is conflicting information concerning the fit of the 5.2 tone ring on the 3.9 flywheel. The guy on the video stated that the 5.2 flex plate clears everything on the 3.9 flywheel, but you have to raise up the crank sensor to clear the larger diameter tone ring. The guy in the video addressed the depth of the starter teeth engagement on the flywheel. He stated that normally, the center of the starter teeth are engaged in the center of the flywheel, with the flex plate added, the flywheel engagement will be towards the end of the starter teeth, but still fully engaged. With the thickness of the flex plate being under an 1/8" of thickness, I would expect and issue with the clutch disengagement should be able to be addressed with the clutch rod adjustment.

The thing that bugs me the most about this deal is everything I read says all the V6 motors have a 13.5" diameter flywheel and the V8 uses a 14.5" diameter flywheel. But from 94 on, the literature states all motors use a 14.5" diameter flywheel (with different tone rings between the V6 and the V8 and a different balance for the 5.9), all use the same bell, the same transmission, and the same starter. One place they state that All V6 have the 13.5" flywheel, but then the same source says the V6 has a 14.5" flywheel from 94 on as well. Wonder why there is confusion?

The OBD1 & OBD2 also brings conflicting info. The full size trucks and the Dakota trucks supposedly have different time lines concerning when things changed. Several locations state that the Magnum motor was introduced in the Dakota line with the 93 model year (if you are buying a rebuilt 3.9, it is either 92 and older, or 93 & newer), but the full sized trucks didn't receive them until 94 (but this Ramcharger that has a 5.2 Magnum is suppose to be a 92 model year). Some literature states that the OBD2 started with the introduction of the Magnum motors, some state 96. I know a 92 Dakota and a 93 Dakota (both were V6) had much different computers and different wiring. The 92 was an LA 3.9. the 93 was a magnum 3.9. The 96 Dakota I have has a different computer and wiring then both the other two, and it is definitely an OBD2, but it is also a 5.2.

The information is so polluted, and the dates are so mixed up, the average guy that was not directly involved can't get a straight answer, and the available information isn't clear and may give to several different answers to the same question.

Since the throttle body injection only has the two injectors in the throttle body, I assume they are batch fire and dump gas into the intake with each notch in the tone ring, as it fires the correct plug according to which notch it passes on the flywheel? If I have a V8 tone ring, won't it still dump the gas and plug fire the correct plug according to the correct notch?

The keg intake doesn't have that look of being too good with the air gas mixture running through it, especially since it injects the fuel very near the intake valve. Are those early port injection motors also a batch fire gas dump with each tone ring notch? As long as I can get the V8 tone ring to work, can I splice all 8 port injectors to the current throttle body injector wires to get all 8 injectors to batch fire and assume the smaller port injectors won't dump as much gas as the two larger injectors for the V6 throttle body? Trying to wrap my simple mind around this.

There's a lot of terminology getting mixed up here. To be clear, OBD2 is a government mandated set of standards for computer communication. It has nothing to do with the engine itself. It applies to all engines across all manufacturers from 96 and up.

Obd1 is just a made up name to differentiate between OBD2 and not OBD2. There's no standards shared by any manufacturers in those Early systems.

In other words, ignore it for now.

Your 3.9 uses an ignition and injection control system that is incompatible with a Magnum engine. There's 2 Magnum control systems, 95 and down and 96 up. I believe the basic engine can use either but the computer and wiring must be from the same system.

Your free Magnum is the Early system . Use the computer and wiring that goes with it. The 3.9 TBI stuff will go in the trash.

As for year discrepancy, the 5.2 Magnum came out a couple years before the 5.9, 91 and 93 respectively. Not sure when the 3.9 changed. But realize there's more changes to the engines themselves than just the induction systems. It was a sea change spread out over a couple years.

The flywheel situation doesn't seem that confusing. From what you say, prior to 94 the v6 and v8 used different flywheels, 94 and up they standardized. I would bet the nv2500 disappeared in 94 so there would be no need for the smaller flywheel.

TBI injection systems basically have the injectors spraying fuel any time the engine is running. Those injectors are not timed to anything other than engine load and rpm. The computer uses rpm, MAP sensor and TPS to determine how much fuel to spray. There's a sensor in the distributor for ignition timing only.

Magnum are multi point fuel injection MPFI system and uses the same inputs as above PLUS engine timing to fire the injectors when an intake valve is open. The computer figures out when a valve is open by comparing the timing notches on the flywheel (for ignition) with the timing notches in the distributor. (For fuel timing)

Along with the MPFI changes, the intake became a "dry" manifold. No fuel passes through it and attempting that will be troublesome at best.

Again, if you want to go Magnum, everything from the TBI system goes to the trash. They are not compatible in any way.

Thank you, that did clear a lot of questions up for me.I will be going with the 5.2 system.

I had the opportunity to learn about the early Bosch fuel injection system way back in high school auto shop in 1973, while it was still very new. The instructor I had that year was very up on the new systems of the time. Then, I was a Chrysler dealer tech in 86 & 87and was brought up to speed very quickly through the dealer training program of that time, but then I opened a welding shop in 94. I didn't pay much attention to the transformation of the injection systems after about 92 and didn't get very involved with it again in about 2010. Then it was involving the early 90s to mid 90s systems, and as noted, information was pretty inconsistent.

I'm OK with throwing the throttle body system away, but it did work flawlessly for me for many years. Every vehicle here has been Chrysler EFI since 2011. My 49 Pickup has an intact system from a 96 Dakota. I have no interest in getting involved with the modern security code systems. Too many things just got stupid after about the 2010-2012 model years.

The free 5.2 update:
I was able to get to my son's place and check out the 5.2 in the Ramcharger. I have mixed emotions. The build date on the Ramcharger was 8 of 91 making it a very early 5.2. It appears to be very original. The mileage is unknown, there is no instrument cluster, but even if there was, the truck has a snow plow on it, so any mileage wouldn't be accurate anyway. When you plow snow, almost 1/2 the miles you put on are in reverse and the odometer won't register those miles. Its hard to say when the plow was installed on the truck, but from past experience, I suspect it lived several years before the plow was added. My guess is that the plow was added in the last 10 years.
The motor has no ran for at least a year. When my son got it very early last spring, he messes with it a bit to try to get it running, but then quit. Nothing has been done since then, except the robbing of some interior parts. So that is the back story, everything we know about the 5.2.

The radiator is full. The oil is low (as in barely touching the dip stick). Other then the air cleaner wing nut not being on, the motor is complete, everything is there. The driver side exhaust manifold has the y pipe wired on, looks like the studs are still there, so that is interesting. It doesn't look like the exhaust manifold bolts will ever come off, and the manifolds themselves are pretty crusty, the diver side worst then the passenger side (the highway departments around here salt the center line on the highway first).

I'm starting out with a compression test, so I'm pulling all the plugs first. Start on the passenger side (that was where i was standing). The outside of the plugs say they have been there a long time, to the point the outer lower 1/2 was rusty. The plug part in the motor told a different story. The electrode and the strap all had crisp sharp edges, like new plugs have. The gap looked to be on the small side (but all 4 were the same gap) and the porcelain was sooty black. Onto the other side, the # 1 plug was shiny new, the # 3 plug was older, but not as old as the plugs on the other side. # 5 matched the plugs on the other bank. The # 7 plug is a problem. These plugs are the small ones that need the 5/8" socket. That all also have that tin shield around them. There was a build up of crud around the plug, the socket couldn't even reach the hex on the plug. In my infinite wisdom (and shear laziness), I decidied i should check the compression on the other 7 and see if it was even worth the effort to pull that last plug.

Another issue was since the dash is missing, and I have no idea how much other stuff may or may not be disconnected, I opted to connect jumper cables onto the the starter wires and the ground cable to the motor. I would touch the starter solenoid wire to the positive jumper cable to crank the motor. As one might expect, those connections were not the best. The starter would turn the motor and almost stop when it got to the cylinder with the plug still in it. At least I know that one has compression... I'm looking for somewhat consultant numbers, and I really don't car what they are unless they are really low.

On the dry cylinder walls, the #1 cylinder, on the first bump hit 60 psi, and 75 on the second bump. #3 cylinder, pretty near 60 on that first bump, almost to 70 on the 2nd bump. That was about the time I considered that those cylinders were probably really dry, the motor hasn't even been turned over since early spring. I brought a pump oil can along, so I gave all 7 open cylinders 3 pumps of oil and cranked the motor over a couple times. Then i restarted my compression testing. Another note, I did not record any numbers, and I wasn't watching the number too close. Starting at #8 cylinder, and moving towards the front. first bump, near 75 (the motor still nearly stops turning when it hits the cylinder with the plug in it), 2nd bump, near 90. # 6 cylinder, 1st bump, 90, 2nd bump near 100. #4 cylinder 1st bump 90, 2nd bump 100. #2 cylinder 1st bump, 80, 2nd bump 90. Other bank, #1 1st bump 80, 2nd bump near 100 #3 cylinder 1st bump near 90, 2nd bump 100. #5 1st bump 90, 2nd bump near 100.

Time to see if i can get the plug out of #7. Recruiting a light, looking through the tin shield, I can't even see the hex on the plug! Recruiting a hammer and thin blade screwdriver, and compressed air, after 3 rounds I managed to get enough of what looked like dried mud, cleared away I could get the socket over the hex. I couldn't put enough force on the standard 3/8" ratchet to break the plug loose. I don't really want to break off the plug either. Since I had an oil can with me, I pumped some oil around the plug base, figured I would let is soak into the dried mud a bit. Later I'll go be with some penetrating oil and see how I fare with getting the plug out.

I am open to ideas on how to get the plug out without pulling the head if possible.

Conclusion: If I can get the plug out without pulling the head, I think I'm going to move forward pulling this motor out of the Ramcharger. If I can't get the plug out, I'm going to move on to the next 5.2. The plan was to install a good running motor because the car won't likely see more then 2,000 -3,000 miles a year. I don't need to invest the price of a rebuilt motor into a car that will be lucky to see 30,000 miles in its life. If I have to pull the head to get the plug out, that snowball will grow way too fast. I will be farther ahead to buy a running 5.2 then to invest into this one.

Iirc, those plug shields press into the head. You can probably collapse it and pull it out for better access to the plug.

If you do break the plug, getting the porcelain and electrode out is important. The threaded end usually come out fairly easy with oenetrating oil and an easy out.

Only real thing I've seen on the magnums is clogging of the oil pickup. Pull the pan and give things a look.

Note, it may be worthwhile to diagnose and fix the running problem with it still in the truck.

I will look into it not running a bit deeper before the motor gets pulled. By a quick look at the wire harness, corroded connectors or broken wires wouldn't surprise me at all. I also have some doubts about the condition of the fuel pump on the Ramcharger. With the instrument cluster gone, the interior tore apart, and having no idea how old the gas (if there even is any) might be, or the condition the fuel lines may be in, do I want to invest a lot of time getting it to run in this chassis? The truck has that look of "whatever cheap thing we can do to keep it running and get by" all over it, and there hasn't been much done with it. The time frame for pulling the motor before winter hits is growing short.

Are those tubes around the plugs something that I still need (I wouldn't mind loosing them), and if so, can replacement tubes be found?

Once the motor is out of the truck, the first step is pulling the oil pan and taking a look at a pair of rod bearings and a main bearing. Every step will be one at a time, something that may indicate a need for a rebuild will likely kill off this motor. Not knowing the mileage, the next step is an inspection of the timing chain and probable replacement. From there its a lot of parts replacement time because I'd rather do it while the motor is out of the car. Those replacement parts include oil pump & pickup tube, a water pump, and looking at the core plugs. Headers are in the plan, if I can find reasonably priced headers, but at the very least, the exhaust manifold bolts will be replaced and possibly the exhaust manifolds. I'm also planning on pulling the intake to replace the gasket under the bottom plate. You can see why I'd rather not pull the heads off.

The tubes are just heat shields for the plug boots. Probably won't clear headers anyway. Pretty sure they're available if desired.

Pretty sure the early Magnum had a fuel pressure test port on one of the fuel rails. With creativity a electric pump can be rigged if needed.

I don't believe these had a factory anti theft system like some newer trucks do.

As for getting it running in chassis, at this point everything is hooked up. Once you swap vehicles, you add infinitely more potential possible causes of a no start. Doing it this way makes figuring out a potential no start easier. I'd verify fuel pressure and spark. Considering corrosion issues, the coil is highly suspect. They're known to corroded the iron core and crack the housing.

A handy tool to make is a 194 bulb socket (license light, side marker) with some small thin terminals on the leads. This can be plugged into the coil connection and injector plugs to see if the ecm is commanding operation.

Once you know which is missing, it's easier to figure out.

Early magnums liked to crack heads.

Used to be a goof aftermarket stock replacement head available, but I think that market dried up a long time ago.

Yeah they were known to crack between the valve seats but, it never seemed to create any real problems.

I also was under the impression that the cracks in the early heads were superficial, and very seldom had any effect on the motor operation. These motors go 200,000+ miles, cracks and all without issues. I'm entering into this with the expectation the heads are cracked, I'll take that chance. My son has an 02 Ram with a 5.9 Magnum, but it consumes a bit of antifreeze every couple months, and you can smell antifreeze burning. I wouldn't take the chance on that motor.

If I needed to pull the head to get the plug removed, I would expect it to be cracked, and the only machine shop in town won't touch a head with any crack in it. At this point in time, probably the only option to solve the cracked head is to replace it with an aluminum aftermarket version. That is not going to happen with this motor in this car.

I suppose a smart guy would pull the heads to look at the valves and the cylinder bores, but then the snow ball starts rolling. While the heads and the oil pan are off, I might as well....


ruderunner, you talked me into making sure I have a functioning system before I pull it from the Ramcharger.

I've seen plenty of the Magnums run over 300k under abusive conditions. Like I said, the clogged oil pickup has killed a couple. Never saw dropped valves or anything catastrophic. Maybe a tossed timing chain.

Your son ought to figure out the leak. Most common is a tube that feeds the heater hose, water pump seal and radiator seam. None is a deal breaker.

I wouldn't sweat the spark plug yet. There's ways to get them out.

The coolant leak on my son's truck started about 2 years ago. He has had it pressure tested while it was on a hoist and the source of the leak can not be found. There are no external leaks present. That was the point he decided to pull the truck off the road and has replaced it with a decent truck (with an already existing plow ready to go). He would rather keep the old one running well enough to do his driveway for as long as he can before he uses the "new" truck to plow with.

That old truck has been a snow plow all of its life. Everything on the truck is a crusty mess (looks worse then the Ramcharger actually), won't be anything under that truck, and very few things on the top that will ever unbolt again. He bought it for $1500 four or five years ago, knowing its condition, for the primary purpose of plowing his driveway. His ability to use it as a truck for the first few years was an added bonus. He no longer drives it on the roads, it hasn't had good plates on it for more then a year now. He will keep it running well enough to plow his drive, when it fails at that, it will likely be history. His functioning newer truck is in much better shape he can replace the old one for plowing his driveway with very quickly when the time comes. His plan is to get what ever use the old truck still has, out of it, before he puts it out of its misery. For the money he paid for it, its been a good truck, and it has lasted well past what he expected, but every year its conditioned has deteriorated more and more.

Well, we get to put new windows in our house, and now also a new roof.

Any car projects not needed are put on hold for this winter, at least.

i did the windows many years ago, and what a difference that made ! cut the outside street noise TREMENDOUSLY !
they may have been the original windows for this place, [built in 1872] as they all had those long "window weights" attached that allowed the windows to open kind of easily. [???]
they were relatively inexpensive back then, compared to what they would be today, and we did all 22 in the house.
we replaced the original slate roof years ago, not due to the slate wearing out or going bad, but because there was nobody that would fix a couple slates that had come loose and slid down, causing a small leak into the one side of an upstairs closet.
as doing a shingle roof would mean a complete re-do of the roof trusses and roof itself, we opted for a steel roof. it turned out fantastic, and the following year, we did the garage/shop roof in the same material.
somewhat different than most steel roofs, there are no exposed fasteners, so no worries about future leaks coming from beneath them.
windows today are possibly better than the ones we had installed, but as long as they open and close as they should, they will be there after my wife and i cash in, so the next sucker, er, i mean owner, of this place can deal with them.
one thing i have had to do over the years, is replace a couple of the lock levers and retainers.
i just used the generic items you get at lowes or home depot, or the local hardware store. those usually require drilling new attachment holes, but we don't live in a "show home", so it's ok for us.

The windows were planned for, our current windows are original to our house (built in 1954). They were, at that time, the top of the line windows available. All of them are therm o-pane, and most are crank out. The seals are worn out and several the cranks no longer work, we have been covering them with plastic for several years to seal them up in the winter (the plastic kit is $40 a year and covers all the windows). The 26 new windows are not cheap, but come with a lifetime warranty, for what ever that is worth.

The roof came as a surprise, that is a long story. If we had known the roof was going to need to be replaced this soon (the current roof is less then 20 years old), the windows would not have happened, at least this year. Between the cost of the windows and the roof, we are almost at 1/2 of what we paid for the house when we bought it 23 years ago.

it really is sad, when replacement costs for things such as windows, storm doors, and roofs, cost half as much or more, than the original cost of the house.................
the real estate guys claim you get that cost back when you sell the house. but realistically, how many people just put a roof or windows on their house just because those people say it's the thing to do, when they know deep down, they are not going anywhere.