200-something small block

Buddies with a tow company are the new owners of a rolled 2003/4 dodge van. Motor sounds great and we're thinking of putting it in an early car w/a push button 904. Want to retain pb feature so using the later trans is not an option. Other than the adapter for the converter snout, any problem bolting newer motor up to this early trans? Will 273 exhaust manifolds bolt up to a late small block? This is looking like a good, cheap way to go fi/computer. Thanks!

Depends on what flavor of smallblock, 360 will require an imbalance weight on the torque converter or a external balance flexplate.

Best find someone that knows Torqueflites to beef up the PB one.

As for the manifolds, you will need to mock up the 273 units, I had to grind the head some with my 87 318, but I dunno how it fits on a Magnum.

I am actually test fitting a set of magnum manifolds on my 65 Cuda, which if they can be made to fit are much better than the 273 stuff.

It's a 5.2, which is probably a 318. Not sure on ext/int balance on late motors but, if there are weights on the converter, I will add them to the 904.

I built the 904, long ago & put in a tf-2, drilled the drum & a few other odds & ends, at that time. It's held up well & it will get a lot less abuse now, than it used to.

Please post how that works out with the manifolds, as this is a 64 barracuda.

Thank you!

the 5.2 shouldn't need any weights, so you should be good to go. As for the manifolds, well, I've been test fitting them for a couple of years now (stalled project), it's likely you'll be up and running long before I even get the engine back into the Cuda.

You will need a manual trans computer or an OBDI computer.

Or a Megasquirt.

All A, LA and Mag motors that had 3.91 bore and 3.31 stroke are internally balanced.

It should be a relatively easy install.

To avoid confusion, the smallblock Mopar with stud mounted rockers is a Magnum motor, either 5.2 or 5.9. There are enough differences that it is confusing to call them 318s or 360s.

R.

They have a couple of dead, mid-late 90's, v-8 dakota's in the yard. One with bad 5spd and both w/dead motors. Would that interchange? Is the main ecm the one mounted under the hood, on the side? Thank you.

Just thinking out loud here as I'm not the expert...on any of this, really. BUT, some of this conversation doesn't add up to me. I'm pretty sure you won't find a 5.2 later than 2002, or MAYBE a 5.9 up through 2003? Is the motor possibly a 4.7? Also, you can run a carb (with an aftermarket intake) on the 5.2/9 if you'd rather keep it simple.

You might need the OBDI computer AND wire harness/sensors/etc OR the OBDII manual trans computer, which should work with your sensors (but grab them anyway).

I'm not 100% on the year, that was just what Jake & John were told by the body shop that had them haul it off, it was approx. an '03. Ended up having only liability and owners walked. I didn't look at the door but there is a emission, or some kind of information sticker on the support, that had 5.2 on it. Engine could have been swapped by now too, I suppose. Not a chance on using a carb, that's why I'll be doing this for them. Besides, I'd just rebuild the 273 in there now if I wanted to do it simple.

I'll a-b all the sensors between them, and resistance test them if I find different part numbers, swap the one's I need to. I'll use the manual trans ecm and harness. I figure to strip apart the factory harnesses and remove what I don't need to make the new one.

These are still cable throttles? I never really got a look 'under the hood' on the van, pretty tight in there.

Thanks for the tips!

The 5.2 as well as the 5.9 were used in vans through 2003, the last model year for B-series vans.No vans were built with a 4.7. The trucks got the 4.7 in 2002 and the 5.9 continued in them through some of 2003,then the 5.7 Hemi replaced it.

There was a change in the Magnum motors. When they went to the later engine controller the plugs on many of the sensors changed shape. You can't plug an early harness into a late engine.

I do not know what year that was done.

Make sure the Dakota and van engines use the same plugs if that's the route you take.

Not much time to go over the van but, the door sticker is July 00 so I'd say it's a 2000. Boating season has begun so that's taking up my time, at the moment.

There's a signal generator on the trans/speedo. Is this the reason for having to have manual trans ecm? If that is required to operate in closed loop, then I assume it generates a signal, to the ecm? To function properly, does the ecm have to generate an output signal to a speedo or, can I dead end that output? Pretty sure I can make a mechanical gear box (GM uses them alot) trans/speedo adapter with a double output and run the mechanical speedo and the sig. gen. to give the right input to the ecm.

Lastly, (for today!) where do you find the best tech books/schematics for these?

Thanks a bunch!

late 80's rams used an electric signal generator for the ECM and a mechanical output for the speedo, it might work.

http://www.rockauto.com/catalog/moreinfo.php?pk=40825&cc=1084744&jnid=526&jpid=0

That's a nice looking piece, I will check into it. Thanks!

You'll want a 92-95 V8 engine harness/computer. Auto or manual trans computer won't matter. The 95 and earlier is OBD-1, and the wiring harness is 20x simpler than a 96+ OBD-2 harness. I put a 99 dakota 5.2 into my 88 Jeep Wrangler. I used a harness out of a 95 grand cherokee and manual trans ecm out of a ram (because my jeep was a manual trans, plus the cherokee ecu would not work because it had security). The OBD-1 harness is fairly easy to dissect, the engine harness portion is very self contained, there's only 3 or so wires from the engine harness that you have to mate with your stock wiring. I did have to swap over the engine sensors from the 95 onto the 99 engine and drill/tap the 99 engine for an intake coolant temp sensor that it did not have.

We'll see if one of those years is in the boneyard. Thank you!

So, regarding tech manuals, schematics, where is the best spot to locate those? Thanks, again.

Anyone use this company for wiring schematics?

http://wiring4cars.com/