chrysler 3.5 V6 ??

You can't really compare the 3.5 to a 3.7, they are totally different from an architecture standpoint; 3.5 is SOHC with a timing belt and the 3.7 is pushrod/timing chain.

Regardless of my distaste for the 2.7/3.5/4.0 variants, ALL pass car engines are compromised designs. Each have their strong and weak points. They can all fell prey to careless owners and poor maintenance or prove themselves over time. Maybe some are more prone to sludge or overheating than others.

Hey, even some brand new engines have faults right off the showroom floor, like the 3.6. We were replacing cylinder heads on brand new cars - they had a misfire code and it was found that the coolant passages in the head were not efficient enough and the valves were getting cooked. Only did a few of those myself but it was surprising to see a fail like that.

Indeed, some problems associated with a particular engine have more to do with which vehicle they were in rather than the engine itself. However, particular designs do not lend themselves to easy service which in my mind was the 3.5. By contrast, the 3.7 is a pretty easy engine to work on and is fairly simple. That could just be my experience though. I worked on more Jeeps than Chryslers/Dodges since I worked at a Jeep dealership. But, I did my share of all of 'em, we serviced all Chrysler/MB/Fiat products.

I agree with the person who said the 4.7 was a dud as far as V8s go. Those things were underpowered gas hogs as well. I could never understand why Chrysler abandoned the Magnum platform in favor of the 4.7, just made no sense. How long did that engine last? Not long.

Things change I guess. Everything that comes out of the factories is designed with planned obsolescence. Some designs are remembered more fondly than others. 318s get no love but there were zillions of them produced for the better part of four decades.