Early Dakota with a 4 cylinder and a 904 Torqueflite

-

lemondana

BlackDart
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
1,287
Reaction score
1,233
Location
Southeast NE
Has anyone owned or ever seen an early Dakota with the Chrysler 2.2 or 2.5 4 cylinder with a 904 automatic behind it? Were any ever built?
 
I'll check, but I think the four cylinder of the Dakota was the Jeep 2.5 pushrod engine instead of the 2.2=2.5 Mitsubishi based engines.
 
Okay, according to AllPar, they were available with them. It must have been in the nineties that they went to the jeep engine. Personally, I don't have a very good opinion of the non turbo 2.2/2.5. They were about average for what they were originally designed for at the time, but there are a whole lot better ways of doing it now.
 
From memory the K-car Trenton 2.2/2.5L 4 cylinder was sold in the Dakota but may have only been with a manual trans. When new this combination had the highest customer satisfaction of all Chrysler vehicles including JEEP models.

I think the AMC 2.5 engine was used mid-90s.
 
I agree that the NA 2.2 and 2.5's were nothing to sneeze at. I've been following a couple guys that have 2.5 turbo Omni's. One is running down in the 10's and the other one is not a long way behind. Just thought a north-south 2.5 turbo with a 904 in a light street rod or something similar would be cool.
 
One of the later high output Shelby 2.2 turbo in that would be a lot of fun in that. If it weren’t so darned overly complicated to swap in, even a Pentastar v6 would be a lot of fun, too. But one of the 3.5 Jeep v6s may not be bad, though.
 
I agree that the NA 2.2 and 2.5's were nothing to sneeze at. I've been following a couple guys that have 2.5 turbo Omni's. One is running down in the 10's and the other one is not a long way behind. Just thought a north-south 2.5 turbo with a 904 in a light street rod or something similar would be cool.

Just put in a turbocharged Honda K24 engine and remove any covers or markings that indicate it's a Honda lol. I'm too young to have been around the Chrysler turbo 4-banger cars in the 1980s but now when I get curious about having an old-school turbo 4-cylinder I always end up leaning towards the Japanese stuff. They just did it better; Mitsubishi 4G63, Toyota 1JZ and 2JZ (inline-6 turbo), Honda B- and K-series, etc. are all legendary for making massive power while lasting a long time. I have heard good things about the old turbo Mopars regarding performance but the cars and engines just weren't built to last, and weren't built very well overall compared to the imports. I could be misinformed though, just my thoughts...
 
I was originally thinking along those same lines but maybe with an SRT-4 Neon engine... But, have you seen what GM Ecotec fours can do with a stock bottom end and big boost and charge coolers? I feel like it's a pretty safe bet the aftermarket support for electronics would be a lot less expensive as well. Unfortunately, sometimes the best probable option is the least popular. I personally miss the MP support for the 3.9 V-6. Certainly not a huge potential engine unless you want to build a bomb but good potential in a light vehicle.
 
Had a 2.2 turbo in an 86 lebaron. Wasnt a dog,but it was almost fun to drive. Trying to get more power out of them was a waste of time and money in my opinion. Unless you went all out and built it from the ground up.
 
@Garrett Ellison I forgot about the SRT-4 engine, those were very very good. That DOHC 2.0/2.4L was actually so good that Mitsubishi imported some of them to Japan to put in their JDM cars.

There will never be any Jap Crap parked in my driveway! Sorry if that offends anyone.

lol not at all doesn't bother me, really just kind of bums me out about being a Mopar fan. I just wish Chrysler had the same level of build quality as that "Jap Crap" then maybe I'd be interested in more than just 1950s-1970s Mopars and G3 Hemi V8s. Everything else they made for the most part is just kind of "meh", IMHO. It's not bad, it's just not quite as good as offerings by other makes in a lot of cases. Once in a while (like with that SRT-4 engine) they knock it out of the park but they'll never be the company they were when our beloved A-bodies were being made.
 
Read years ago that there were 6 prototype A904s made for the 2.2 Dakota, but they never made it to production. A 2.2/2.5 legend, Cliff Sebring, had a dragster back in the day with one of these prototype transmissions in it.
 
I was originally thinking along those same lines but maybe with an SRT-4 Neon engine... But, have you seen what GM Ecotec fours can do with a stock bottom end and big boost and charge coolers? I feel like it's a pretty safe bet the aftermarket support for electronics would be a lot less expensive as well. Unfortunately, sometimes the best probable option is the least popular. I personally miss the MP support for the 3.9 V-6. Certainly not a huge potential engine unless you want to build a bomb but good potential in a light vehicle.

If you were going to do that you can get a complete pullout from a Pontiac Solstice or Saturn Sky - They had either a 2.4L Ecotec with 174 hp (5-speed auto or Manual) or a 2.0 Ecotec Direct Injection Turbo with 260 hp and the same transmission options. Honestly should be relatively easy to put in a pickup truck of any kind, they mount the ECUs under the hood and everything.
 
Thanks for the heads up on that, I've got an '02 S-10 with 2.2 Vortec and 4L60e that may receive that sort of thing if the present mill goes south. Not wanting to go full on LS or 4.3 with it, just want it to be able to get out of it's own way. A quick check confirms said LE5 is growing in popularity for that.
 
-
Back
Top