Search results for query: *

Thanks, that is what I was looking for. Now the pan issue is settled. Maybe someone will post that has used the magnum gasket on the 5.2 and give us the final word on that.

I appreciate everyone's input, but it would make me more confident if someone who actually has a magnum 5.2 in their a-body would chime in and say if the LA pan is the one to use for sure.

So the 273-340LA pan will fit the magnum 5.2? I assume one could use the magnum 5.9 gasket? Does any one have personal experience with this in their car? I only want to install the pan one time (and only buy one pan).

I thought that might be the case, so I went straight to the FEL-PRO catalog, and sure enough they are different parts numbers...

I am planning a 5.2 magnum swap. To install the 360 car pan on my 5.2 magnum, do I need the 5.2 magnum gasket or the 5.9 magnum gasket? I thought the all the magnum pan gaskets were the same, but there are different part numbers for the gaskets....

I remember seeing the 3.9 crate engine swap into a Duster done by one of the mopar magazines probably 15 or so years ago.....just can't remember which magazine.

Good info, I suspected it would work. I would definitely plan on bracing the pump with extra supports. Darter6, did you have any fuel starvation issues under hard acceleration or cornering?

Is anyone running an in tank fuel pump spliced into the original a-body fuel pickup? Or any other mounting options to put a pump in the original tank without cutting/welding the tank? (other than buying a fuel injection tank from Tanks, inc.)

You will need pretty much everything. You will need the engine, a 46RE transmission, engine wiring harness and computer from a Durango the same year that had a 5.9 (plus the SKIM module and ignition key if it has SKIM) You will also need alot of other small parts people don't think about like...

magnummopar, have you run your new belt setup on a car yet give a real-life try? It looks great, just curious if there are any issues and if you are in production with them yet.

To avoid reflashing, could I use an AT pcm and just connect "dummy" od and tcc solenoids to fool the pcm into thinking there is a transmission present?

Thanks everybody for all the good info, it gives me a lot to think about and will probably save me lots of time and $$!

Would the same apply to the 96-97 Dakota/Durango?

magmunmopar: If I use a 96-97 ram harness and pcm for my A727 equipped Dart, will I have any engine performance issues due to the PCM not "seeing" the 46RE trans, or will it just have a nuisance CEL? Or do I need a manual trans PCM?

Would I need the instrument cluster or some portion of it to run an OBDII setup? Or can I just wire up a CEL and use the diagnostic port by itself? Would you recommend Dakota or Ram wiring for best fit in an A--body?

So....back to my original question???

Can I upgrade to obd II later on by changing the computer and harness?

No, the Dakota does not have the security system.

Considering a magnum swap into my 71 Dart. I have access to a complete running 1992 Dakota with a 5.2 MFI. Looking at the wiring diagrams, it appears that all the MFI system needs to use most of the Dakota's underhood wiring is to splice a power wiring from the ignition switch that is hot in...