At 06:02 PM 3/10/97 -0800, you wrote:
>The 3.9 runs just fine, it doesn't make the power of the 5.2, and if I
>knew then what I know now I'd have waited a few months and bought a 5.2
>with a 5 sp'd in '93. But unless you expect it to do things it can't do
>it oughta hold up just fine.
>
>The old slantomatic sixes only had four main bearing and a lot of crank
>flex, I'll take my 3.9 over one of them anyday. Had a '60 Valiant with a
>170 cu in slantomatic, which was a good engine for its day. But that was
>36 years ago! Seven mains, a better head and mpi and it'd be a good
>engine today, maybe.
>
>Larry
>
Larry:
I've owned 3 cars with slant 6's. The latest was a super 6 in a 77 Volare.
It had 100,000 mile on it when I sold the car with no engine repairs
(except maitenance) at all. The local taxis were easily getting 200,000
miles before even doing valve jobs.
I also had a slant 6 1/2 ton .... gave me 17 mpg (canadian) in town and 25
on the highway ... what were you guys saying you're getting with V6
Dakotas? :)
Rob Agnew
ragnew@islandnet.com
Victoria,
British Columbia
Canada
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:07:34 EDT