RLSH700

I'm critical of offering the 4.7L option. When Chrysler was considering making the "Howler," replacement for the Prowler, they tested a 4.7L with a 6-speed manual, and they found it to be no faster than the 3.5L 42RLE combination despite the two gear and significant torque advantage. That version of the 4.7L had 250hp & around 300-310ft-lbs of torque. Even if they would come up with the 265-270hp/325-330ft-lbs version that they used to have in the Grand Cherokee, modify the exhaust, add a ram-air, and other cheap modifications, the improvement would be marginal over the 3.5L and would not justify the higher price it would cost for both the original purchase and the higher insurance cost. The normal 4.7L is more expensive to build than the 5.7L HEMI, let alone the higher output 4.7L and the costs of these modifications. A V6 base model is not an insult to the heritage because the orginal had a slant six that had well under 200hp and the 3.5L produces more hp and weighed less than the 318 option did, but offered less torque. I would prefer it if they would offer the upcoming 4.0L which is supposed to offer more torque, which is more valuable in a heavier cars like this. If they would instead add dual exhaust and a cold-air intake it could be powerful enough to rival the 340's numbers, with higher fuel economy than any of these engines.

I believe that the HEMI engine line is more fuel efficient than what we think. Look at the tests that the magazines have done on the LX cars. Consumer Reports (a very anti-Chrysler source) just reciently compared the Impala SS to the Charger R/T, both of which have their own multi-displacement systems. The SS vs. R/T are rated at 18/28 & 17/25, but CR found them to get the same 17 mpg combo and the SS has a taller gearing advantage. In a Car and Driver test, they also got 17 with the Charger R/T, but they got a very lousy 14 mpg, the same as the SRT-8 had. In these tests, most of these cars are being run to where the MDS probably doesn't get a chance to run. The T-56 Tremec manual should increase the fuel economy as it has with the Corvette in comparison to their automatic. The overdrive improvement would be more significant between the A580 and the T-56 (.83 vs. .50), than it would be between the auto in the Vette (.7 vs. .50). To some up this massive amount of information, I believe that GM overrates their fuel economy and Dodge is underrating it, and the T-56 will probably make us happy with higher fuel economy. Another fact the 6.1L is shown to having a K&N air filter, and those typically help the fuel economy as well.