I got the idea when I found out that the earliest ones were a whopping 2700 pounds. I do wonder how many mopar purists I could make suicide by throwing it in an early Barracuda though.....
Note: as a normal mopar guy, it is our job to do that.
Second Note: the weird ones are the normal mopar guys. This one didn't really need to be pointed out here.
In reply to Grizz:
There was a link on here to some Swedish build where they put a turbo 4 cylinder in a Corvette.
In reply to Grizz:
There is a guy who has a 10 second Rampage who built a 9 second RWD Daytona with a TF999. I dug around for it hoping he did it without an adapter plate somehow, but no such luck. 
Trackmouse wrote: In reply to BrokenYugo: How would you keep the front wheels (now rear wheels) from turning? Is there a science to disconnecting the steering rack and like... welding... the steering knuckles in place?
I'm not sure exactly what they did, but the Georgia Tech kids put an entire Subaru front subframe in the back of an Insight to make it RWD. I think they kept the original tie rods and rack, but locked it somehow.
..then again, that rear end did break apart at both the 2015 and 2016 Challenges 
In reply to maschinenbau:
I suppose if you wanted to be quick and dirty about it you could just center the rack, cut up the stock u joint for the splined section and weld that to a bar that bolts down somewhere to keep the pinion from turning. Or for a sketchy solution you might be able to crank the preload adjuster down tight enough to lock the rack.
i did fine last year with a $500 van donating it's 5.3 and 4L65E. 
this year's donor is a $1000 van with a 6.0/4L80E
bang for the buck is hard to beat with a gen3 small block chevy, especially when you liberate it of 3 tons of van and put it in less than 1.25 tons of car.
Wonder how cheap the 2.8/2.9/3.5s are out of wrecked colorados.
Big aluminum DOHC motors with manual options and decent power.
In reply to Grizz:
Definitely "big", they are extremely large engines physically.
Local car-part search has the 2.8 going for $1k or so, the 3.7 for $2k.
I've never had to deal with it, but scuttlebutt on all of the tech magazines and online resources suggests that the Atlas engines have extremely weak head bolts. They break when trying to remove them and the new ones sometimes break while torquing them down. So maybe used engines are extremely valuable because shops would rather drop in a used engine with Someone Else's Warranty than own a problem repair.
Hm, that sucks, they seem to be good engines otherwise.
Again, I've never seen an Atlas have any mechanical problems other than the usual VVT solenoid failure or valve cover gasket drooling into the plug wells. Nothing ever serious. But I read enough reports of head bolt issues to be forced to recognize it as a possibility, and there's got to be some reason why such a common engine is so expensive at the moment.
I just figured it was aluminum, dohc and still fairly new. All of that normally means money to me.
"New" often means "worthless", too. How many one year old cars need engines?
Was a time when I could find 2.0 Ecoboosts on car-part for $300. Now they're up in the $800-1000 range depending on if you want one with a turbo and intake manifold or not.
Knurled wrote: "New" often means "worthless", too. How many one year old cars need engines? Was a time when I could find 2.0 Ecoboosts on car-part for $300. Now they're up in the $800-1000 range depending on if you want one with a turbo and intake manifold or not.
Yep in 04 i bought a 20k mile takeout 4.2 atlas from an 02 trailblazer for 400 shipped with computer, harness, exhaust, accessories. Wish i still had it.
Atlas engines are TALL
You'll need to log in to post.
