The Dodge Charger, celebrated for its muscle car heritage from Daytona to drag strips, faces a paradox: not all models are equipped with the roaring power one might expect. While contemporary Chargers boast robust Hemi V8 engines, past versions were delivered with underwhelming engines, most notably the much-criticized 2.7-liter V6, which some consider one of Chrysler’s most disappointing engines in recent history.
Since its revival as a sedan for the 2006 model, the Charger has primarily been offered with various Hemi V8 options or a V6 as a secondary choice. The now-retired LD model featured the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6, a decent but unremarkable engine. Prior to that, the Charger had the 3.5-liter “Magnum” V6, known for its lack of power, which was also used in other models like the Plymouth Prowler and the Dodge Durango. Yet, there was an even smaller V6 that, arguably, should have faded into obscurity.
The 2.7-liter twin-cam “EER” V6 served as the base engine for the LX Charger at its launch, having been introduced the year before in the Magnum wagon. This engine was initially designed for Chrysler’s LH-platform sedans, starting with the 1998 Chrysler Concorde and Dodge Intrepid. Interestingly, the 2.7 was not initially offered to the public but was limited to fleet sales for the 2006 model year.
In 2007, Dodge released the 2.7 to the wider public, producing a modest 190 horsepower and 190 lb-ft of torque, which diminished by the time it reached the rear axle via a four-speed automatic transmission. In the SE base model, which was the only variant to use this engine, steel wheels were standard while traction control was offered as an option, although it was largely deemed unnecessary since the 2.7 struggled to reach 60 mph in around 10 seconds—slower than the heavier Ford Crown Victoria. Reports suggest it could reach a top speed of just 112 mph. One can only imagine how much worse the performance would be with all-wheel drive; in fact, it gets worse.
In 2009, Dodge decreased the power of the 2.7 to just 178 hp while maintaining the same torque. Surprisingly, fuel efficiency also took a hit, dropping from 21 mpg in the city and 28 on the highway to 18 city and 26 highway. By this stage, the engine had garnered a reputation for developing oil sludge and timing chain tensioner failures. While some enthusiasts claimed these issues had been resolved before the engine came to the Charger, the aging motor’s relevance was diminishing. When the revamped 2011 model debuted, it brought with it the 3.6-liter V6 that subsequently replaced both smaller V6s.
Despite the criticism directed at the 2.7-liter engine, it has grown on me. Upon discovering its existence, I shared the news with my fellow 24 Hours of Lemons racers. The Charger possesses solid suspension and an expansive aftermarket support network. A less desirable engine could even be advantageous, as judges might dismiss it as a sluggish car, relegating you to a slower racing class. Unfortunately, I already have a race car and many other questionable project ideas ahead. If someone takes the plunge and races it, I’ll celebrate with a shot of Malört in your honor.
.
