Yes, it's nuts, but there's just something about it that appeals to me. A-arm pushrod front suspension, multi-link rear, vintage yet modern looks, and a serious power-to-weight ratio add up to fascinating. I suppose the FF 33 roadster would be just as good, but I like the looks of this even better. Crazy?
Had it come with a proper motor from the factory it probably would of been a more desirable car. Though I think the FF33 is a better looking car
I agree, if Dodge/Chrysler had put a decent engine in there instead of a V6, that car would be awesome. It was waaaaaaaay overpriced if I remember correctly too wasn't it?
They took a line from the GM way of doing things. They produced a car they though you'd want, but did it all wrong. Then, as they axed the car they came out with the Howler. V-8, manual trans, real trunk space. But alas, they wouldn't produce it.
I don't like the look of those at all but I can't imagine a scenario where an LS7 wouldn't improve my opinion of it.
No, you are not crazy.
I'd rather have a new Hemi in there to keep it all Mopar, but hey, that's just me.
The stock ones are LAME.
I think the lack of a manual trans was a much bigger problem than the motor itself. It was a GOOD motor. Of course, the fact that chrysler didn't bother to re-rate it to differentiate a prowler 3.5 from an intrepid 3.5 was probably a goof even though it would be pandering to people who only have enough car knowledge to make judgments on face value. I know for a fact that taking off the intrepid intake plumbing and improving the downpipes adds a BUNCH of power at high rpm. But the ship has sailed. 
The stock 3.5L V6 from the Prowler was originally used in the RWD and AWD Charger. Ergo, you should be able to easily bolt in a 5.7L V8 or drop in the 6.2L Hemi. You should even be able to add AWD with the 5.7L. Probably take a weekend and some hand tools. 
pinchvalve wrote: The stock 3.5L V6 from the Prowler was originally used in the RWD and AWD Charger. Ergo, you should be able to easily bolt in a 5.7L V8 or drop in the 6.2L Hemi. You should even be able to add AWD with the 5.7L. Probably take a weekend and some hand tools.
Not a chance in the world, the transmission in the Prowler is very unique and not in the place you expect it to be and it does not take huge increases in HP very well.
The Prowler was built originally as a engineering exercise to see just how much of a car that they could make out of aluminum. Even the brake rotors are very light weight and made out on non traditional materials.
People look at them and often see a modern car but they were designing it in 93-95 almost 20 years ago ago and compared o things being built at the same time it was a wonder.
My old boss used to work at a high-end custom/hotrod shop where a customer had them shoehorn a then-new Hemi into his Prowler. According to everyone but the owner with stars in his eyes (probably unwilling to admit he'd wasted probably close to $50k on the build), it ruined the car. And this was not a shop where a lackluster end result could be blamed on poor execution.
I think if you want retro looks and giant-slaying performance, build yourself a FFR '33 with the meanest motor you can handle. Probably still cheaper than a stock Prowler.
alex wrote: My old boss used to work at a high-end custom/hotrod shop where a customer had them shoehorn a then-new Hemi into his Prowler. According to everyone but the owner with stars in his eyes (probably unwilling to admit he'd wasted probably close to $50k on the build), it ruined the car. And this was not a shop where a lackluster end result could be blamed on poor execution. I think if you want retro looks and giant-slaying performance, build yourself a FFR '33 Couple with the meanest motor you can handle in it. Probably still cheaper than a stock Prowler.
Good point on just getting a FFR '33. Those are really cool.
Anyone throw a Pentastar motor in a Prowler yet?
Looks like a great idea, but I appear to be in th eminority in liking the original car. It's a production built cruiser. Ice cream runs and date nights with the wife. To me a V6 with auto would be fine, but I admit I haven't driven one to really comment.
Yeah, I think the bad reputation Prowlers got out of the box was largely from guys who misunderstood the point of the thing. It was foremost, as wearymicrobe mentions, an engineering exercise. That they sold it at all is pretty remarkable. And you'd think equipping it with an auto and a V6 would have disabused people of the notion that it was supposed to be a firebreathing hot rod, despite appearances. For the intent of the car - cruising, as Adrian mentions - the drivetrain is more than adequate.
I'll admit it was probably a misstep on Chrysler's part to sell something that owes so much to American hot rods for its overall look and not put a big V8 in it. That alone probably would have quelled almost all of the initial rancor surrounding the car.
Always needed a manual trans.
Well, since the cheapest stock Prowler around here is $10K higher than the FF kit, I guess I've answered my own question. Still think it would be cool if I could find one with a blown motor for a reasonable price.
I have always wanted one.....
maseratiguy wrote: Always needed a manual trans.
This. The later ones could do 0-60 in 5.9 seconds which isn't bad but I think the lack of manual option was a let down.
93EXCivic wrote:maseratiguy wrote: Always needed a manual trans.This. The later ones could do 0-60 in 5.9 seconds which isn't bad but I think the lack of manual option was a let down.
They are actually a little bit faster then that 5.6 give or take. With gears, exhaust and intake they are a 5.3-5.4 car all day long.
When people talk about swapping them and thinking it is easy they have never actually take one apart. The drive shaft is not exactly straight in the cars and making the output shaft plate for the motor is a PAIN in the butt.
Now a few guys have stroked the 3.5 to 4.0/4.4 liters and they make some pretty good power 400-410hp give or take which is plenty in a car that weights that little.
maseratiguy wrote: Always needed a manual trans.
they had an auto with a shifter that you moved sideways to do manual up and down shifting... isn't that close enough?
also, weren't they the first production car sold in the USA to come with 20" rear wheels?
While the V6 in the Prowler "only" made 253hp, Chrysler didn't really have an option for a much more powerful V8 to throw in there. The 5.9L in the pickups only made 245hp, and the HO4.7L from the Grand Cherokee just barely beat it out with 265hp. Sure, there's the argument for wanting a lot more low end torque in a car like this, and the V8s would have provided that, but then you'd also be adding more weight.
I'm of the opinion they should have thrown together a crossflow AMC I6 for it, maybe with a supercharger option.
they already had the Viper V10 in the parts bin, and i think they were built in the same factory as the Vipers...
novaderrik wrote: they already had the Viper V10 in the parts bin, and i think they were built in the same factory as the Vipers...
Same factory as the vipers, different build lines. The vipers got special treatment on paint and some accessories.
In terms of the V10 the v6 in the car is almost impossible to service. Getting a V8 in requires moving the firewall. The viper V10 would take removing the drivers legs and using hand controls.
it does not take huge increases in HP very well.
Unfortunately that is almost all down to the difficulty in changing the shifting behaviour of the TCM. The few people that managed to run the clutch-to-clutch 604/606 with both high power and standalone shift computer reported good durability even with 600hp. We're talking 10 second 1/4 passes on stock guts (in a neon, admittedly).
To me a V6 with auto would be fine, but I admit I haven't driven one to really comment.
Well, how do you feel about your Mustang? The prowler was at the very bleeding edge of what is now mainstream: High-power V6s in perfectly passable sporty RWD cars.
While the V6 in the Prowler "only" made 253hp, Chrysler didn't really have an option for a much more powerful V8 to throw in there. The 5.9L in the pickups only made 245hp, and the HO4.7L from the Grand Cherokee just barely beat it out with 265hp.
The 5.9 only made 245 in certain trim and i dont think the HO 4.7 existed yet, non-HO were around 235hp rated!
People forget now, but in 1998 when dodge released the 250hp 3.5 version, it was exceptionally powerful among 'mundane' family car 6 cyls. More powerful than an M3 motor, an SHO v6 or v8, nissan's VQ, NEARLY as much hp as an NSX v6, and just forget about the Mustang gt!To get the same effect today, you have to be in the 350-400hp range from similar displacement.
Now a few guys have stroked the 3.5 to 4.0/4.4 liters
How about 5.0? Requires some massively expensive machine work. Look at those sleeves starting to touch the coolant jackets!
wearymicrobe wrote:novaderrik wrote: they already had the Viper V10 in the parts bin, and i think they were built in the same factory as the Vipers...Same factory as the vipers, different build lines. The vipers got special treatment on paint and some accessories. In terms of the V10 the v6 in the car is almost impossible to service. Getting a V8 in requires moving the firewall. The viper V10 would take removing the drivers legs and using hand controls.
leave the firewall... move the front suspension farther forward...
You'll need to log in to post.
