--- Kyle Kozubal <grndak4x4@home.com> wrote:
> Other than finding some, yet still limited info, concerning the
> agricultural 3.9L 4cylinder....I havent found any solid info
> concering this
> engine. I found it mentioned two times lately in 4WD Magazines:
> #1: Four Wheeler, August 2000 Issue; Page 26
Also in the same issue (same article actually), page 22. In the '60
CJ-5.
> In one article, it said the 3.9L uses a Holset Turbo and makes
> 130hp at
> 2,500 RPM and 350 lb-ft of torque at 1,500 RPM.
> These stats may be fine for a 'rock buggy' or
> when it is bolted down into a lightweight CJ5, but a heavy
> Dakota......I
> would rather have the 5.9L Cummins. But then again, I would just
> love to
> have a torqued out diesel under the hood, how cool would that be!
I see the following advantages:
- torque, especially at low RPMs (really suits my off-road crawling
style)
- fuel efficiency, combined with the lower price of diesel fuel
- durability (I've heard diesels will usually go 200-300 thousand
miles without any problem, no personal experience to back it up,
though)
- safety in case you puncture the fuel tank with a rock (diesel is
harder to set on fire)
- did I mention torque?
- the sheer coolness of having a Cummins diesel in a Dak (come on,
how many have you seen? :-)
Do you think the 5.9L Cummins would fit in a Dak engine bay? That'd
be the way to go, for sure.
=====
---------------------------------------------------------
Jason Bleazard http://www.bleazard.net Toronto, Ontario
his: '95 Dakota Sport 4x4, 239 V6, 5spd, Reg. Cab, white
hers: '98 Dakota Sport 4x4, 318 V8, Auto, Club Cab, black
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:52:50 EDT