Hee hee, Ryan, So, lets see here, your truck is making over 300 hp, but your still running what, 15's?????
If you read my post I said you'll have a hard time finding a 5.9L (360 cubes) making 360 hp NA (normally aspirated). 1 hp per liter. On the other hand, the 4.7L is very capable IMHO of making 287 hp, NA.
BTW, 360 HP, would be around 288+ hp at the rear wheels.
Good luck.
Matt Y2K-HEMI
In a message dated Mon, 26 Feb 2001 11:31:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Ryan Stewart" <firebird@kymtnnet.org> writes:
<< Uh, there's plenty of 5.9s puttin' out 300+HP with just bolt=ons. Lots in
faqct. Hehe. Prolly myself included!
-Ryan
99 DA RC R/T
Big fan of the new engines, just not to excited bout these problems.....
----- Original Message -----
From: <WMBARRET@aol.com>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: DML: 4.7 or 5.9?
> Jason, as you said, we have run this thread into the ground, and then
some, so I won't go into great detail as Jon Smith will probably kill me!!
hee hee LOL, but seriuosly, the stuff Will has experienced is NOT normal by
any means, I would never trade my 4.7L for a 5.9L, I have had very good
results with the 4.7L, especially with the hard life mine has had. The 5.9L
has one foot out the door, take a close look at that aspect, the 5.9L is
going, going, gone, outta here!
> The 4.7L is moving into the future, it is a high tech, effiecient engine
that has been proven to match and or exceed the 5.9L in every dept., for
pratical purposes.
> The 4.7L (287), I'm confident, can produce 1 hp per cube, normally
aspirated, mine is currently 260 hp + with only minor mods. You'll have a
hard time seeing those numbers from a 360 cube 5.9L that's NA.
>
> Matt Y2K-HEMI
> '00 RC 4.7L 5spd
> 14.23@94.49
>
>
> In a message dated Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:33:46 PM Eastern Standard Time,
"Will Coughlin" <willcoughlin@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> << Jason, at this point, I would tell you to get the 360,and the trailer!
I
> don't really like the 4.7L the more that I deal with it and would take the
> 360 over it any day.Plus you would get the 46RE tranny which can be
upgraded
> with the deep pan and shift kits,etc(IE crap that's not available for the
> 45RFE). I have the 4.7L and would gladly trade it for a 318/360 truck
> anyday,even if it meant I had to go automatic.Mine runs like crap-it
> constantly gets hot,won't idle for crap,the fan clutch is still
screwed,etc.
> I would especially opt for the 360/46RE combo if you were going to tow
> anything. The 45RFE shifts pretty sloppy and that means heat,and lots of
it
> during a slippery shift with a heavy trailer.IMO, get a QuadCab
> 360/46RE/(9.25")3.92SG gears,and add an oil cooler,dual oil filters,
Biggest
> tranny cooler you can strap on there(preferably electric fan
assisted),Shift
> kit,Deep pan,And all the other heavy duty stuff.Just my thoughts.HTH,
>
> Will Coughlin willcoughlin@hotmail.com
> '00 reg.cab,2wd,4.7L/hd5-spd/3.92sg(9.25")
> http://www.geocities.com/willcoughlin/index.html
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "Jason Bleazard" <jbleazard@home.com>
> Reply-To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> To: dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net
> Subject: DML: 4.7 or 5.9?
> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 21:18:17 +0500
>
> Okay, I know this is a FAT (frequently argued topic), but we're trying to
> decide which engine we want in our new Quad Cab 4x4. The archive search
> engine doesn't seem to like searching for numbers (it tells me there have
> been zero articles posted to the DML matching the string "4.7"... that
> just can't be right).
>
> Anyway, this truck will be used for daily driving, highway traveling,
> camping, exploring, just generally taking us wherever we need to go.
>
> My first instinct is to go with the 4.7 for the gas mileage, and to avoid
> the standard belly pan gasket and pinging issues that plague the V6, 318
> and 360.
>
> The reason I'm thinking we might want the 360 (other than bragging
> rights) is that I was thinking about the possibility of getting a flatbed
> trailer and dragging my '95 Dak around on it. I haven't been able to
> find any towing specs on the 4.7 anywhere. This trailer idea isn't
> definite, just a possibility.
>
> Any other issues I'm not considering? Anyone know how much the 4.7 is
> rated to tow?
>
> Thanks,
> Jason>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
> >>
>
>
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:59:30 EDT