Man, I just bought a 98 5.2L 4x4 and already want to get my wife the 4x4
Durango and go 2WD with my Dak. I like the 4.7, good gas milage, good
performance, but not many mods out right now or in the very near future
(yes, as time goes on there will be mods). I'd get a 2wd 97 or newer 5.9L
Dak hands down. I just got rid of a Ford Expedition and if you are into
modifying the engine the 5.9 2WD gives you the most options in my opinion.
Use the 4x4 Durango for off road and what not. I'd also want AT LEAST 3.92
gearing in the Dak, preferably a 4.10. That's just my opinion and what I
plan on doing as time goes on.
I wouldn't bother with the RAM simply because it's to heavy, big, and isn't
going to perform like the Dak. I find the Dak the Perfect middle ground
between full size and compacts. Plenty of room, and the 5.9 in that body
will flat out smoke it.
Shawn
98 5.2L 4x4 CC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@BUFFNET.NET
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@BUFFNET.NET]On Behalf Of Kyle Kozubal
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 10:20 PM
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
Subject: DML: Ram or Dakota
I cannot decide on what I want/need.
All I know is the a V6 will not be under the hood of my new(er) truck. I
know, trader trader me.
4WD Dodge Dakota Engines:
-4.7L V8(00); 230hp@4,800rpms; 295ft.lbs torque@3,200rpms
-5.2L V8(97-99); 230hp@ 4,400rpms; 300ft.lbs torque@ 3,200rpms
-5.9L V8(00 in 4WD); 250hp@4,800rpms; 345ft.lbs torque@345rpms
4WD Dodge Ram Engines(that I would want):
-5.2L V8; 230hp@4,400rpms; 300ft.lbs torque@3,200rpms
-5.9L V8; 245hp@4,000rpms; 335/345ft.lbs torque@3,200rpms
-Dakota front axle:
Hybrid Dana 35
-Dakota rear axle:
Chrysler 8.25" or Chrysler 9.25"....depending on what year/engine, etc
-Ram Front Axle:
Dana 44,, Dana 60
-Ram Rear Axle:
Chrysler 9.25", Dana 60, Dana 70
-4WD Dakota Payload:
1,450 pounds all the way upto 2,000 pounds
-4WD Ram Payload:
1,300 pounds, 1,450 pounds, 2920 pounds, 3010 pounds, and much higher
This is dependant on what engine, cab style, and payload option of course
I just have always wanted a solid front axle truck. As much as I love the
Dakotas......the IFS front axle just turns me away. I mean I have had no
problems with mine in 142,000 miles.....just if I had to do it and do it the
way I want, I guess a V8 and a solid front axle would be checked off. Fuel
economy isnt that big of a deal, since I will have a take home squad car
anyways....the next truck will really just be a weekend driver, used for
hunting, hauling, and weekend/vacation camping trips. I think ANY V8 engine
in the Dakota would more than suffice, and the 5.9L V8 in the Ram would
almost be a must. I would love to drive a 5.9L V8 4WD Dakota
though.......man what frigin beast that must be! I cant afford a 2000
though, so that V8 is out. I mean I just couldnt imagine a 5.2L V8 to that
'that' capable of moving that large of a truck without working itself to
death. If I did go with a Dakota, the 4.7L V8 would not be under the hood.
So basically the Dakota would have to be a 1997-1999 Dakota, since the 5.2L
V8s were not available after that. My girlfriend does have the 4.7L V8 in
her 2000 Durango 4x4, but I just dont like working on it and it is my
preference to have the 5.2L V8 over the 4.7L V8. Also, no more regular cab
trucks for me, Club Cab or Quad Cab is a must. Axle ratio is that huge of an
issue, but I am looking for a truck with atleast the 3.90(3.91? 3.92?)
gearing. Payload also isnt that huge of an issue, since I would most likely
buy some aftermarket 'air bags' for the rear springs that I could air/up
down as needed with towing/hauling. I just keep thinking about having a RAM
and having all that nice huge interior room, higher towpayload rating, and a
SOLID front axle. Hmmmmm........Sorry for the long post, just thought I
would try to clarify my thoughts and my point(s) of view before I asked
everyone else for their comments, thoughts, and suggestions.
THANKS!
Kyle
93 Dakota 4x4 V6
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:01:44 EDT