Re: 2001 Dakota to a new (to us, or 2003) Durrango

From: andy levy (andy-dml@levyclan.us)
Date: Sun Dec 07 2003 - 23:27:52 EST


jonathan wrote:

> But, when looking, were not to sure about the v8s. Carmax said the 4.7 had
> like 235HP, 295TQ. The 5.2 had 230HP, 300TQ. Is this right? And why so
> close, and the difference? What would be beter (this really isn't going off
> road...but we want quick). And...is it going to feel faster (or more
> powerful) than our current v6 Dakota? So, im asking....is there a certain
> motor we SHOULD STAY AWAY FROM?

Well, unless you're gettin an '00, the only V8s in a Durango are the 4.7
and the 5.9. 5.9 is standard in the R/Ts, optional on the rest. Go for
an '00 and you have all 3 V8s available, IIRC.

The numbers you've seen on the 4.7 vs. 5.2 are correct. Why are they so
close? Ask Dodge, I guess. The 4.7 is an all-new engine (well, it's 5
or 6 years old now) and they had to get performance at least comparable
to the previous engine. Were you hoping for more or less?

I've had both the 5.2 and the 4.7. The 4.7 is a lot more rev-happy and
gets its torque a little higher in the RPM range. It's also better on
fuel. Even with lower gears and more weight to pull around (but a
manual tranny, compared to the auto on my 5.2), my 4.7 gets the same or
better mileage compared to my 5.2.

The 5.9 and 5.2 generally have the same maintenance needs, problem areas
(belly pan gasket) and advantages (aftermarket). The 4.7 has been
relatively trouble-free from what I can tell and with no distributor,
maintenance is less. But the aftermarket isn't as big. And it takes 1
quart more oil than the 5.2/5.9.

All 3 V8s come with different transmissions. The 5.2 gets the 44RE, the
5.9 the 46RE, and the 4.7 the 45 (or 5-45) RFE. The 44RE and 46RE are
pretty similar, the 45RFE is completely different, completely
electronically controlled and it has 2 2nd gears, and a decision made by
the vehicle which to use. Later models have been reprogrammed as the
5-45RFE, giving you 5 foward gears (and again, 2 2nd gears).

A Durango 4x4 weighs a *lot* more than your V6 2WD CC Dak. We're
talking over 600 pounds, probably closer to 1000 pounds. You need a lot
of engine to make that feel quicker.

> Also, any known issues with Durrangos other than Dakotas (and the ball
> joints?).

Pretty much the same list of issues, also some minor problems with rear
leaf springs squeaking around '00 and '01, and a lot of cost-cutting in
the '01 model year. Also be aware that since September of '00 (2001
model year), Durango R/Ts get the standard PCM, not the Mopar
Performance PCM.

> So, kinda...any information yall could give me on if this would be a good
> idea, bad idea, or what? Also, about used (from the dealership or
> carmax)...would the 4WD be more reliable (my dad said that you should never
> buy a used 4wd).

The biggest factor on the 4wd is what kind of abuse was it subjected to,
and how was it maintained. On part-time systems it's real easy to put
the vehicle in 4HI when you shouldn't and cause a lot of stress on the
drivetrain. And I'm sure lots of people don't take care of them like
they're supposed to (fluids).

-- 
-andy

http://home.twcny.rr.com/andylevy/dakota - andy-dml@levyclan.us -------------------------------------------- "Whatever Adam does, do the opposite and you'll be fine" -Bob Tom --------------------------------------------



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:47:12 EST