My buddies 93 reg cab 5.2L is bone stock except for the the catback exhaust.
he had 3.55 open diff
He ran 15.2 no need for headers i dont think as the 92-93 manifolds are a
pretty good in stock form.
>From: m.meyerhoff@mchsi.com
>Reply-To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
>To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
>Subject: Re: DML: GenII vs. GenIII acceleration - a few questions + mpg
>concerns?
>Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 02:11:12 +0000
>
>It bet it would really wake up with the headers/y-pipe. The replacement
>Y-pipe on my 92 V-6 isn't as good as the stocker... it cost me 2tenths
>right
>there.
>
>MikeMeyerhoff
>
>
> >
> > My '93 5.2L CC auto:
> > DT Tri-y's
> > 3" Dynomax cat + 3"->2x2.5" UltraFlo exiting in front of my passenger
>tire
> > R&D Underdrives - full set
> > F&B Stage 1.5 Prototype
> > Magnecore wires
> > 8.75" w/4.10s + half trashed SG
> > K&N FIPK
> > 4050lbs sans driver
> > ~133k miles
> > 255/60R15s
> >
> > With electric fans it ran 15.5s (2.44 60', sigh) @ 91-92mph.
> >
> > My '98 5.2L CC 5spd has the 9.25" with 3.92/SG and is completely stock
>with
> > 235/70R15s and 16,500miles. Not sure on the weight, but it's heavier
>for sure
> > - maybe 4200lbs? At any rate, although the '93 has bolt-ons, it's MUCH
>MUCH
> > faster feeling than the '98. I don't remember my '93 being this slow
>stock,
> > but that was 7 years ago. Are the bolt-ons worth that much? The '98
>just
> > feels doggy. The '93 revs up fast, rips throught the frist couple
>gears, and
> > requires little effort to maintain 70mph. The '98 revs up
> > slooooooowwwwwwwwwwww and I have to give it a fair amount more throttle
>to
> > maintain 70mph. Are the GenIII's that much slower or is there a chance
> > something is wrong with my '98? One thing for sure is the exhaust on
>the '98
> > is pathetic at best. The y-pipe is miniscule, maybe that's a large part
>of the
> > problem? I was thinking of getting a CAI, TB, headers/cat-back, and an
> > electric fan... The power just isn't there, and the mpg doens't seem to
>be
> > there either. Maybe a flush hard tonneau if it'd help with mpg, too.
> >
> > I was hoping it'd do much better on the mpg front. Especially since
>it's a
> > 5spd and has a tiny bit less gear. On my first tank it got 15.0 mpg
>with mixed
> > driving and with about 50 steady highway miles. That's terrible IMO.
>The '93
> > gets ~16 mixed only and used to get 16/22, but now maxes out at about
>19.5
> > highway due to age and the stock clutch fan being put back on I'm
>guessing.
> >
> > Not that I'm expecting super acceleration and hybrid style mpg, but I'm
>kinda
> > disappointed at this point. Anybody got any ideas? Or is this pretty
>much
> > what to expect?
>
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 05 2008 - 19:13:05 EST