I have a 98 5.2 with 197k on it and have the original tranny and
engine and its still ripping along. I would think you would be just
fine.
Rascal
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Matt Brenneke <brenneke@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello! I'm looking to get back in a Dakota after a several year hiatus (was driving 40000 mi/yr and couldn't afford the gas), and I was looking for a little advice.
>
> First of all, I'm looking for a used Dakota, because new prices have gone insane! I bought a new 2004 SXT for $16k 5 years ago, now the cheapest new I can find is $27k!
>
> That rant aside, I've found a 2005 ST (basic 3.7L V6, 2WD) with only 2880 miles(!), and a 2003 SLT Quad Cab/5.9L V8/4WD/loaded with 80000 miles for about the same price that I'm trying to decide between. So I'm looking for thoughts from the list on which way to go.
>
> I'm leaning towards the like-new basic model just because I'm probably still going to drive a lot and my wife likes the newer body style, but I'm concerned by how few miles it has. Should I be worried about seals being dried out and random problems popping up if the truck sat unused for a couple years? (Dealer says previous owner was a old man who drove it very little, then had a stroke so his family sold it back).
>
> Do the 5.9L V8s hold up well under high millage? If I go for the loaded older vehicle I'd likely push it to at least 200,000 miles in the next 6-7 years. Are the engine and transmission likely to hold up that long under mostly highway miles?
>
> Does it matter which way I go since I'm definitely getting back in a Dakota either way? :-)
>
> -Matt
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 01 2009 - 14:24:03 EDT