>
> Weird. I would have expected better times out of the R/T!
Especially
> for the short bed. Mid 14's or at least 15 would be nice. My '96 Club
Cab
> SLT with the added weight of a trailer hitch and bed rails posted a
16.0@85mph
> with 90+% humidity. (V8, standard tranny) (I have no idea what my 0-60
time
> is)
>
>
> -Jon-
I agree!
Motor Trend January 98 did a test on the Grand Cherokee 5.9 Limited.
Both the Cherokee 5.9 & the R/T 5.9 use the 46RE /4 speed auto trans.
The Cherokee weighed in at 4218 lbs. 300lbs more that the Dakota R/T but
posted better times! The R/T article said the 1/4 mile runs were done
"using a street (low RPM) launch and letting the automatics shift
at their predetermined points". Braking was another area the Cherokee
did
better than the R/T. The Cherokee has 4 wheel disc brakes. Why doesn't the
R/T?
The R/T also used Premium fuel which indicated the upgraded computer. Here
is the data from both articles.
Cherokee 5.9 R/T 5.9
(Motor Trend Jan Article) (Sport Truck Feb
Article)
Weight 4218 Lbs. 3900 Lbs.
Horsepower 245 @ 4000 250 @ 4400
Torque 345 @ 3200 345 @ 3200
Braking 60-0 126 Ft 147 Ft
Acceleration 0-60 6.8 8.22
1/4 Mile 15.2 @ 88.7 16.17 @ 83.15
What's wrong with this picture?? The Cherokee family truck just blew away
The R/T in all categories! Somebody call Chrysler! Granted the R/T is a
pre production truck but lets hope the production R/T at the very least
has the performance of the Cherokee!
Catlin
(Still going to buy the R/T )
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:08:02 EDT