RE: RE: Trading my 3.9 in on a 5.9

From: Jason Bleazard (jbleazard@home.com)
Date: Tue Mar 09 1999 - 21:20:00 EST


.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net]On Behalf Of Eddie
> Estoppey
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 12:48 AM
> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> Subject: Re: DML: RE: Trading my 3.9 in on a 5.9
>
>
> yeah, then i got to change my tranny, my drive shaft and then the rear
> end along with the computer and all the wireing, chances are then ill
> have no warrenty.
>
> ed

That's true, but then you could tell everyone you have a '97 R/T (not very
many of those were made, you know :-).

I've toyed with the idea of replacing my V6 with a 360 someday, so I know
what you're talking about. The really sick idea I had was to put a diesel
in there. I sort of doubt the Cummins is going to fit in the '95 engine
bay, but I understand the Grand Cherokee is sold in Australia with a 3.1L
diesel (wonder how difficult one of those engines would be to locate in
Canada...)

Now, you might be wondering why I would ever want to replace a 3.9L V6 with
a 3.1L 5-cylinder turbodiesel. Two reasons:

1. Offroaders love lots of torque, especially at low RPMs (ever seen the
torque curve on a diesel?)

2. Just to be different. How many diesel Dakotas have you ever seen?

Just daydreaming...

--------------------------------------------------------
Jason Bleazard
current: '95 Dakota Sport white 4x4 Reg Cab V6/3.9L/5spd
current: '98 Dakota Sport black 4x4 CC V8/5.2L/Auto
RIP: '95 Dakota Sport black 4x2 CC V6/3.9L/Auto



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:13:06 EDT