yes sir i did no more 5.2 and best of all no more 5.9....yeah i got mine
the 4.7 supose to have 225to 235 hp so still not that bad...99 the last year
of the magnum series engines.......
John Van G 99R/T RC the black pearl
-----Original Message-----
From: Garfield <schred1@yahoo.com>
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Date: Friday, April 30, 1999 12:39 PM
Subject: DML: 4.7L VS. 5.2L
>|Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 07:45:53
>|From: Bob Tom <tigers@bserv.com>
>|Subject: DML: 4.7L rumour
>|
>|Has anyone else heard the rumout that the 4.7L V8
>|may start appearing in the Dakota in the mid-99
>|production run?
>|
>|Bob
>|Burlington, Ontario
>
>I don't know about the Dakota CC's and RC's but I do
>know the new (extremely ugly and too short a box) quad
>cab will have the 4.7L from the Jeep Grand Cherokee in
>it. I have mixed feelings about this engine, take a
>look below and decide for yourself. I extracted this
>from http://carpoint.msn.com/. it seems to have about
>5 more horses but about 5 less lbs of torque than the
>318. In all your opinions which would be better in
>this case? BTW got the info about the quad cab from
>Mark via e-mail at http://www.autoinvoice.com/ (UH OH
>do I see a new thread starting here???)
>
>4.7L 235-hp V8
>Horsepower 235 @ 4800 RPM
>Torque (lb-ft) 295 @ 3200 RPM
>Displacement (cc) 4701
>Turbo/Supercharger No
>Bore X Stroke (in.) 3.66 X 3.4
>Compression Ratio 9.3:1
>Fuel Type Gas
>Fuel System SEFI
>
>5.2L 230-hp V8
>Horsepower 230 @ 4400 RPM
>Torque (lb-ft) 300 @ 3200 RPM
>Displacement (cc) 5208
>Turbo/Supercharger No
>Bore X Stroke (in.) 3.91 X 3.31
>Compression Ratio 9.1:1
>Fuel Type Gas
>Fuel System SEFI
>
>5.9L 250-hp V8
>Horsepower 250 @ 4400 RPM
>Torque (lb-ft) 345 @ 3200 RPM
>Displacement (cc) 5825
>Turbo/Supercharger No
>Bore X Stroke (in.) 4 X 3.58
>Compression Ratio 8.9:1
>Fuel Type Gas
>Fuel System SEFI
>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:13:58 EDT