On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Elmer Hanhart wrote:
> I personally love the new 4.7. I went and drove a Grand Cherokee with
> this engine and it was very smooth and responsive. It had more torque
> than I expected too. I *might* (don't ask, I not supposed to disc.) be
> getting a 2000 Dak and if I do it will be the 4.7 five speed combo. The
> only reason I didn't get an R/T was because of the lack of a manual.
> This time I will be getting a reg. cab as all I do is shove crap in the
> back of my current baby. I have driven an R/T and it has a little more
> low-end, but the 4.7 just seemed to want to rev a lot easier (it seemed
> more like a racing engine rather than a truck engine, good IMO not so
> good in others).
According to http://www.allpar.com/mopar/47.html, the new 4.7 is "almost
a HEMI". Here's an exerpt for those who can't or don't want to dl the page:
------------------
Buddy Revell pointed out that the new engine is "almost" a Hemi - "the only reason it isn't
called a hemi is because the combustion chambers have a wall on one side that makes it
look kind of like a flat tire. Other than that everything is in the same arangment. The valve
springs are across from each other and the spark plug goes right down the middle."
------------------
> The only draw back I see w/ the new engine is that there aren't any
> performance parts available, and I will have to do my own experimenting
[...]
And this is different from the current engines... how? ;-)
I'm witholding my final opinion of the 4.7 until I actually get
to drive it and/or I start seeing some timeslips. (Not that I expect
anyone to care, I just thought I'd mention that.) :-) New & more
powerful technology is a good thing, but IMHO, its already got one strike
against it because CC seems to have done the standard "design around
arbitrary HP and torque numbers". If the new technology is so great,
then why not design it around the current displacement? If a 4.7 that
makes 230hp is good, a 5.2 that makes 250hp would be better! =) Why
are the auto manufacturers so afraid to break through their generic HP
boundaries? Hopefully they will help to alleviate this mistake by
designing and then offering bigger, badder engines. I doubt it though;
I hear the 360 replacement will be smaller too. I have a feeling the
EPA is involved here somewhere... :-P
I can sort've understand this philosophy if we're talking about
passenger and economy cars, but on a truck, I think just about everyone
knows they're not going to get the gas mileage of a Neon, and power is
really important for hauling and towing. So... CRANK UP THE FRIGGIN'
POWER!!! (Sorry...) :-) Would a bone stock Dak or Ram that churned out
350hp be so terrible?? I thought not. ;-)
-Jon-
.--- stei0302@cs.fredonia.edu ----------------------------------------.
| Jon Steiger * AOPA, DoD, EAA, MP Race Team, NMA, SPA, USUA * RP-SEL |
| '96 Dodge Dakota v8 SLT CC (14.55@94.14), '96 Kolb FireFly 447 |
`--------------------------- http://www.cs.fredonia.edu/~stei0302/ ---'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:31 EDT