While the 5.9 torque will probably be nice while towing the 4.7 has proven
itself as well( to me anyway ) . They run about the same at the track. The
4.7 is probably better on gas. While the 360 has years upon years under it's
belt the 4.7 has been out a few years and has had nothing but rave reviews.
If you plan on doing alot of towing I would pick the 360 but for a all
purpose vehicle I would pick the 4.7, It's cheaper to buy and keep the tank
full.
Joe W.
87 Shelby Charger 13.9
98 Dakota 13.1
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Johnson" <frankwjohnson@hotmail.com>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 1999 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: DML: 4.7 vs. 5.9
> Well, do you mind paying for gas?
> The mileage isn't great on the 4.7, but it's downright brutal on the 5.9.
> A trailer weight of 5000 lbs should give you no trouble with either
engine,
> like you said: "5.9's towing capacity is only 300lbs more".
> So you kinda answered your own question right?
> Listen to all the feedback that you get from the DML and just i'm sure
we'll
> steer you right. :)
>
> Frank WJ
>
>
> >From: "Boris Elpiner" <boriselp@altavista.net>
> >
> >I'm new to the list, so please forgive me if I'm bringing up a topic that
> >you had discussed to death earlier.
> >
> >I'm in the process of buying a 2000 Quad Cab 4x2 and I'm trying to make a
> >decision on whether to get 4.7L or 5.9L engine. I will be towing a car
> >trailer (about 5000lbs ) twice a month, but most of the time the truck
> >will be used for commuting and regular day-to-day driving. Of course 5.9
> >has a lot better torque which is great for towing, but I keep hearing how
> >smooth, responsive and efficient a 4.7l engine is. And 5.9's towing
> >capacity is only 300lbs more than 4.7's I'm leaning toward 4.7, but I
> >don't want to find myself regretting not getting the most power I could
> >have gotten.
> >
> >I appreciate your feedback.
> >
> >Boris.
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:48:06 EST