| From | Message |
gary r.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/09/2003
17:55:57
|
 Subject: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
Why are they such bad asses?I beleive I read here somewhere that they were rated at 250 hp from the factory and that in later years they tuned it down a little.What was different about the 92's.If anyone can show me some stats on the 92 compared to later years it would be greatly appreciated.
|
JimH.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/09/2003
18:47:59
|  RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
stock-220hp max like any Magnum from that era.
I think the exhaust manifolds on these are more desirable though.
|
jerseybud
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/09/2003
20:45:22
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
Mopar Action did a story in 94 I think where they raced a firebird and a mustang. Lots of argument about whether the Dakota was that fast on stock tires but anyway...
92 and 92 Dakotas had a slightly different camshaft profile that raised the powerband in the rpm range. To go with this cam, they also had a slightly looser convertor in the automatics. I assume the computer was different to go with the camshaft and convertor, but in the story Mopar Action used the Mopar Performance computer. Mopar changed the Dakota for 94 supposedly to increase low end torque. After all, it is a truck.
|
b1llyw
DakotaEnthusiast
5/09/2003
21:32:50
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
'92 and '93 were rated at 230 hp. Bigger exhaust manifolds by a 1/2", return fuel system, friendly PCM.
Bill White
2002 QC 4x4, SLT , 4.7, 5 spd, 3.92 LSD
1995 CC 4x2, SLT, 318, 5 spd, 3.55 LSD
|
1flamed92dak
GenII
5/09/2003
21:39:05
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
Yes the 92 had a few differences in the engine department the exhaust manifolds are 2 1/2 inches and the exhaust is also 3" all the way back. The stock rating for the 5.2l was 230 hp and the 3.9 l was rated at 180 hp which I believe both were very underated. I have one and I cant believe the difference between the new ones and My 1992 I wont give her up for nothing. GOTTA LOVE THE GEN 2
|
dakotaguy92
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/10/2003
00:05:52
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
i thought that the 318 mag in 92 were rated at 235 hp. mines a 92 reg cab longbed LE package. auto. i beat a newer dakota once . i think its because gen IIIs are heavier and less hp. i love my 92 . today it turn over to 118,000 miles. although lately its been using oil and i dont know were its going.
|
1flamed92dak
GenII
5/10/2003
02:19:24
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
Check you PCV valve mine was burning oil and I replaced it and it quit burning oil
|
01Motorsport
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/10/2003
22:59:38
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
I loved my '92 RC Sport 5.2 3:55 Auto right up until the day she was totalled by a '95 T-Bird, 217K miles. The numbers at that time were: 1992-93 230hp/280tq, 1994-up 220hp/295tq. The '92-'93's would mortally scream. I NEVER was inclined to shift it manually, because it reached the redline itself so fast. There was a neat little notched adjustment for shift points. Mine ran 7.6 0-60's the first month I had it. The performance between 30-70 mph was unreal. When you passed a car on a two lane road, you had to back off about as soon as you punched it. I had the M-P computer, K&N drop-in, Catco converter, Flowmaster 70 into 2 1/2" duals through the factory bumper with 4" tips. I followed a CC R/T around an Interstate entrance ramp once, and had to back off to keep from eating his tailgate. Still miss old blue...
|
dakracer2003
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/11/2003
18:43:41
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
The oil consumption problem is going to be the belly pan on the bottom of the intake. The original gasket is made of paper, but the replacement from Mopar is rubber coated metal. The only problem is to get to this belly pan ...you must remove intake manifold because it is atached to the bottom of the intake. Once the gasket breaks it sucks oil into the intake and the engine burns it, hence you lose oil like crazy and have no external leaks. Another side affect of this problem is the engine starts to develop spark knock ( pinking under light acceleration )...this is because of the engine burning oil. One other fix is using the M1 MFI 2 barrel intake from Mopar Performance which eliminates this belly pan and gives better performance to boot!!
I do have experience with this problem...had to do it to my 93 Dak and many other Daks, Durangos, and Rams with 3.9,5.2,and 5.9.
|
Jacque
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/12/2003
12:24:49
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
92 and 93 Dakotas had the A-500 trans. Which is a 904 with an overdrive. With this trans, these Dakotas were possibly the lightest ever made. My 94 had an A-518(larger trans) and weighed 3550 lbs. With the A-500, the 92 and 93's handled better with better steering response than my 94 due to the fact that the engine sit further back in the engine compartment. Much like the way 5-speed Dakotas were in 94 as opposed to Dakotas with the A-518. This made for better weight distribution which improved traction. I looked at a 92 to fix up. I wish I had bought it. 92 and 93's had larger and more efficient exhaust manifolds which accounted for the 235 hp. rating as opposed to 220 hp. for 94 and up. From the stories I heard and from what I have seen I can believe that the engine was indeed detuned in 94. Supposedly a 92 Dakota had a top speed close to 140. Low 14's with just the addition of a MP computer was possible. NOS has a 150 shot kit for the 92 and 93's that was reportedly good for close to a 2 second drop in ets.
|
b1llyw
DakotaEnthusiast
5/12/2003
13:42:11
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
My friend has a '93 318 Dak and it came with an A-518 tranny, stock. He bought it new.
Bill White
2002 QC 4x4, SLT , 4.7, 5 spd, 3.92 LSD
1995 CC 4x2, SLT, 318, 5 spd, 3.55 LSD
|
dakracer2003
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/12/2003
20:33:38
| RE: whats up with 92 daks?
IP: Logged
Message:
My 93 extended cab Dak with a 5.2 came stock and still has the original A518 trans. It was a option in 92 and up Daks.
|
| | P 1 |
|
Post a reply to this message:
Username Registration: Optional
All visitors are allowed to post messages
|
