| From | Message |
Wal
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/26/2004
06:46:16
|
 Subject: RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Cool. I have the Flowmaster on right now, purely for the sound :-) I think the manifolds and cam would be the ticket along with some roller rockers and intake.
The other thing that I can't help feel is that the tranny low gear isn't the same. Both trucks have the 3.55 (LSD in the 99) and the launch and low gear feel very different. It's like the 99 has a taller gear - I'm positive of it. I also feel like there's more overlap when shifting in the 99. I guess that's why I'm psyched on making the very first mod the Transgo kit. I just need warmer weather so I can get on my back in the driveway.
Cam - If the duration is the same but it has more lift, then I believe it would leave most of the low/mid alone but give more power in the upper-mid and top RPM area. I took a stump puller like the 5.2l (Suzuki Bandit 1200) and swapped in an intake cam with the same duration but more lift. After an airbox mod and rejetting on the dyno, I increased the rear wheel power 25% and there was no penalty anywhere in the RPM range compared to stock :-) Now, if I could do that to the Dak... WOO-HOO!!!
Wal
|
RadioMan
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/26/2004
06:54:35
|  RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
I have a 4.7 in a 02 4X4 Dak. I pull a 26' camper
with it to upper MI twice a year. After owning
both a 4.7 and a 5.2, it's very clear to me that
the 5.2 out does the 4.7 hands down in the torque
(pulling power) department. The 4.7 has plenty of
get up and go not doing any real work but draging
its own body around but it shows its flaws when
you put it to a real job. One other thing, if you
can buy a used one with manual tranny, get it! These new autos in a word, SUCK! I bought my last
auto for any brand I may buy next.
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/26/2004
08:14:20
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
I don't think they that offer cam anymore. I can't find it. There's probably still one on inventory somewhere in some Mopar warehouse. That was before the 1.7 ratio rockers were available. The cam is actually cheaper than the rockers. If you can afford the rockers it's easiest upgrade you can make on the valvetrain. I prefer the cam, but mechanically speaking there's no difference between the high lift stock duration cam and the 1.7 rockers on a stock cam. There's a place in Texas called Magnum Performance that made this cam also. It's strange to me that you never hear their name mentioned on this forum and they single handedly started the whole Magnum engine aftermarket. Before Magnum Performance there were no parts available for the Magnum Engine. I don't think Mother Mopar would have had as many parts available if it weren't for the competition they were getting from Magnum Performance. They often had performance parts available before Mopar did.
|
Wal
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/26/2004
08:29:15
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Found it and bookmarked it, thanks: http://www.fastdodge.com/accolades.html
Hmm... 1.7 ratio rockers, eh? Works with the stock cam? No need to hard-face at all? I'm a total blank on hydraulic valves, so forgive me. I'm used to screw/locknut and shim under or over bucket. Seems to me it'd be easier to just go to 1.7 roller rockers then to swap the bump stick on this motor - no?
Wal
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/26/2004
13:20:51
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Oh yea, if your budget allows it definately go with the 1.7 roller rockers. I have not priced any in a long time. They were at least double the cost of the cam a few years ago. I've never used any, but almost everyone with a Magnum powered Ram/Dakota at the Mopar Nationals runs them and know one I've talked to has ever had any problems. It makes you wonder why the engine didn't come with them in the first place. They actually reduce the wear and tear on the valve stems by reducing the side loading on the valve stem. When I modify my R/T that's the first thing I plan to install besides a flash to the PCM. I'm probably going to have the cats gutted also. We don't have emissions testing here, but they will fine you if you remove them.
|
slimy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/27/2004
21:00:39
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
I dont know much about mods but you guys are saying that a stock 4.7 will spin the tires on pavement pretty easy without holding on the brakes? and a 5.2 will spin them easier than that? is it a manual that has 3.92 gears and an automatic has the 3.55? I want a truck for mainly cruising and some towing.
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/27/2004
21:10:49
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
slimy,
Traction is definately a problem with both. I'm not sure I understand your question. Do you want to smoke the tires? By all means, get a manual. Either the 5.2 or the 4.7L will light them up. Even if you get a posi you will have traction issues with the manual. Especially if you run low profile tires. Most street rod trucks run those 55's or lower tires. They handle the corners great but they suck when it comes to launching at the tree.
|
slimy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/27/2004
21:28:49
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Im just wondering how a 4.7 will hold up to someone with a 5.2? will 5.2 kick a$$ or will the 4.7 hold its own?
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/27/2004
21:41:14
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
I'm assuming you are talking about the gen3 (97-2004) Daks. With no modifications the 4.7L manual will smoke a stock 5.2L. Now, if you don't mind the boxy look of the gen2's. Get a 93. A 93 auto or manual will smoke a 4.7L. It will be hard to find a low mileage 93. If you like working on your street rod, you need to get a 99 5.2L because the performance parts for the 4.7L are far and few between and they are expensive. The 5.2 is much cheaper to build. If you want to tinker on your toy then get a 5.2. If you just want to get in and drive it get the 4.7L. The 4.7L offers the best all around performance and gas mileage. The 5.2L offers the cheapest performance potential and versatility.
|
slimy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/27/2004
22:10:36
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Oh ok Thank You very much. That answers my question very good. This weekend im going to go look at a 2000, club cab, 4x4, auto, with a 4.7, and its all stock
my friend has a 99, reg cab, 4x4, auto, with a 5.2 and its also all stock, thats the reason I was asking to see how I could do against him. Once again thanks for the info.
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/27/2004
22:27:56
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
4X4? That's a whole different ball of wax there. My experience with the 4.7L has all been with Reg Cab 2wd models. The 5.2L offers more low end torque than the 4.7L. Not much more, but some more. An X-cab 4x4 auto will weigh considerably more than a reg-cab. The slower reving torque happy 5.2L might be better suited for 4x4 use than the 4.7L. The 4.7L is a rev-happy mid-range engine. I have no doubt it will beat a stock 5.2L from about 20mph up. From a stand still the 5.2L might get enough of a jump on you to beat you. The 5.2's best attribute was always geting the jump off the line without breaking the tires loose. The 4.7L has a tendency to either break the tires loose or bog slightly off the line. 3.92's will help that significantly. If you do decide to get the 4x4 CC 4.7L go for the 3.92 gears. The 4.7L also doesn't loose much in gas mileage or driveability with the 3.92's like the 5.2 and the 5.9 does.
|
Wal
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/27/2004
22:32:03
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Wow, this is like my buy a few months ago all over again :-)
I had a GenII with the 5.2l and RH tranny. At 175,000mi I didn't want to rebuild the trans so I decided to replace her. I did the same research and decided I wanted a 96 with the 5.2l and automatic. Gooooood luck! I couldn't find a nice one and even the crappy ones were expensive. So, I decided to look for the last of the 5.2l models and found the sweetest used 99 I've seen. I don't like that the motor feels a bit slower and the RE trans isn't as much to my liking, but I am overall very pleased.
I decided against the 4.7 for a few reasons. Some may disagree with my logic, but that's why we don't all date the same chick ;-) (proceeding is long and stream-of-consciousness - sorry)
I wanted the 5.2l over the 4.7 because it's more like a real TRUCK motor! I don't go for higher revving motors in a truck, nor do I like motors that require higher revs for peak torque and hp. I don't like newer generation of motors that boast MPG and such as sales figures... gimme old, heavy, powerful, reliable workhorses any day! Hell, I'd buy a diesel if I could in the Dak. I like the power out of the hole and midrange of the 5.2 when I pull out a boat, haul bikes, or pull onto a freeway. Yeah it runs out of breath fast but so what? It's a truck not a sportbike. The truck is fast only because the motor is so much more then a midsize truck needs, not because it's designed to be a fast truck. I want something that loafs along 90% of the time. I also like the history of the 318/5.2 and how well it lasts. 175,000mi on my last one and it was faster then my 99. Parts are everywhere. Parts are cheaper.
On the flip-side, sure the quicker 4.7l appeals to me. But a good portion of my driving is at 2500rpm and below. My truck goes out in bad weather, hauls bikes, runs errands, and to tow. Otherwise I'm on a bike. I want a workhorse of a motor for that and I am willing to sacrifice a few ponies. Some days I want to take her and just have fun 4wheeling or letting loose around town. I'll toss her into a drift and let that tail swing happily. The truck does it all.
Since reading more and more about the 4.7l I think that I prolly judged it harshly at first and I have softened up a fair bit. When I was reading about it, people were bitching up a storm about it not having the punch out of the hole and there were lots of threads about it not breaking the tires loose. The 5.2 will bust em loose if you breathe on the throttle! Now I know it's the torque management system, but at the time I thought it was a typical case of new tech high revving BS. Still, after being a bit better informed, I would not choose the 4.7 over the 5.2.
Oh yeah, when I can cobble up some more $ I'll have the best of both worlds with my 5.2l, hehe.
Wal
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/28/2004
13:54:20
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Wal,
I agree. If you plan to use your truck as a truck then go for the 5.2L.
I used to haul firewood with my 92X-cab 4x4 5.2L auto. I had a 16' trailer that I could easily stack 2 quards of firewood on. One quard of green Oak is supposed to weigh 5,000lbs. So, by the numbers I was hauling 12,000lbs when you include the weight of the heavy duty trailer. Even if the wood was a little dry I was still hauling over 9,000lbs. The owners maunual said to turn off the over drive when towing a trailer of any weight. I did this the first time I hauled fire wood. After that I started leaving the over drive on. It would have to kick down once every 75 miles on average on I30 between Texarkana and Little Rock. It only had 3.55's. My 4.7L 2wd Reg Cab would not haul the same trailer with about 1000lbs of furniture on the back without kicking out of overdrive about once every 20 miles on the same stretch of Interstate. I set the cruise at 70mph on both and the speedo on the 92 5.2L never moved. The 4.7L was always loosing speed going up hills and then it would have to shift down in order to maintain speed. The 5.2L has much better towing and low end torque capabilities than the 4.7L. The ratings in the brochures don't tell the whole story.Looking at Dodges advertisements you would be led to believe that the 4.7L was as good if not better than the 5.2 at towing. It's not. A lot of those ratings have to do with tires, brakes and the weight of the vehicle.
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/28/2004
21:30:08
| RE: 4.7 or 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey Slimy,
I like the newer trucks as far as interiors and wheels are concerned. Chances are you will replace the factory wheels anyway. If I were you, I would wait for a low mileage 97-99 4x4. The money you will save buy getting a 98 vs a 2000 will allow you to make some mods. Take the $2-3K you will save on a 98 and buy a set of Aluminum heads, cam, PCM, and exhaust. Paint the heads Black and know one will know but you. That 5.2 will come to life! If your not mechanically inclined at all, then settle for a 4.7L.
|
| | <<Oringinal Post <<Previous Page P 2 |
|
Post a reply to this message:
Username Registration: Optional
All visitors are allowed to post messages
|
