| From | Message |
Jimmyc
Dodge Dakota
8/26/2001
11:17:12
|
 Subject: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
I was at work a few days ago and someone(Ford owner) had a new copy of Motor Trend's Truck Trends. One of the main articles was about all of the new diesels in all makes. Mostly talked about the Powerstroke, Cummins and Isuzu diesels. The article, unfortunately, was biased to Ford. Initially he showed it to me and seeing this I passed it back. He pointed out part of the article to me about "smaller" Diesels. It said that someone has been testing a new 4.0 liter V6 diesel in the Dodge Durango. I don't recall who the manufacturer is though. Numbers were ~210HP and a more torque than the 4.7L. Fuel economy is supposed to be in the 20+ MPG range. Apparently the engine was supposed to be converted to a new 5.4L v-8, but Dodge is toying with the idea of releasing it in its current configuration in the 04 Durango and Dak. This comes after news that the 03 Explorer/Mountaineer will most likely have a diesel option. Chevy is also considering a different smaller version of the Isuzu diesel, already in use overseas, but it will come much later. That's about all it said in the article. He wouldn't part with the mag and I tried to find it myself, out in town, but I can't. All I know is that I do a lot of hauling/towing with my Dak. I also drive about 40 miles to work each way. I love my 4.7 but I would gladly trade up to a diesel that got 5-10 more MPG while making the same torque. It would also be nice to have an engine that lasted as long as the truck. I know of a guy locally that has one of the first model year non-turbo Cummins diesels. He had 650K miles on the truck last year. The engine still runs fine, though the rest of the truck is about shot. Talk about longevity. Later.
01 QC 4x4 4.7 3.92LSD 5-speed Flame Red
98 RC 2x4 3.9 auto Green (wife)
|
cbsdakota
Gen III
8/26/2001
11:26:46
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
That would be bad ass! 20+ MPG and pull down a house. I'll have to tell my father in law. He does alot of hauling and loves diesels. He has a Cummins too (2000)!
Project QUIKV6
|
sandman
Dodge Dakota
8/26/2001
14:09:44
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Diesels are alot more effecient than gasoline engines. It always puzzled me that they did not catch on here in America. I am betting that with ever increaseing C.A.F.E. standards and soaring gas prices that diesels with clean buring fuels will make a come back in America if the Gas stations start carrying it again. Diesel makes more sense in a truck then anyother engine design.The cummins diesle that is used in Dodge trucks was designed to last at least 300,000 miles between major overhauls in medium duty applications like ambulences, Day Trucks (likeinner city deliver trucks), furniture moveing vans......It should last alot longer in less intense applications. If you look at the crank journals of the little cumins and compare that to a power stroke you will see a huge difference in designed durability.
|
dropt98dakota
Dodge Dakota
8/26/2001
19:42:55
|  RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
As for diesel engines in dakota's I was strolling around a mexican dodge website and they offer a 2.4L 4 cyl turbo diesel in dakota. Here is that link http://www.chrysler-ba.com.br/dakota.html scroll almost to the bottom.
|
Mar
Dodge Dakota
8/26/2001
21:27:09
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
I think the company is detroit diesel. I think chrysler ownes them.
|
Christophe
Dodge Dakota
8/27/2001
03:49:34
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Find a site here in switzerland from an
unofficial dodge dealer with pictures of a
dakota 2.5 diesel taken at the Detroit
autoshow 2000. Here are the links to the pics.
http://www.dodge-truck.ch/_private/bilder/detro
it2000/DSC00072.JPG
http://www.dodge-truck.ch/_private/bilder/detro
it2000/DSC00073.JPG
http://www.dodge-truck.ch/_private/bilder/detro
it2000/DSC00074.JPG
http://www.dodge-truck.ch/_private/bilder/detro
it2000/DSC00075.JPG
http://www.dodge-truck.ch/_private/bilder/detro
it2000/DSC00076.JPG
http://www.dodge-truck.ch/_private/bilder/detro
it2000/DSC00077.JPG
http://www.dodge-truck.ch/_private/bilder/detro
it2000/DSC00078.JPG
http://www.dodge-truck.ch/_private/bilder/detro
it2000/DSC00079.JPG
Christophe, switzerland
Dakota QC 2001, black, 4.7 AWD, LSD, etc...
|
Jimmyc
Dodge Dakota
8/27/2001
03:58:03
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Checked out the Mexican site. Thanks for the link. Kind of sucks that we don't have any option here. I think the manufacturers have held out here so long because more reliable engines equals less new trucks sold. Americans seem to view the diesel in non-commercial vehicles as a status symbol, unfortunately, more than a reliable fuel efficient power plant. Well they (Mexico) have got a diesel Dak and a newer version of the Ramcharger! Seems all of the stuff we want here they've got down there. They've probably also got a 5" suspension lift kit for the 01s also. LOL Jim
01 QC 4.7 3.92LSD 4x4 Flame Red 5-speed
98 RC 3.9 2x4 Dark Green Auto
|
Jimmyc
Dodge Dakota
8/27/2001
04:11:02
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Thank You Christophe for the links and the information. Wow, I did not even know there were Dodge dealerships in Switzerland.
01 QC 4.7 3.92LSD 4x4 Flame Red 5-speed
98 RC 3.9 2x4 Dark Green Auto
|
Jimmyc
Dodge Dakota
8/27/2001
04:51:22
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
For anyone interested I went to the picture links above and one was a picture of the spec sheet on the motor. All the numbers were Metric (NM and KW) so I did the number crunching to English Units. This is for the 2.5L Intercooled Turbocharged Detroit Diesel apparently marketed for overseas. Here goes:
103KW @4000RPM = 138.07HP @4000RPM
41.2KW per Liter = 55.36HP per Liter
340NM @1800RPM = 250ftlb @1800RPM
Pretty impressive engine for its size. Especially backed up by a standard. Hope they offer the prototype V-6 over here though. The only actual numbers I've seen for it is the ~210HP and 20+ MPG. Imagine that with about 350-400ftlb of torque. I'll be first in line with the checkbook.
01 QC 4.7 3.92LSD 4x4 Flame Red 5-speed
98 RC 3.9 2x4 Dark Green Auto
|
J. C. Brandon
Dodge Dakota
8/27/2001
15:25:01
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
The diesel mentioned in the Truck Trends article is the new Delta engine from Detroit Diesel (a DaimlerChrysler company!). It was developed for the North American market, so I would expect to see it in a Dakota before long.
http://www.detroitdiesel.com/Public/Markets/automotive/adelta1.asp
I'd buy one.
-J.
|
Dan Gruber
Gen III
8/27/2001
18:40:34
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I've got a weird attraction to diesels, particularly turbo-diesels. My brother and his wife own two Ram 3/4 ton Cummins 4X4's (a 93 reg cab and a 2000 quad cab), and my dad has a 93 3/4 ton extended cab Cummins 4X4. They live right across the street from one another, so that part of the block sounds like a truck stop in the morning!
Are you listening Dodge? I want a Dakota turbo-diesel! Make mine a QC 4X4, Patriot Blue, with a 5 or 6 speed manual.
Dan
2000 CC SLT 4.7 4X4 Auto 3.55 LSD
|
Donald
Dodge Dakota
8/27/2001
18:57:13
|  RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Diesel engines are excellent for towing and "slow power" things, but the engines simply don't last on small vehicles at high speeds. My dad is a bus driver, and the deisel buses always wear out before the GAs busses. In fact, they had to take away his gas bus because it didn't meet safety requirements, not because of the bus performance. He has been through 1 deisel bus and is on his second while he drove the same gas bus for almost 20 years. and besides diesel exhausts are extremely toxic... it had been linked to Lung Cancer. Today i did see a Dodge Ram with a Diesel engine.
Just my opinion.. :)
donald
|
Dan Gruber
Gen III
8/27/2001
19:32:52
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
In terms of emissions, diesels are in some ways cleaner than gas engines. They produces less of the pollutants that contribute to the greenhouse effect than a comparable gas engine. The main downfalls diesels have as compared to gas engines are particulate emissions and the sulphur in the fuel. For whatever legislative reason, US diesel fuel has a large amount of sulphur in it that is not present in European diesel fuel. Eliminate or sverely reduce the sulphur (in the works now) and that problem goes away. Particulate emissions (the black soot we see spewing from diesels) is mostly unburned or partially burned fuel. This is being handled in two ways. One, electronic control combined with a high-pressure common rail direct injection (no prechamber) system allows for much more precise fuel metering than in the diesels of the past. Follow a VW TDI down the street and see how much soot escapes the tailpipe...almost none. Having no prechamber does increase the noise of combustion and makes combustion less reliable, but the electronic fuel control and high fuel pressure make the combustion process at least as reliable as a mechanical pump/prechamber system, and the noise can be combatted by injecting fuel over a longer period of time, thus creating a slower more controlled burn as opposed to one big explosion. The second way of dealing with particulate emissions is to introduce a soot trap or a catalyst into the exhaust stream. This will need some work, although diesel cats are getting better. Past attempts at cats on diesels (Mercedes Benz in the early 90's comes to mind) have been less than successful...not terribly effective and prone to clogging. A soot trap design likely faces similar "challenges" (I love throwing a positive spin on problems), although the VW TDI does have a cat and is apparently having success with it. Not enough success to meet CARB standards, but good enough to keep selling them outside of California.
The emissions challenges are possible to overcome, but in the end it comes down to what will sell. Diesels sell in Europe because diesel fuel is cheaper than gas and diesel cars get better mileage, magnifying the savings. Diesels were popular in the US in the late 70's and early 80's because gas prices were comparatively high and diesels offered a way to pay fewer pennies per mile to drive. Is the US market ready for light duty diesels again? Ask me next time OPEC sneezes and decides to hold crude oil at $35-$40 per barrel.
Dan
2000 CC SLT 4.7 4X4 Auto 3.55 LSD
|
Dan Gruber
Gen III
8/27/2001
20:14:46
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Okay, one more note and I shut up (for now).
Reliability. We can probably all come up with a reliability nightmare story on one engine or another. Since the focus of this thread is on diesels, lets talk diesel reliability.
Bottom line: a well designed and built diesel will last a long time, just as a well designed and built gas engine will last a long time. One is not necessarily more reliable than the other. GM's old 350 diesel was a reliability nightmare because it was not designed well. It was a 350 gas engine converted to use diesel fuel. Let's bump the compression on a DC 4.7/3.9/5.2/whatever to 17.5 to 1 and see how long it is before the engine grenades. The GM 6.2 was better, but it had an appetite for fuel pumps every 60K-75K miles (as my dad discovered). Design, design, design! On the whole, diesels need to be built with incredible strength and care because the basic premise of a diesel is to make the cylinder pressures high enough to explode the fuel/air mixture without benefit of a spark plug...in other words, a controlled version of knock (also known as uncontrolled combustion). Imagine burning 81 octane gas in an engine with a 12 to 1 compression ratio and you get the idea. So the block, heads, pistons, connecting rods, crank, bearings, valves, etc have to be able to deal with the unbelievable forces of uncontrolled combustion over the life span of the engine....2000-4000 times per minute for a couple hundred thousand miles. This calls for very strong components, built to very precise tolerances. Expensive to do. That's why the Cummins is a $4500 or so option on the Ram.
Why bother? From the consumer standpoint: torque and fuel economy, and the possibility of a long lasting engine. From a manufacturers perspective: profit not just on the vehicle itself, but a better chance to meet the government's corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) mandates and hopefully avoid being fined by the government for not meeting the CAFE requirements. That last one is why the PT Cruiser is classified by the EPA as a truck: DC designed it very carefully to be considered a truck by the EPA so that the Cruiser would help DC meet its CAFE requirements, thus saving DC from government CAFE fines. Think about it...for every diesel Dak that DC could potentially sell at a small profit, that represents a better shot at DC selling a high profit big-block hemi-engined tire-eating gas-guzzling automotive-sex-on-wheels kind of vehicle, just because of CAFE requirements.
Dan
2000 CC SLT 4.7 4X4 Auto 3.55 LSD
|
Jimmyc
Dodge Dakota
8/28/2001
10:39:55
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Have to agree with Dan on a lot of points. I was stationed in the military in Washington state back in 98. While there I went to a several rodeos. My girlfriend at the time was a barrel racer so I got to walk around behind the fences. I had the opportunity to talk to a lot of guys about their diesel trucks. Most were Dodges (a big rodeo sponser) with a few Fords. They were literally from all over the country. All said the same thing. Anywhere between 200K to 700K miles. A few had gone through several trannies and lots of brakes and clutches, but none of them talked about actual engine problems. The guy I mentioned on my first post at 650K miles owns his own business. He's in his truck constantly and does a lot of stop and go driving. He tried to go to the local Dodge dealer and buy a new truck without an engine. He wanted to put the old one in a newer truck and see how long it would actually last (he has a lot of money). They told him that he couldn't buy a new truck without an engine. It would have been neat to see how long it would have lasted. He sold the truck to a local landscaper and I still see it on the road. I'd definitely be willing to spend an extra 3 to 4 grand on a truck with that kind of longevity. With all of the towing I do, and the distance driven to work, it would give me a better piece of mind. I don't drive 75 MPH everywhere I go anyway, so driving at high speed is not an issue. Currently I trade trucks every 3 to 4 years. I could see myself driving a diesel Dak until it wore out. The only downside is repair costs if needed. My father went through a starter in his (starts the truck ~15 times per day) and a rebuilt one was $450 ($800-900 new). After the starter he put on a Gale Banks Power Pak and the torque of that truck now is incredible. If DC does this they need to offer a standard option. I've have a lot of friends, that do a lot of towing, with the Cummins. A lot of them have had auto tranny problems, but no problems with the standard. As for day to day drivers I haven't heard of any problems with transmissions. The engines are outstanding, DC just needs to be sure they put a good powertrain behind behind these engines in the Dak. Don't know about you guys, but I get about 17-18 MPG in my truck. This year showed how volatile gas prices can be. Back when gas was about $2 per gallon the diesel here (in Maryland) was $1.45. The guys at work, with the 1 ton Cummins Dodges, were getting the same or better mileage as me at about $.55 cents cheaper a gallon. For the driving I do that would make my savings about $10 per week or $500 per year. A diesel this year would have just about paid for itself.
01 QC 4.7 4x4 3.92LSD Flame Red 5-speed
98 RC 3.9 2x4 Dark Green auto (wife)
|
Jon
Dodge Dakota
8/28/2001
16:41:12
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
I am thinking about buying a fullsize and a diesel engine. I currently have a 2000 QC Dak 4.7L and 5spd. Its fast and fun but I need more room and cargo capacity. I like both the Powerstroke and the Cummins. Which do you guys think is the better motor? I am happy with with either truck, I will just buy the one with the better motor. I heard the Powerstroke block was based on a gas block. Is that Ttrue?
|
Jimmyc
Dodge Dakota
8/28/2001
20:44:42
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Personally I think both are good choices. I would have a hard time choosing myself. As in my above posts, I've heard a lot of good things and very few bad things about either. Not positive if the Powerstroke is based on a gas block or not. I know the old Chevy was. The Powerstroke is made by International. I'm sure someone on the site can answer this. I have friends with both Ford and Dodge 3/4 and 1 ton trucks. The Dodges seem to ride a little nicer and are a little more quiet on the inside. I have a friend with a 1 ton Ford that has to have 700 lb of sandbags in the bed for the truck to ride OK. As for the diesel engine itself the Powerstoke is more powerful. The new one is supposed to have about 550 ftlb of torque to compete with the new Isuzu(Chevy) Duramax. From listening to the Ford guys at work the Powerstroke seems to require a little more preventive maintenance than the Cummins. I think the best bet is to drive both trucks and see which feels the best to you. Personally I would choose the Cummins. I like the Dodge body style a lot more than the Ford.
|
Dan Gruber
Gen III
8/28/2001
21:32:32
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Jimmyc hit it right on the head: drive the ones you're considering, then make up your mind which suits you best. Having said that, the new GM/Isuzu duramax looks good and has gotten good reviews...also available with an allison automatic which is a very good thing, but reliablity remains to be proven. The Cummins in the Ram is absolutely dead reliable, although my brother has had to replace his LSD twice and have his manual shifter rebuilt once in 200,000 miles on his 93 cummins 4X4...seems the LSD doesn't like the fact that my brother drives VERY hard and has upped the torque considerably through some aftermarket add-ons. The rear-end gears themselves are doing great, but the LSD can't handle the torque for more than 80-90K miles. The shifter problem was my brother's driving...he broke it and it left him stuck 3rd gear. I've heard good things about the powerstroke, but a friend of the family had bad luck with his 99...new front drive assembly, new cooling system, new front suspension, and new automatic transmission within its first 6 months on the road. But the engine ran great up through the day he traded it in 8 months after buying it.
Bottom line: buy what you want and find a dealer or independent shop that you trust for service.
Dan
2000 CC SLT 4.7 4X4 Auto 3.55 LSD
|
Blckdak
Gen III
8/29/2001
11:43:42
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Here's some hopeful info on seeing a diesel in a dak from Car-Truck.com
--------
The good news is that both Dodge and Jeep are considering offering a diesel engine in the WK and the HB/NB (NB is the next Dakota). The motor is the highly regarded Detroit Diesel Delta engine. Long time Buzz readers will recall that Dodge did extensive testing with the Delta in the current Durango back in 1999. One of my Ace Buzz Patrollers s who drove a Delta equipped Durango, reported that it was the quietest diesel they've ever heard and that the vehicle was impressively powerful and smooth throughout it's operating range.
The Buzz is that the brass at Chrysler decided against offering the option because of "marketing and regulatory issues." In retrospect it seems like a dumb move, I receive letters regularly from readers wondering why they can't get a diesel in the Dakota/Durango or any of the Jeep products. The quiet, smooth running Delta seems like the perfect choice for these vehicles.
The 4.0 liter V6 diesel has a peak output of 235 bhp and 375 ft. lb. That's more power than the 4.7 liter V8 (235/295) and the 5.2 (230/300). Detroit Diesel has also been working on a 5.3 liter V8 version of the Delta which is said to put out in the neighborhood of 315 hp and 500 lb. ft of torque. Either one of these engines would be a good choice, but the 4.0 liter seems like the most likely candidate.
-----
Still gonna go for my Cummins Ram though! :-)
Erin
2000 CC 4x4 Sport
Magnaflow Exhaust, Z-Tube, Runnin AMSOIL
|
Jimmyc
Dodge Dakota
8/29/2001
22:50:14
|  RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Thanks for the info Blckdak. Has anyone heard what, if any, replacement is being planned for the Cummins? My dad has a Cummins and will be looking to trade in a couple of years. He was just curious if there was any word of the Detroit V8 replacing the Cummins? Sounds like the 5.3L V8 Delta would be a good candidate. Thanks Jim.
01 QC 4.7 3.92LSD 4x4 Flame Red 5-speed
98 RC 3.9 2x4 Dark Green auto
|
GJoyce
Dodge Dakota
8/30/2001
08:08:48
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Jimmyc-
Theres no replacement for the Cummins in the rams. Cummins and dodge just signed a long-term contract stating Cummins would remain primary supplier of the diesel engines in the dodge ram pickup truck. (even though Daimler makes a comparable mercedes diesel engine, own Detroit Diesel, and have contracts with Caterpillar, they must have decided the cummins was too good) Thank goodness, too.. cause that puts food on my table.. I don't know, but there are rumors about dakotas/durangos, too. Nothing concrete yet, but how cool would that be??
Gary J
|
Jimmyc
Dodge Dakota
8/30/2001
15:48:23
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Thanks for the info Gary J. I'll forward it to my father. I think he'll be glad to hear this. He's had 2 Cummins Dodges and wouldn't buy anything else.
01 QC 4.7 3.92LSD 4x4 5-speed
98 RC 3.9 2x4 auto
|
Blckdak
Gen III
8/31/2001
13:07:17
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
I hope they keep the Cummins around when the introduce the 2500 & 3500 series of the new Ram. Would be interesting to see a Cat diesel in one though!
Erin
2000 CC 4x4 Sport
Magnaflow Exhaust, Z-Tube, Runnin AMSOIL
|
Chris
Dodge Dakota
8/31/2001
17:23:04
|  RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
I guess some of you guys have no idea about how to read spanish! But that's ok, after all, the website is not written in spanish anyways... it PORTUGUESE and it is not from Mexico either, it's from BRAZIL! It says that right there....
On another note, check out this link
http://www.car-truck.com and go to the part about the new Grand Cherokee. At the bottom of that page they talk about the Diesel engines. They state that the 4.0 V6 makes 235hp and 375 lb-ft!!! The 5.3 V8 makes 315hp and 500 lb-ft!!! I hope they are right! Anyways, truck-on!
2001 QC 4x4 SLT+
|
wonk
Dodge Dakota
11/23/2001
23:25:21
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
23NOV2001 - I looked them up on the web today, diesel dakota in Brasil. They also have a ford F-250 XLT with a 4.2L(?) diesel w/exchange rate approx $24K USD
|
C-Whit.
Dodge Dakota
11/24/2001
10:36:47
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
As far as the high speed durability issue with the diesels goes, i'm a paramedic and we drive type 3 modulars with the 7.3 powerstroke turbo diesel. Our trucks weigh 10,000lbs and still hit a rev limiter at 100mph at half throttle. Our trucks were bought new 3 years ago, and even though they see TREMENDOUSLY hard wear and tear, and are near 100'000 miles, they still drive good as new! We have tranny probs more than anything else. Look I know this is a Dakota site, but I cant let you guys knock the Powerstroke. BTW over 90% of all ambulances sold in the U.S. are built on Ford chasis. I've got a 95 Dak V6 with 120,000 on it and I'm keeping it forever!! i love that truck. I do think that the 94,95,96 Daks were the best built. sorry so long.
|
rowdy
Dodge Dakota
12/02/2001
17:40:43
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
i also agree i my self have never seen a deisle put in anything less than a 3/4 ton. i own a 96 psd i have never had any problems with the engine and i have 171,750 mile on it and i dont think i will ever go back to a gas. it would be cool to see the diesle an option in smaller trucks less weight more power!
|
Jon
Dodge Dakota
12/02/2001
19:28:03
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Anybody notice that the Mexican Daks come with clear corner lenses?
|
MarkP
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/07/2003
15:21:35
|  RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
Has anyone considered putting a Diesel in a Dak?
Isuzu makes nice looking 2.7L and 4.3L turbo-Diesels that might be a better match for smaller trucks than the 250+ HP Cummins, etc.
Or would this be another Manhattan Project?
|
.alex.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/07/2003
15:49:34
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
These guys did:
http://www.dodgedakota.net/boards/per/6666.html
Scroll down a few posts.....
It runs 12's in the 1/4 mile and gets 32 mpg on the highway.
|
JustRed
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/07/2003
17:22:05
| RE: Diesel Dak?
IP: Logged
Message:
For what it's worth, it looks like the Jeep Liberty will have a 2.8l diesel towards the end of 2004. Maybe there will be some carryover to the Dakota after that?
Some more info here: http://www.newswire.ca/releases/November2002/25/c6084.html
|
| | P 1 Next Page>> |
