| From | Message |
Chipster
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
11:45:56
|
 Subject: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Just when Dodge is looking to end our
beloved Dakota's. Chevy is coming out
with a mid- sized truck modeled after our
Dakota's. That sucks.
|
dan
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
13:28:22
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Why does that suck? That just gives you more choices in the truck market. If it looks as good as the DAK (that in itself is a styling challenge) and is decent in build quality, then who cares who makes it.
|
CanaDak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
13:50:45
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Isn't it the Chevy Colorodo?
Why not the Chevy Mounties?
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
14:32:06
|  ????????
IP: Logged
Message:
Dodge isn't ending the Dakota line.... they just canned the redesign effort because it was getting off track.
I say bring on the competition! Competition is a good thing. It makes the manufacturers improve their products for us all to buy.
|
xplikt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
14:54:59
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
That should kick Mopar's @ss in gear and make some 4.7L stuffs!
|
Ryan Miller
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
15:21:18
|  RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
They new Chevy is supposed to have a I-5 w/240hp
why the lil weenies wont toss in the 270hp I6 and have an SS model is dumb if you ask me. It would eat dakotas all day long
|
S. Allen
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
16:17:44
|  big deal
IP: Logged
Message:
Have you seen what it looks like?
Yuck! Everything GM is starting to look as ugly as that Avalanche thingy....ugghh! Where did the metal bumpers go to, as well? GM is stuck in the ugly design mode and it looks like theres just no hope for them anytime soon. Funny...that used to be Chrysler's plague!
On that GM 270hp inline engine...have you seen how many recalls there are on that thing so far? Not exactly confidence-inspiring, when compared to the 4.7 V-8's track record so far. The inline 6 has HP but no torque to speak of. Typical GM post-350 engine. No 100K warranty, either.
It will take GM years to get the bugs out of the new design and the new 5cyl. engine, anyway.
I'd say the Dak has little to worry about in the competition department. Yeah the Colorado is bigger than the puny S-10, but it will take more than more interior space to get my attention.
Besides, do you know anyone that owns a Trail Blazer? They get HORRIBLE gas mileage as well. I know the 4.7 is no peach, but for an inline 6, that engine should get better mileage than it actually does.
-SA
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
16:21:40
| 270 = 235?
IP: Logged
Message:
It MIGHT, except for that part about how GM rates their HP numbers.....
An advertised 270 worth of Chevy marketing's HP just might be about equal to DC marketing's 235 HP.
|
Clevite 77
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
16:41:42
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
From what I hear they're putting the I6 in the GMC version (s15, Sanoma, the new name???)
I was taken for a ride in a t-blazer. to all with a CC 4x4 w/3.92's LSD, all the hd options, or if you have what would be a faster truck you don't have to worry about that piece of sh!t, in 2wd it won't even bark the tires, it's not to bad once it's moving, but neither is my 4.7L
Before I bought my Dakota I was somewhat of a Chevy fan, and to be honest I had high hopes for the new I6 motor. Then when I got my Dakota
I was a bit intimidated by them, (not like any gramma wants to race anyway) so after my little joy (not so joyful) ride I was not only disappointed,
but I was laughing my arse off.
|
Dan
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
17:07:13
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
anyone has pixs of the competition please post link so that i can laugh. i hate gm's line up. all of their interiors have the same plastics and textures, even in the cars. CRAP!
|
DakotaDan
*GenIII*
5/22/2002
18:02:17
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Here is a post I made earlier this month about the Colorado
COLORADO
Dan
K&N FIPK # 57-1517 * DynoMax #17748 * OEM 5.2/5.9 V8 TB #53032691AA * Crower 1.7 Roller Rockers # 73654K * Factory Flares * WeatherTechs * Saddleman Low Profile Tonneau
|
Clevite 77
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
18:05:48
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
the fenders kinda remind ya of our Dakotas (they flare out) but the rest says, Toyota is wearing the pants in this design haha chevy you suck
|
Marks DQC
GenIII
5/22/2002
22:11:00
| RE: 270 = 235?
IP: Logged
Message:
Duner,
What are you trying to say?
If you look objectively the manufacturers are very consistent. One of the best measures is performance versus power to weight ratio. The image below shows ratings for a few manufacturers where lbs.per horsepower is plotted against zero-to-sixty times. A line higher on the list would mean the manufacturer is being more aggressive in it's power ratings. As you can see Dodge and Chevy are on top of each other. If anything the dodge line goes way higher on the less powered vehicles. In other words their ratings are consistent. Dodge 235 = Chevy 235 etc.
2001 Dakota Quad Cab SLT , 4.7L, Auto, 3.55, Garnet Red over Slate
Zaino, Tint, Vent Guard, Gaylords Lid, Hotchkis, Bilstein, Wet Okole Covers, Painted Grill Shell w/ Ram inserts, S/S Bumper/Valence Cover, Billet Antenna, Precision Roll Pan, APC Clear Corners, Airaid, Gibson
|
Hersbird
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/22/2002
23:14:16
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
If the new I6 270 HP trailblazer is so good why has it lost every side by side performance comparison to the 4.7 Grand Cherokee? These were not even the new 4.7 HO motors but the regular 4.7.
The graph is interesting but... Power to weight is not always telling, the weight makes a big difference weather or not it is moving weight or static weight, (like weight in a fender compared to weight in a crank). weather or not it is FWD, RWD, or AWD, gearing, aerodynamics, and on, and on. What about torque? The best measure of performance is not 0-60 but the 1/4 mile, how do 1/4 mile times compare? Those chrysler dots don't look like they really make a linear line as shown. Throw out that 11 sec 0-60 thing (what's up with 11 sec 0-60, my minvan is faster then that and it's got to be the slowest chrysler!) and then look at chrysler's line. Pretty out of wack with the others. You need to plot about every power to weight -vs- 1/4 mile times from one source like Motor Trend or Raod and Track. Go back 5 years and then there will be a better representation for the makes, 4 dot's hardly make for a good line. Pretty cool otherwise.
|
92dakotahd
GenII
5/22/2002
23:24:49
|  RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
My aunt just got a Trailblazer and to compare it to a Grand Cherokee is a stretch. A trail blazer is more of a Suburban than the old blazers. Now I know that's GM's fault but to really compare a trailblazer to anything it would have to go up against a Durango. Grands are LUXURY Suvs, not really commuter suvs like the durango and T-blazer.
And don't forget I-6s to V8s is apples and oranges. If you wanna compare a jeep to a T-Blazer, try the straigt six in both, they're very comparable. I've driven both.
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
00:50:06
| That's a very pretty graph.
IP: Logged
Message:
What I'm saying is that manufacturer's will say whatever they think they need to in order to market their goods. If that means exaggerating some HP numbers or talking the magazine editor into "correcting" the 0-60 or 1/4 mile times then that's what it takes. I know full well how it works.... I've been at the track for a magazine test session. It's amazing how the numbers I saw come up on the board aren't what shows up in print!
I produce marketing materials (brochures) for a living and that includes "creating" graphs that tell the story that the customer wants to tell. That typically includes throwing out information that shows their product in an inferior light or fudging or rounding up or down some of the numbers.... however makes their product look the best. It's amazing how much a curve can be manipulated just by getting rid of a single data point. They can fudge the HP or fudge the weight to get to their target HP/Weight numbers. I could take all of this very same data and still show it accurately, but you wouldn't even recognize it as coming from the same place. All I would need to do is remove a single data point from each manufacturer and the perceived results could be drastically different.
My next question would be where did the data come from to plot this graph.
Which products were used?
Whas is the purpose of the linear curve? Is higher or lower or shorter or longer better?
In the graph above, the linear curve does little to convey the fact that Dodge is represented by 3 separate vehicles that range from a 4.2 to a 10.2 0-60 time. Probably a Viper, a Ram and a minivan. I see the Chevy camp looks like they 4 vehicles in the 5 second 0-60 area. Which 4 Chevies would that be? 2 Vettes, and 2 Camaros? Isn't that a little bit like stacking the deck? The HP numbers for the performance cars will be correct - they know everybody and their brother checks them at every turn. How many people are going to question them about a Trailblazer?
I guess what I'm saying is that the manufacturers lie whenever it serves a purpose.
Are you saying that they don't?
|
Marks DQC
GenIII
5/23/2002
08:19:53
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Hersbird,
It's easy to see why the Grand Cherokee beats the Trailblazer. The porky Trailblazer weighs in at 4612 lbs or 17.0 lbs./hp for 270 hp. The svelt Grand Cherokee weighs in at 3786 lbs. or 16.1 lbs./hp. The Car and Driver database I have access to doesn't have the 0-60 data for either model. I would expect the Grand Cherokee to beat the Trailblazer in a race. But that doesn't mean the hp ratings are not consistent.
Duner,
Truth in advertising laws require the manufacturers get pretty close. The graph shows they are being pretty consistent.
Dodge data includes:
2001 Neon, 2002 Intrepid, 2002 Stratus, 2002 Ram QC 4x4 4.7, 2001 Viper
Chevrolet data includes:
2002 Avalanche Z71, 2002 Monte Carlo, 2001 Camaro Z28, 2002 Camaro SS, 2002 Corvette, 2002 Silverado ex Cab 4x4, 2001 Trailblazer LT
The specific reason I picked 0-60 times is because in the 1/4 mile areodynamics, rotating vs. static mass, and gearing all become bigger factors. This would cause more spread in the data.
The data is all from car and driver, they are for several models in several trims. The database in the plot is a representative sample of data for a few manufacturers. We all know the Chrysler Voyager is slow (11.1), so is the Ram QC 4x4 4.7L (10.1), but manufacturers rate those vehicles for horsepower and the db is not biased so it includes them all.
2001 Dakota Quad Cab SLT , 4.7L, Auto, 3.55, Garnet Red over Slate
Zaino, Tint, Vent Guard, Gaylords Lid, Hotchkis, Bilstein, Wet Okole Covers, Painted Grill Shell w/ Ram inserts, S/S Bumper/Valence Cover, Billet Antenna, Precision Roll Pan, APC Clear Corners, Airaid, Gibson
|
Ryan Miller
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
11:29:55
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
It looks like Yall are pretty scared of this new truck we will just have to see when it comes out and if you dont like it then dont buy it. But if the make a SS I-6 w/270hp or the 5.3 w/300hp bye bye dakota and back to GM.
I do love my dakota but Im not a mopar or no car guy
www.angelfire.com/tx5/dakota
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
11:49:00
| Who can argue with logic like that?
IP: Logged
Message:
All those that believe whatever they read in magazines - please raise your hands.
Oh crap! I was afraid of that....... some of you guys actually believe that stuff!?!
|
1Flamed92Dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
12:12:13
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Bring on the new COLORADO its gonna be just like all the rest of the GM line a pieces of CRAP. Dont get me wrong i know they will sell the crap out of them then again there is a ASS for every seat.My little ole Dakota likes to whoop ass on the fullsizes and i dont even sweat the S-10s. Hell Chevy had to steal the Name from VOLKSWAGEN for their new Truck ie the New SUV that they have coming out. And they steal the look from Jeep for the H-2 so i think CHEVY should is sweating it out, I believe DODGE has something up their sleeve and they arent saying anything about it. As for the Fullsize my bosses 5.3l SILVERADO cant keep up with my little ole DAKOTA 3.9l and the trucks weigh in pretty damn close to each other. ENOUGH SAID
|
Ryan Miller
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
12:51:23
| 3.9 vs 5.3 Whatever!!!!
IP: Logged
Message:
If your Dakota 3.9 can keep up w/ the 5.3 you have a mighty quick dakota or that is the slowest damn 5.3 ever! My buddy has a 01 gmc 327 (5.3) Club Cab and it will straight out hall balls and the only thing it had on it was dual exhaust.
Some of these fishin stories are getting way out of hand. I will say it again I love my dakota but I know what it is and what it will do.
Nuff said
|
1Flamed92Dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
14:39:36
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey believe what you will, she runs 15.2 @ 92mph in the Quarter. I do have a few Mods. If you wanna go fishing. Take the Chevy it will make a
perfect boat anchor. This is the view the boss see all the time 
|
Hersbird
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
14:54:16
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
The stats I have on the Jeep say a Limited 4x4 weighs 4300 pounds and the Chevy LTz 4x4 trailblazer 4600 pounds. Still the chevy's extra 35 HP can't make up for the 300 pounds. If every 10 HP is equal to 100 pounds the chevy should still be faster but It loses by a good .3 in the 1/4 mile which is equal to even 30 more HP. It just seems like the trailblazer is really only putting out about 240-250 HP tops. I think plenty of people have verified output of their Dodge motors compared to factory claims, but do the chevy guys? Or do they just assume they have more drivetrain losses? Chevy already has what it takes to beat a Dakota with they s-10, they just need to get off the pot and stick a damn v-8 in there. The aftermarket seems to make them fit just fine, the factory is just too chicken. There is no reason to make a pickup as big as a Dakota and then add a powerful 6 or an 8 because then they will still be slower. They need to keep it small, and just add more power. Then again I think they need to keep the Dakotas current powerplants but replace the 5.9 with the 5.7 and then make the truck about the same weight and size as the Gen II but with modern looks. 350 HP, 3500 pounds, and a car 5-speed, that would be pretty sweet.
|
Ryan Miller
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
15:06:56
| Fishing
IP: Logged
Message:
15.2 For a V6 damn I better go get my boots I think your truck looks pretty good but I dont think it will run a 15.2 or out run a 5.3 your looking at over a 100hp more in the gm.
|
Ryan Miller
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
15:19:17
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
2001 Chevy Silverado:
Standard Cab / Short Bed
LM7 5.3L, 4L60E, 3.73 w/locker
STOCK 1/4 MILE NUMBERS:
Location: Carlsbad Raceway
Notes: Stock, 22 gal. 87
Weather: 85*F, 78%Humidity
E.T.: 15.595
MPH: 90.17
|
Dan
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
16:15:50
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Yeah thanks for that link. it definately looks just like the avalanche but with more plastic. i bet all of that body molding will come with it. sounds like another aztec just with a bed
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
16:58:12
| Carlsbad?
IP: Logged
Message:
Hahahaha I've raced at Carlsbad a few times.... Do you honestly believe the 90.17 mph speed? I had two back to back runs at Carlsbad that were about as identical as two runs could be. One timeslip said 14.82 @ 83 mph and the other said 14.84 @ 105 mph. Which one do YOU think was correct? I would guess that NEITHER was correct. Here in AZ the same truck (stock CC 4.7) was running 15.20s @ 92 mph.
I can believe the 15.59 ET since it's close to sea level, I just don't believe the MPH figure. My guess is that that 90.17 is probably more like a 87 or 88 mph speed. Get the owner to bring it out to AZ and you'll be looking at a 16 second truck.... at about 84 or 85 mph. That's pretty much where the rest of them run out here also.
Yeah Ryan, we're ALL pretty scared of the those new Chevies.... we're scared one of them will be in front of us when we're trying to merge with traffic on the freeway and we might accidently run over it! BwaHahahahahaha
|
Ryan Miller
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
17:05:31
|  RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
lol thats pretty Funny I got those #s from some guys web site he runs low 13s now. I have never had my truck at the Track I live in KC Mo They have one out here KCIR I just have not had it out there yet Ive never recived a straight answer on what a rc v6 5 speed runs stock ( mine is not stock) But im sure there is not much diffrance.
I wish I would of bought a V8 but at the time I was making less money and the V8 they had was about 2k more (auto+V8+other crap)
|
Marks DQC
GenIII
5/23/2002
18:05:08
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
According to Carpoint, the Grand Cherokee Limited 4WD is 4072 lbs. The Overland is 4300 lbs. (The 1st response did not mention 4WD and I used 2WD figures) The Overland comes standard with the 265 hp 4.7 H.O. If your refering to a 4300 lb. vehicle then your also talking about 265 hp engine. A 0.3 sec difference in the 1/4 times is not very significant. 265 and 4300 versus 270 and 4600. Or 235 and 4000 and 270 and 4600. Either way they are close. Those other factors (aerodynamics, etc.) could easily explain the differences. Not enough to say Chevy is lying.
Ford got in a lot of trouble in 1999 when the SVT Cobra was proven not to be making the advertised horsepower.
As for Chevy, I have personnaly talked to those responsible for that kind of testing and they are very careful and use independent resources for verification.
All I'm trying to say is that manufacturers are generally consistent in their ratings. I can be convinced that there's bias. Just show some objective data. I have.
2001 Dakota Quad Cab SLT , 4.7L, Auto, 3.55, Garnet Red over Slate
Zaino, Tint, Vent Guard, Gaylords Lid, Hotchkis, Bilstein, Wet Okole Covers, Painted Grill Shell w/ Ram inserts, S/S Bumper/Valence Cover, Billet Antenna, Precision Roll Pan, APC Clear Corners, Airaid, Gibson
|
Rob
GenIII
5/23/2002
18:14:59
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Scared I dont think so! The 5.3 do have balls my friend has one and it runs 15.3 but know way would i have it instead of my truck even if I ran 16's.
 180 thermostat,Z-Tube,Magnaflow exhaust,jet mod,,Auto lite 3923's,SS bumper cover,Stull full billet grill and shell,SS rollpan,Apc clear corners&euro tails,DJM 2inch control arms & 3 inch block
|
Hersbird
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/23/2002
21:23:19
| RE: New Dakota to be a Chevy
IP: Logged
Message:
Carpoint is the same place that says a 4.7 Dakota runs high 17's in the 1/4 mile too. The overland and limited should weight the same, the extra 35 HP doesn't add any weight. You can get the 4.7 HO in a limited as well as the overland. I don't have the article here but I think it was Road and Track (maybe Car and Driver), they break the weights down of the actual trucks they tested and they were not that far apart. It was not a HO 4.7 though, and it did smoke the Trailblazer. You can say .3 is not that much but .3=30 HP and that's about by how much Chevy is exaggerating.
|
| | P 1 Next Page>> |
