| From | Message |
Danny
Dodge Dakota
6/30/2001
09:42:09
|
 Subject: Is 4.7 better than 5.2??
IP: Logged
Message:
I am buying a used Dakota CC 4x4 soon, but I can't decide on weather I should get a 1999 with a 5.2 V8 or a 2000 with a 4.7. Obviously, there will be a price difference on these, but what are the advantages over each engine? Thanks!
|
kj
Dodge Dakota
6/30/2001
10:29:33
|  RE: Is 4.7 better than 5.2??
IP: Logged
Message:
The 4.7 is supposed to have slightly better mileage than the 5.2. The 5.2 is a quality design with a good reputation for durability. The 4.7 hasn't been around long enough to evaluate long-term durability unless somebody on this board has driven a ton of miles in the last year and can speak up on the subject. Power levels are close between the two so you can't really go wrong with either in my opinion. Some prefer tried and true and some like modern technology. I assume one of the major reasons DC switched was the fact that the 4.7 has a much smaller bore than the 5.2 and larger bores are harder to meet emission standards with. This was one of the nails in the coffin of the beloved 340 with that sizeable 4.04 standard bore from 68-73.
|
Hawkeye
Dakota Enthusiast
6/30/2001
14:47:02
|  RE: Is 4.7 better than 5.2??
IP: Logged
Message:
The 4.7 has been around since late 98 when it came out in the 99 Jeep Grand Cherokee's. Every long term report I have read on them has said that the engines were as good at 50,000 miles as they were at 5,000 miles. I have the 4.7 in my Dakota and my wife has the 5.2 in her 99 Durango. I like both engines. The 4.7 has more bang out of the box but there are more aftermarket things available (and usually cheaper) for the 5.2. Both are good engines to me. Overall I think the 4.7 is capable of making more power than the 5.2 with the right mods.
'00 QC 4x4
4.7 3.55 LSD
32x11.50 BFG AT's
Jet Power
|
kraw
Dodge Dakota
6/30/2001
21:44:24
| RE: Is 4.7 better than 5.2??
IP: Logged
Message:
well, I have a 5.2 in my Dak, and I drive 2 Durango's at work, one 99, one 2k. I can say that the 4.7 feels way stronger than the 5.2. But, they 99 was wrecked once with about 6k bux worth of damage to the front end. We put about 100 miles a day on them and my 99 has 56k on it in one year. It is in the shop now cause the oil pressure gauge keeps going to 0 and it starts sounding like a Diesel engine.
On the other hand, the 5.2 in my 98 Dak is just as strong now as it was before. I love my truck, but I can't wait to get a 4.7 =]
www.krawdaddy.net
|
Jason
Dodge Dakota
6/30/2001
22:17:05
| RE: Is 4.7 better than 5.2??
IP: Logged
Message:
I really like the 5.2 but that is the only one that I have driven.So my opinion is bisaed but the 4.7 seems to be a good setup.I really do not thank that it is way more powerful or anything like that.I will say that the 4.7 is alot more efficent than the 5.2 when it comes to feul but what do I know.I really would like to drive a Dak with the 4.7 and someday I will.
99Dak/RC4x4/318/32x11.50s
|
Jeffster
Dodge Dakota
6/30/2001
22:30:10
| RE: Is 4.7 better than 5.2??
IP: Logged
Message:
Owned both engines and like the 4.7 more. Even if they are both equaly as powerfull the 4.7 will give you more power just because the whole engine weights a lot less. Not just because it's less liters but it also has aluiminum heads and composite intake. Also it doesn't ping like an SOB when it's bogged down. With my 5.2 I would have to down shift a lot more often no because it was a 4X4 but because it would start to hammer at low low rpm's.
|
| | P 1 |
|
Post a reply to this message:
Username Registration: Optional
All visitors are allowed to post messages
|
