| From | Message |
Kyle M.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2002
02:25:08
|
 Subject: My 3.9 VS 5.9 R/T - the 5.9 sucked
IP: Logged
Message:
A very intersting thing happened tonight!!!! I own a 1993 Dak 3.9 V-6 Magnum and I pulled up next to a newer 5.9 R/T Regular Cab. We raced off the line and he couldn't even get half his truck past me and barely won. Then we raced again from about 25mph and I stayed a little past him for about 2 blocks and then we had to stop!!! As far as I know my 3.9 is all stock. This is no joke either.
Also, the guy wasn't a bad shifter because I took note that we both hit second gear scrath, and he shifted quite good actually.
|
87DakBuilder
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2002
02:54:36
| RE: My 3.9 VS 5.9 R/T - the 5.9 sucked
IP: Logged
Message:
Kyle,
In 92 and 93 Chyrsler put out the first Gen Magnum engines and they were mean as hell. They actually have more horsepower than the Magnum engines of today. They had hydralic roller cams from the factory, and better breathing due to larger diameter exhaust pipes. So it is very posible that your truck could hang with the new R/T in a short distance. Also to my Knowledge the 5.9 R/T has and automatic tranny. I could be wrong now, but I'm pretty sure that Chrysler hasn't put one on the market with a manuel. Hell if they have, I just might trad in my 87, and get one. (that was a joke) Anyways not trying to put you down or anything, just letting you know, that you have one of the baddest trucks that Chrysler put out on the Market. I know cuz My dad has a 93 with the 5,2 Magnum, and it runs low 15's bone stock. It's funny, it ran a 15.2 with my little sister driving it. So the V.6 that you have shouldn't be that much slower.
Congrats and take care
|
IntenseDak39
GenIII
1/13/2002
10:07:44
| RE: My 3.9 VS 5.9 R/T - the 5.9 sucked
IP: Logged
Message:
87Dakbuilder,
The newer magnums have roller cams also and I believe they produced more power from the factory. The downfall is that the 97 and newer weigh a lot more.
98 RC V6 auto modifications: LOTS ! ! !
|
bernd
*GenIII*
1/13/2002
11:13:44
| RE: My 3.9 VS 5.9 R/T - the 5.9 sucked
IP: Logged
Message:
Yup...about 500lbs more on the average. :(
1997 Dodge Dakota SLT - V6
Supercharged/Intercooled @ 10# w/Nitrous
14.55 @ 96.01mph
|
dakkid
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2002
12:08:00
| RE: My 3.9 VS 5.9 R/T - the 5.9 sucked
IP: Logged
Message:
how can i find out what mine weighs?
|
Kyle M.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2002
12:25:11
| RE: My 3.9 VS 5.9 R/T - the 5.9 sucked
IP: Logged
Message:
Well, knowing now that I am able to hang for a while with the 5.9 R/T kinda makes me wanna rebuild my 3.9 instead of getting a 440 or 360.
|
IntenseDak39
GenIII
1/13/2002
20:50:28
| RE: My 3.9 VS 5.9 R/T - the 5.9 sucked
IP: Logged
Message:
Kyle,
....440!!!! That would be bad@ss!!
I know of a guy with a 80's full size van with a 440/4br and trans for $1000 and I have been trying to build up the courage to go and buy it and slap it in my truck, but then there is the whole inspection thing!
98 RC V6 auto modifications: LOTS ! ! !
|
Kyle M.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/13/2002
20:59:47
| RE: My 3.9 VS 5.9 R/T - the 5.9 sucked
IP: Logged
Message:
I am lucky, we don't have any inspections here in the state of Nebraska, or as well call it, Butt-F@ck Egypt and middle of nowhere.
|
IntenseDak39
GenIII
1/14/2002
00:05:29
| RE: My 3.9 VS 5.9 R/T - the 5.9 sucked
IP: Logged
Message:
I'M MOVING TO B.F.E!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
98 RC V6 auto modifications: LOTS ! ! !
|
| | P 1 |
|
Post a reply to this message:
Username Registration: Optional
All visitors are allowed to post messages
|
