| From | Message |
Arto
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/27/2008
06:48:28
|
 Subject: V8/V6 chassis
IP: Logged
Message:
Hello USA - Greetings from Finland
I have -88 4x4 3,9 Dakota with manual trans.
I swapped engine during this winter to 318 from
-85 RAM. In order to get it road worthy and inspected here in Finland. I need to prove that the chassis/brake parts are the same in V6 and early V8 models. Please inform is this the case or do I need to change something. Are part lists etc. available to show the inspector that the parts are the same..
Thanks Arto/Finland
|
Walt_Felix
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/27/2008
08:04:58
|  RE: V8/V6 chassis
IP: Logged
Message:
It might be difficult as the 88 Dakota wasn't available with the 5.2. Also, I've read the 89 Shelby Dakotas (all 2wd) left the Dodge plant with 3.9 V6s under the hood and were swapped to the 5.2 in Shelby's shop. So that may not help your argument. However, when the V8 became an option in 91, the V6 and V8 models were nearly the same, just some slight changes from the 87-90 V6 models. They did have slightly stiffer torsion bars on the V8 trucks compared to the V6 trucks. But I believe the brakes were the same for both the V6 and V8 trucks 91-96, though not exactly the same part numbers for the 87-90 models. There were some slight design changes to the front suspension in 1991 with the introduction of the V8. The lower control arms were beefed up, hubs went from 5-lug to 6-lug, larger tie-rods, CV axles, etc...
Get yourself a parts list for both an 88 and 91 Dakota 4x4. Some of the parts are the same (upper control arms for example). But it sounds like your going to have an up hill battle to convince them it's the same since many of the part numbers don;t match up exactly.
Walt
|
gen1dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/27/2008
13:41:30
| RE: V8/V6 chassis
IP: Logged
Message:
As a Shelby Dakota owner, I can confirm that it is a V6 Sport model Dakota with a V8 swapped in. No suspension modifications were made.
|
gen1dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/27/2008
13:47:29
| RE: V8/V6 chassis
IP: Logged
Message:
Also, in the HSelby Dakota owner's manual, often found on eBay, states all suspension components are the same as the V6 Sport. Shelby added some gas-charged shocks, but that's all. A little more info here:
http://www.allpar.com/model/ram/dodge/shelby-dakota.html
|
gen1dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/27/2008
14:00:10
| RE: V8/V6 chassis
IP: Logged
Message:
Here it is online. Note the maintenance comment.
http://www.shelbyregistry.com/pages/89dakota-pg10.html
|
jayb
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/27/2008
18:24:18
| RE: V8/V6 chassis
IP: Logged
Message:
Im still wondering why anyone would want to do all that work, just to stuff in a gutless 85 318 with 140hp,as opposed to a magnum..... unless of course, if its modified.
|
gen1dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/27/2008
20:13:07
| RE: V8/V6 chassis
IP: Logged
Message:
Maybe he doesn't have a Magnum laying around. And even that '85 318 would stomp on the original '88 V6. Stock, it makes about 50 lbs more torque, which is especially useful in a 4X4.
|
Arto
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/28/2008
03:45:58
| RE: V8/V6 chassis
IP: Logged
Message:
Hello again
Thank you for your comments. I try to get the parts lists and/or I try to get aroud it since I know some inspectors. About the engine, Yes it was an enormous task to rebuild the engine + fit it in the truck. I removed all emission gadgets
+ throttle body injection. Milled swirl port heads (makes 11 to 1 compression), single plane
intake + new 600CFM Holley, better bumpstick + headers and dual 2 1/4 exhaust. It made 250hp/4600rpm at the dyno. It would have done better but propably lack of fuel cut the power curve. Now after rejetting, I belive we are closer to 260-270hp. This truck runs nice. I'm thinking about still improving breathing with Edelbroc performer heads and 650 double pumper. I belive this would help to get +300hp. Pls. comment
Brdgs Arto
|
gen1dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/28/2008
13:40:51
| RE: V8/V6 chassis
IP: Logged
Message:
Yes, breathing improvements would be a plus. However, your biggest issue is with the cam. The stock LA 318 cam is tiny. I mean, awful. With a good dual plane intake, 4V carb, free-flowing exhaust, and a cam, any decent cam in the .450" gross lift range will easily net 100hp increase over stock. 11:1 compression? Yikes!!! Why'd ya do that?!?!? You're gonna be low on HP with stock, even milled 318 heads unless they are also ported (and I mean hogged out to 360-size ports) and fitted with the larger valves of the 360 (1.88/1.60 or optionally the 2.02/1.60 combo as used in the old 340 Magnum, and hopped up 360's). The small-ports of the 318 heads will not match up to the single plane's intake ports (they're 360 sized in the intake, so you have a flow disruption/restriction) and will limit HP potential. Get a set of 360 heads, mill them to get CR up to around 9.5:1. Then you'll have the makings of an engine capable of 400HP at 6,000rpm at the crank and streetable. You can use the single plane to more power potential with the 360 heads and a real cam. Use a 4-hold spacer to help improve lower rpm power with that single plane intake. Otherwise, if you have the $$$, slap an Edelbrock Performer RPM AirGap on that sucker. Read here:
http://www.hotrod.com/howto/113_0304_318_small_block_build/index.html
Anyway, now that you have that, with a carb in the 750+ range and a cam in the .450"-.480" range, you'll easily snag 300 at the flywheel (with stock heads). It'd run much better as it is now if you just change to a standard issue Edelbrock Performer dual plane intake. The intake ports are much more closely matched to the 318 head ports. If you choose to open up and rework the 318 heads, go for it. Just remember, you're running an awfully high compression ratio for pump gas. How'd you handle the fan? Shelby used dual electrics in front of the radiator in the '89 Dak.
|
| | P 1 |
|
Post a reply to this message:
Username Registration: Optional
All visitors are allowed to post messages
|
