| From | Message |
Junior
Dodge Dakota
11/29/2001
00:48:01
|
 Subject: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
I am looking to get either a CC R/T or a CC 4.7. I want to know which you think are faster? And what they have done to there trucks to make them that fast? Does anybody have any 1/4 mile times?
Which one should I buy???
|
kota on 20s
GenIII
11/29/2001
01:07:03
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
if you are going to keep it stock, get the 4.7. if you are going to mod it out, get the 5.9. there are WAY more parts available.
both are about the same stock. if both are auto
Eric
|
andrew
Dodge Dakota
11/29/2001
01:20:07
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Kota on 20's pretty much said it. I personaly would go for the 5.9 because of all the aftermarket parts for it now. It got great torque too. Not sure about MPG, but if your considering an R/T, something tell me thats not an issue here.
|
HSKR
Dodge Dakota
11/29/2001
04:20:13
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Kota is partially right. The 4.7 5-speed stock is par with the R/T. Most auto 4.7's have to play catch up performance wise to a R/T. There are a lot more parts available for the R/T's. I know of one CC R/T running 11.5 in the 1/4, but also know of a 4.7 running 12's in the 1/4. How much money you got??? as they say, wanna play, gotta pay.
|
fot80
Dodge Dakota
11/29/2001
06:48:53
|  RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Is gas mileage a consideration? 4.7 is a little better. How serious are u about performance? Gonna modify it alot or a little?
|
ZenDak
Dodge Dakota
11/29/2001
12:32:48
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Driver skill plays a big part in which truck is going to be faster.
I haven't heard much on 'normal' RT 1/4 times, but I run ('01 CC 4.7 auto 3.55) strong 15.5 in the 1/4, and have take'n a number of RT's. Also got spanked by a few RT's. That was before my intake arrived (prior was just a catback),,w/the intake i bake'm if I launch the way I used to. Have to let off the gas now,,,,pwr is up,,,traction is down. sux..
Anybody, can make anything fast,,,time, money, patience. The 360 is probably the to get parts for,,,at the moment.
...my 4.7 cents
Lates,
Ando
|
ZenDak
Dodge Dakota
11/29/2001
12:33:32
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Driver skill plays a big part in which truck is going to be faster.
I haven't heard much on 'normal' RT 1/4 times, but I run ('01 CC 4.7 auto 3.55) strong 15.5 in the 1/4, and have take'n a number of RT's. Also got spanked by a few RT's. That was before my intake arrived (prior was just a catback),,w/the intake i bake'm if I launch the way I used to. Have to let off the gas now,,,,pwr is up,,,traction is down. sux..
Anybody, can make anything fast,,,time, money, patience. The 360 is probably the to get parts for,,,at the moment.
...my 4.7 cents
Lates,
Ando
|
Junior
Dodge Dakota
11/29/2001
12:39:05
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
I was thinking of going with a 3-inch cat-back dual exhaust system, KB supercharger, a jet-chip, and a new intake. I am leaning a little towards a 4.7 because of the 5-speed trans.
|
MikeD
Dodge Dakota
11/29/2001
14:58:07
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Well I got a 2001 RC R/T and I personally love it, I put a catback w/ 3-1/2" tips w/ an intake and MSD Ignition and waiting on the 52mm TB and it definatley turns heads when they hear it rumbling up to a stop light. The gas mileage kinda sux I drove 6 hours on Thankxgiving and it consistantly got 14 MPG, of course it was windy all weekend, it wouldof gotten a whole lot better mileage if it had shifted another gear thats for sure. But I wouldn't get the 4.7 just cuz of the transmission. Once U get the R/T and see how good it rides and how much fun U have in it U'll forget about the transmission. I kinda thought the 4.7 was sluggish when I test drove it back to back w/ the R/T. After driving the R/T my mind was made up. Thats my 5.9 cents.
~Mike~
|
scott
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/13/2003
23:50:50
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
i have 1999 dakota R/T i had at the dealer 3 times because the trany still shifts to soon or to late can anybody help me out with this.
|
larry cook
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/14/2003
00:22:24
|  RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
I have 00' Clubcab 4.7 with a k&nfilter flowmaster and powertower throttlebody spacer and I got 300h.p. and 365pounds of torqe out of it over stock and it smokes RT,S consintly and gets consideribly good gas milage when your not always on the gas I'd go with the 4.7.
|
Wow
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/14/2003
04:23:10
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey Larry, where do I get one of those 60HP throttle body spacers? My '00 4.7 with Intense Performance Intake and Flowmaster catback only makes 240HP.
|
micah radnich
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/15/2003
02:25:12
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but those hp/tq #'s are way exagerated. Don't believe manufacturer's claims until dyno #'s match. The 4.7 alone is worth getting just because of the 5speed. I get better gas mileage than my friend who has an intense blue 5.9 and we are a dead even race -so far. The 4.7 will out rev the older technology 5.9. The heads are easier to port cuz they're aluminum and you can already get racing cams for the 4.7 through KRC performance. They're getting 450 horses out of these small cube engines. You may spend a little less on 5.9 speed stuff but not much. If you like to shift get a 4.7 5spd and take all that $1200 you just saved off the sticker from not getting an automatic and put it into performance. $1200 can do a lot. just my .02 cents.
|
Viking
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/15/2003
13:20:50
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Think about it...the 5 speed is only available in the 4.7 since the stock 5.9 would tear it up...in short notice....especially with the aftermarket availability for the 5.9. Dodge isn't that stupid since aftermarket parts won't void the manufacturer's warranty. The auto is a protection measure for the manufacurere since it is a known fact automatics are not as harsh on drive trains as a stick...especially in light truck 4x4's. Can you imagine the crisis it would cause Dodge if the 5.9 came with the 5 speed? Especially with the current differential set-up? Wheel spin would be the only saving grace for a 5.9 5 speed combo. As a long-time "A" motor fan, the venerable 318/340/360 motor required the same A-833 four speed as the RB-383/440/hemis of long past just to manage the performance that was "anticipated" as well as the stout rear end. SO, if you want a five speed...knock yourself out with the 4.7 with the inherent drivetrain limitations. If you want to be able to tinker and develop some interesting power from the 5.9/automatic combo, go that route. What's nice is that you have a choice...just wish the 5.9 came with the 5 speed. By the way, my application is a 2002 5.9 Quad cab 4x4 with gibson headers/dynomax cat-back.
|
blackrtaz
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/15/2003
13:56:04
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
just for the record my CC R/T pulled a 15.3 with just a dynomax ultraflow. I think the 4.7l rc 5speed pulls high 14s stock.
|
blackrtaz
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/15/2003
13:57:22
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
I am not possitive though, bout that high 14s....I could be wrong.
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/15/2003
20:27:24
| Limitations?
IP: Logged
Message:
What exactly are the inherent drivetrain limitations of the 4.7 5-speed combo? and what would you consider "interesting" power?
You can break anything, but I don't think the drivetrain components get the credit they deserve.
|
nitraking
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/16/2003
00:52:29
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
what duner said uh jeez so you are saying a quad 5.9 auto 4x4 will touch my cc 4.7 5 speed 4x4, sorry dude you lose!
|
Greg
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/16/2003
22:36:04
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
I had the 4.7, now I have a 5.9.
Nuff said.
|
LC47kota
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/16/2003
23:41:05
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
WOW? Who said 60hp tbspacer ? 300hp 365lbft are dyno number's it ran five times to be sure I couldnt believe it their are a couple more things that got it their but Im not gonna say what that is you guys can just wonder about what they are
|
Wow
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/17/2003
05:26:43
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Larry,
That was my smart@ss way of saying that you don't have 300hp with 10hp worth of mods. If you do have dyno runs of 300, that's great. But you shouldn't misrepresent what an intake and exhaust will give the motor, especially to people who are asking for help deciding what motor to buy and might not know any better.
|
Eddie
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/17/2003
13:48:33
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey guys! Just got a 2003 Dakota Quad, 4.7, 5sp auto. Love it! Nice performance, questionable gas milage at 18/gal. Need some help/suggestion... I was told buy a Chrysler Service engineer that the 5spd trany was computer restricted to the 5spd. He said that there is an aftermarket chip that would allow a 6th gear to come into play. Is this a hoax? If not where can I get it? Remember, I'm a newbie, hehe
|
viking
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/20/2003
16:29:09
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9..give me a break!
IP: Logged
Message:
Oh Duner and Nitraking. Don't start the old dialogue about a stick vs automatics. That discussion is old news...especially if you've spent any time behind the christmas tree running either. I don't drag race a "4x4"...give me a break and grow up... Dakotas are not Typhoons...anyways, that's not the point. The question is still 4.7 or 5.9. The 5.9 has more intrisic "horsepower potential" than the 4.7. Engineering-wise, the 4.7 can only be taken to a theoretical maximum...same as the 5.9...same as any engine. The 4.7 has been engineered at its inception to produce more useable HP per CI than the 5.9. For a reason...market share. mileage, stimulating new sales...i.e new technology for the sake of new technology...not that the Dakota needed a new engine. THe trick is determining the best course of action to get the performance your engine is "capable" of producing given shade tree mechanic skills and/or aftermarket availability. Cubic inches are cubic inches..and in lieu of that, how does one get more punch out of a given displacement. Given identical performance-type parts (heads, cams, intakes, headers, ignition, PCM,s,etc. etc. the 5.9 will respond much greater than the 4.7 since the 5.9 has immeasurable "room to grow"...underengineered from the factory. The 4.7 performs at the current 4.7 level because it was engineered to..otherwise why would anyone opt for the 4.7. The 5.9 could have been engineered EASILY at over 300 hp but then you have the drivetrain wear/tear, insurance ramifications, "old and dated" technology, and the aftermarket vendors crying foul. Just check out some of the PR on the H2 Hummer if you don't think new vehicles are only engineered/developed to a baseline level...leaving a market for the aftermarket devleopers to finish the job. If the 5.9 produced over 300 from the factory with just an automatic for an option, would you order the 5.9...or would you opt for the 4.7 /5 speed of today. What about a 5.9/6 speed option with aluminum heads, M1 intake, roller rockers with an agressive cam, headers with factory cat-backs?Interesting choices since simply opening up the heads, basic intake/exhaust work has (for over 30years) made dramatic HP gains in the 318/340/360 "A" motor. Dodge knows this and that's why MOPAR performance parts exist...to appease the need for speed..at a cost that not everyone that buys a truck wants to shoulder (plus the insurance companies don't know what performance stuff you've done to your truck). Remember, Dodge didn't "need" a new Hemi...the marketplace supported it and it would stimulate sales against Ford/Chevy Pickups....That's why its not programmed into the Dakota line-up.
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/21/2003
02:12:25
| Your point? Answer my Question!
IP: Logged
Message:
Give you a break and grow up? WTF? If I wanted a Typhoon I would have one. I like Dakotas. I started with an R/T and ended up with a 4.7 5-speed. I like to drag race and you like to 4-wheel. There's nothing wrong with either pastime. I'm not starting any sort of manual vs automatic dialogue. I'm still waiting to hear what YOU think the inherent drivetrain limitations are for the 4.7 5-speed combo..... or what YOU think is interesting power. If you have some facts and real life numbers to back up your assertions than I'd like to hear it. Until then I'm just going to put you in the "I got a 5.9 and there's no replacement for displacement"category and figure you for not having any sort of imagination or independent thought.
|
Pittdawg
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/21/2003
03:07:03
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Viking...please explain to me then how Honda got 240 horses of a 2.0 liter engine? There are many engines (4 bangers of course) that have a larger displacement and you could mod the heck out of them and never get 240 horses, some engines are simply designed better from the ground up irrespective of displacement...your argument that the 5.9 simply has more room to grow is overly simplistic and in fact inaccurate, the 4.7 is a better design from the ground up and that's all there is too it. I know its hard for you to admit but the 5.9 is in fact dated, its a great engine nonetheless but severely outdated, simple as that.
|
IntenseDak39
*GenIII*
8/21/2003
08:55:01
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
"the 4.7 is a better design from the ground up and that's all there is too it"
how is that?
1998 Regular Cab V6 Auto
|
Viking
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/21/2003
09:24:28
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Pittdawg,
You are absolutely right about the 4.7 being better engineered and the 5.9 being an old cast iron anchor..no argument there...that's why I opted for the 5.9. No frills, time-proved anchor that has proven itself year after year. My choice for my needs and my performance purposes down the road. For me, I love the basic simplicity of the motor and I know how it will respond to upgrades/aftermarket products. Just like Duner liking to drag race his Dakota with the 4.7/5 speed application...and after having owned an R/T. Good for him in talking the talk after walking the walk..so to speak. Not too many posters can say that..simple run their mouths after having their heads in the clouds with their applications. I have no argument with him...I used to drag race a 1977 F-100 Ford that I put a built 460 auto in...so I know how much fun all that is. Given another time in my life, I would have probably gone for the 4.7 5 speed...but I have too much history with the 5.9 and know what's its capable of. Enough on that. As far as 4-bangers, etc producing great hoursepower...you'll find most of these applications for the most part...are not "naturally aspirated" and get their gains from, what's known in the industry, as "artificial displacement"; i.e turbos/superchargers...again, no replacing dispacement..how ever you get it...that's the name of the game. No surprise here, this has been around since before WWII. All manufacturers have these applications in some form or another. Look at the 5.9 diesel, et.al. Sure, there are a few foreign/domestic applications that get remarkable HP from their engines with variable valve timing, multi plane intake runners, etc. etc at high RPM, but you don't see that in a majority of the domestic big three trucks...plus the torque on these engines is abysmal..and again like dispacement, torque is what's king..not HP. As far as inherent drivetraim limitations on the 4.7 vs 5.9 debate. Well, Dodge did the R&D of that for you. How many 4.7 applications do you see in the full-size Dodge trucks? None...since it can't hack the full-size abuse/wear/tear....read they require reliable torque at a variety of RPMs. Prior to the Hemi and notwithstanding the diesel, what was the largest V8 available in any Dodge truck application...the 5.9. For a reason. Also, look at the automatic transmision selections that go with the applications. THe 5.9 has the beefier auto than that available with the 4.7...again, for a reason.
All I am saying is that I was impressed with Dodge's ability to put the full-size drive train in a mid-sized truck and the venerable 5.9 was a great choice to make it happen at its inception...especially for the performance enthusist. It is indeed outdated, but the basic design is solid and I like it....so did Dodge, otherwise they would never have introduced it years ago in the Dakota/Durango line-up. I think they would have designed a new engine at that time. Would I get one if it came with the Hemi...regardless of the HP...don't know. Lots of weight to contend with. Again, that's why the 5.9 is such a nice package. It can very easily achieve the performance level of the Hemi without breaking the bank (I also think the Hemi is going to get some remarkable performance work in the next 3-5 years...just wait as there are numeorus Hemi owners out there wanting more out of the motor..dissapointing to some..others very pleased..we'll see the numbers down the road). Do I think the 4.7 is a technological breakthrough that makes the 5.9 irrelavent? No. Nothing "new" technologically there. Just Dodge's long term plan to build a family of new engines for the 21st century...just like allt he other manufacturers. Smart move in the long term...just like Dodge getting back into NASCAR. It was time to retire the 5.9 anyways. I'm all for new ideas and new products, but I'm not impressed by it...We'll see where it ends up 5-10-20-30 years from now.
|
Pittdawg
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/21/2003
20:36:52
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Viking...that was actually a well thought out reply, I actually agree with most of it...however the full size ram does come with the 4.7
|
Viking
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/22/2003
07:57:48
| RE: 4.7 or 5.9
IP: Logged
Message:
Wow, My bad. Really? I can't believe I missed that "fact". Just goes to show how tunneled vision one can get with their perspective/knowledge. I'll have to keep my eyes open a bit wider since I have never seen a full size with the 4.7.
|
| | P 1 Next Page>> |
