| From | Message |
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/03/2003
23:23:29
|
 Subject: RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
13.3@102? Do you have a 5speed? I can't see a stock or even a mildly modified 4.7L running 13.3's Dude, the SS Camaro 6spd won't even run that without some mods. You don't have a SC or NO2, do you? How about filling all of us in on how you accomplished this miracle. The Lightning cranks out 380HP and can only break into the upper 13's with racing slicks. Assuming that you have a reg-cab, the Lightning weighs 800 more pounds than you. If you have a X-cab, then your only 500lbs lighter than the lightning. For you to run 1/2sec faster than the Lightning would mean that you would have to have at least 380hp. 400hp would be more like it. No 4.7L is capable of this without serious modifications. What exaclty did you do to get a 4.7L dakota to run a 13.3? I know you need at least 150 more HP. That would mean a KB super charger at the minimum. If that's the case, how long do you think the transmission is going to hold up? The R/T has all the good heavy duty truck stuff that can handle the extra torque. The 4.7L has a weak drive line. It won't withstand 380hp without breaking.
|
notchlx
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/03/2003
23:56:02
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
The formula for the times is quite simple...
Paxton Novi-1000
True Dual MagnaFlows (from manifold flanges back 2-1/2" with H-pipe)
Home Ported 65MM TB
Lakewood slapper bars
26x10.5x15 MT ET Streets
The truck is a 2000 SLT 4.7 Regular Cab 5-spd 3:92's.
The truck seems to be holding on pretty dern well. You must not have heard about Duner's 4.7 yet? These motors are holding up quite well under pressure.
|
azdak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/04/2003
00:56:48
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
it will handle it and more. i run 8lbs of boost from a single turbo i have had no problems it just screams! there is nothing like pulling up to the mojority of r/t's ss harley ferds and camaros and the like and making them feel it where it hurts, the look on there face is well PRICELESS they always stay a little behind at the next light but on the other hand if anybody had the balls to do this to an r/t it would be an awsome machine worthy of praise
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/05/2003
08:07:31
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
notchlx, thanks for clearing things up. I figured you had a 5spd and a supercharger. I maybe trading mine in for a 5spd. I don't feel comfortable putting a supercharger on this little "multi-speed" automatic. I may wait to see id DC drops a HEMI in there. A HEMI DAK would have a hard time matching those numbers in stock trim. I suspect a HEMI DAK will run close to 30K. You can pick up a 5spd 4.7L for $16-18K? I'm guessing you spent around $6K to get your DAK to this level? That's cheaper than the asking price of the R/T and 2 seconds faster and better gas mileage. DC needs to take lessons from the after market. Just build a 4.7L designed for a supercharger (like ford does the 5.4) and make it an R/T option instead of the boat-anchor 360. Any DC engineers reading these post?
|
Notchlx
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/05/2003
08:57:11
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I won't get into specifics as to what I paid for what, but I can tell you this...
The price of all mods (vehicle included) tallies up to $18,050. The truck had 2300 miles on it when I bought it in 2000. Not too bad, I think... I couldn't have bought a new GT for that.
Plus I use the truck as my work truck. It's paying for itself...hahaha
|
00287RC
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/05/2003
13:44:14
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
bought my RC 4.7 for 16,900 with a 5 year 60k mile warranty full loaded. 45RFE auto trans with power everything. Special ordered it from a dealership in Parsons, Kansas. Of course my brother worked for that same dealership, haha.
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/05/2003
21:43:49
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I paid $16,900.00 for my 4.7L SLT RC also. I bought it right off the show room floor. The only 2 options it does not have is the overhead console and a CD changer. I'll probably add a CD changer. I'm not happy with the way it drives. It is too squirmy. It wiggles and jiggles all over the rough surfaces on the road. I'm constantly having to check up on the throttle and the steering to keep the ass in from swapping around.
The look on that 6spd Maxima owners face was PRICELESS!!!! I was suprised myself. I expected to get my ass kicked. My mom has a new Maxima automatic and I drove it. It hauls ass. I never would have thought a 235hp truck engine hauling 3750lbs would have beat a 255hp car engine hauling 3300lbs. Something does not add up. Either DC is being conservative about the actual HP numbers on the 4.7 or Nissan is overating the HP numbers for their 3.5.
|
daveman
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/06/2003
00:28:05
|  RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
R/TBlues,
I think the new (2004) Maximas are rated at 265HP. Peak HP isn't the entire story, however. You need to look at torque, and you need to look at it at every RPM, not just the peak numbers. Dak has more torque over the entire powerband, especially in the lower RPM's.
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/06/2003
21:16:27
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
daveman:
First of all, it was an '03 Maxi. They had 255hp. The 04's have 265hp. The 04's also weigh more than the '03's. The 03 maximas are faster than the 04's and it's due to the extra weight of the extra size and luxury they added to the 04's.
Torque is nothing without horse power.The torque and HP curves need to remain relatively close together through out the RPM range in order to have good acceleration. That's why a 4.7L SLT RC will out run a 5.9L R/T RC.
|
steve
R/T
6/06/2003
22:10:42
|  RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Sometimes ..maybe!!!
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/23/2003
22:30:23
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I just ran an '03 RC R/T with my RC 4.7L SLT and I wipped him red light to red light 2 out of 2 times. It's not a proud moment for MOPAR lovers around the U.S. I just assume have the R/T beat me. I've temporarily lost my respect for Dodge. They better hurry up and do something about this. It is discraceful to be a Dakota owner right now knowing the best thing Dodge has to offer right now is a freaken 4.7L 5spd. Where's the HEMI? I want a HEMI Dak!! I want it now!
|
Jack Tabor jr
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/24/2003
02:02:55
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Ya OK !
|
dcxer
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
01:11:23
|  RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Boat Anchor 5.9L? Yes the performance of the R/T is dismal as sold.Yes they killed the good 5.9L.(320 H.P.)Guys remember that the state of tune in a 5.9L R/T is very mild.Check it out.However never think that 4.7L is anywhere near the engine the 5.9L is.All hell breaks loose above 300 H.P. on the 4.7L.It simply isn't made to handle much more than stock and it can't.Down the road it may improve but not as produced today.BTW 03-4.7L is down 15-20 H.P. from 2002
|
Trukguy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
01:38:57
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
what exactly does this mean?:
"...all hell breaks loose above 300 H.P. on the 4.7L. It simply isn't made to handle much more than stock and it can't.
uhhh, you haven't talked to duner lately have you.
|
Notchlx
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
08:45:50
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I'm pushing somewhere in the neighborhood of 380-390? crank HP.
It seems to me it's held up to logging over 50 1/4 mile passes in the last 6 months, ruthless punishment on a daily basis, and towed on many ocassions. It's never coughed once.
Yes, I'd like to know what you meant as well?
|
dcxer
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
12:39:10
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Trust me here guys.It won't handle it for long.It's not a knock on the 4.7L and yes you are seeing great power for now.The HO was detuned at least 4 times to live.I believe the final H.P. rating as sold is 260-265.It started at 300 H.P.Thats a fact.Wonder why all the changes?If you look closely at the engine its very evident.For obvious reasons I can't say much more.This is just a warning and the 4.7L can probably handle a bit more on the street than in the lab.You can't duplicate the lab conditions no matter how hard you drive.Just remember the 4.7L is much closer to the edge than any of the older engines were.
|
Trukguy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
12:53:52
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
B.S.
Either put up or shut up.
I don't believe you know what you are talking about.
|
dcxer
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
13:10:44
|  RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Don't like the truth? I am only trying help here so save the B.S.stuff.You have no idea.Good news for the 4.7L in the future major upgrades are planned.It is a fine engine now and it will be much better.Then it may become what you all seem to think it is.My point was and is that it will not handle heavy mods as it is today.
|
Trukguy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
13:21:13
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
OK, at what point will the 4.7 engine grenade?
Duner has been putting out somewhere around 500hp from his forever. Please explain yourself.
|
Jeremy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
13:47:33
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I want to say that I'm very impressed with the timeslips notchlx put up. Your killing them out there. I never thought that could be done for so cheap.
|
Notchlx
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
14:26:11
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
This is a tougher engine than most expect.
D/C didn't just slap together a lil disposable motor. They use good quality materials.
Are you saying these things won't last long with the power because of displacement? If so.......
Explain how 4.6 SOHC's are making 450+RWHP on stock bottem ends, and go 100,000 miles, and have been doing it since 1996.
I believe you are speculating on things that you have heard, my friend. Those guys in the lab were smoking some of their experiments.
We that mod out our motors know that we are taking a chance, and that the life-span of a heavily modded motor prolly won't last as long as a stock motor that is driven by grandpa only on the weekends. That stands the same on 5.2's, 5.9's, etc...
|
KevinD
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
15:51:58
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Just so everyone understands. So people arent mislead by HP numbers. Someone mentioned earlier something about "torque is nothing without horsepower". Technically Horsepower is nothing without torque. Because, It is impossible to measure HP. Torque is measurable but HP is not. Torque is amount of force produced by the crankshaft turning in a circular motion. HP is only a calculation based on the engines RPM and the torque numbers at that RPM. A dyno measures the engines torque at specific RPMs, then does a calculation and posts a HP number. If you dont belive me, think about it, how are you gong to measure "HORSE-POWER" Which is how many horses it would take to move this object, this speed, in this amount of time. Also, there are two standards for HP calculations. There is the D.I.N. standard which is the German standard, and there is the J.I.S. standard which is the Japanese standard. The J.I.S. standard overates HP ratings on the cars (Japanese cars). American cars and most other manufacturers use the D.I.N. standard for HP. So if a guy with a Honda says his car is putting out 200HP from the factory, then all in reality it only puts out around 185-190 Hp with prolly only 125 lb/ft of torque, Im not impressed.
|
Jeremy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
17:23:41
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I think the only reason some of them imports pull off successful horsepower numbers is cause of the high redline. Like you said its torque times rpm and while our big multiplier is the torque, most small compact imports have to rely on a larger number posted in the rpm section to claim large amounts of horsepower.
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/25/2003
21:02:45
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Well, I can make 400ft/lb of torque with a 2-1/2' long cheater bar on the Jesus nut on the front of my front wheel drive Taurus. That won't get me down the 1/4 mile in 12sec. I might get there in 13 minutes if I keep turning that wrench. Like you said, RPM's is the key factor. If the engine won't accelerate that extra torque won't do anything except help you pull a trailer. That's where the HP comes into the equation. Hp is a result of both the torque and RPM's. If you have no torque you won't have any HP, but you can have lots of torque with very little HP. An engine that has a torque curve that closely follows the HP curve will accelerate. Acceleration is the key to good #'s at the track. The Japanese have mastered this phenomenon with their variable valve timing, overhead cam, 4 valves per cyliner engines.
|
dcxer
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/26/2003
01:20:15
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Ok you seemed to miss the point. I like the 4.7L as much as you all do.Do I wish some things were done differently? Yes and that is the point.The 4.7L Ho in original form 300 H.P. could not cut it,so they had to detune it to make it live..Yes we do use quality parts....as long as they're cheap!Can you say MCM errr-cost saving? More than parts go into building an engine.Costs are cut thruout the process.Yes the engine was designed for 150,000 mile life cycle.Yes it will may do that with Grandma and you driving.Anyone that has ever had one apart completly will tell you the same things. And no the displacement has abolutely nothing to do with it.If you check you will see the 4.6L Ford is a very stout piece as delivered.Most of our other engines are very strong.(e.g 2.4L,5.7L etc)If you notice the 5.7L is a new engine that shares nothing with the 4.7L.If it was all that would DC spend all the money to create a completely new piece? They would have made larger more powerful variants of the 4.7L.The management has no alliance to the word HEMI.They decided not to didn't they? Does that tell you something? Btw:Notchlx,I don't have to speculate.I am there daily and heavily involved. 50 passes at the strip is impressive but more impressive would be if it ran say 5 hours of MGD testing at Wot.Thats less than 1/120 of a full test.13.3 sec*50=11.08 minutes.Got a way to go.
|
notchlx
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/26/2003
01:57:46
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
They created the 5.7 for versatility. Would it make sense to only have one engine in a lineup? No.. They need engines for different purposes.
Am I saying the 4.7 is all that, or better than the 5.7? No...
I just see no basis for your reasoning on the 4.7 not being able to handle 300+HP. You have already been proven wrong in several cases, just by people on these boards. There are several out there that have been running the Kenne Bell superchargers for over 2 years now...Why aren't their engines blowing? Duner??? He's pushing 14psi, and pulled the motor apart last year when he added his HO heads, and said the motor looked great for a truck that had been running that amount of boost for that long.. Needless to say he just bolted the heads on, and went. He's still hauling arse today. Explain that one?
The secret to success/engine longevity on modding these vehicles, regardless of displacement is the state of tune. If the DC engineers had a problem getting the 4.7HO to 300HP, they need to fire them, and get the young boys with PVO to come show 'em how it's done. Or just glance at these boards.
Oh, and I may not be on the labs cycle... WOT for 11 minutes. I'm a little silly, but uh...WOT for 11 minutes? Why would I do that anyways? I'll just keep driving it like I stole it, while I continue to mod.
If it blows it blows, but I can say it's definitely taken some heavy abuse.
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/26/2003
03:12:21
| Over the Limit?
IP: Logged
Message:
Mr. DCXer or realslow......
I read all the latest on this thread. I too would LOVE to know what in the hell you are talking about.
You make it sound like you have some sort of inside scoop about the components of the engine. You also try to make it sound like there is some sort of 265 hp limit to the components of the 4.7 engine. You state that the 4.7 HO couldn't live at 300 hp. Why am I "magically" able to produce in the neighborhood of 500 hp (for the last 2 years and 30,000 miles), and not run into this supposed fatal flaw? If I have my math correct - that would mean that I ONLY have about 2 actual hours of power production at that level, but certainly many more exceeding that 300 hp threshold and while pulling a loaded car trailer also! There are a number of differences between the 4.7 in my Dakota and the 4.7HO in a Jeep - not the least is the PCM programming and some other related components. Could this problem be exclusive to the Jeep?
You appear hesitant to tell us on a public forum exactly what YOU think the problem is, yet you want us to believe that you have the inside scoop.
The suspense is killing me.... I'm going to email you directly.
|
Trukguy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/27/2003
15:29:01
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Well?
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/28/2003
00:03:09
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
If it blows it blows. That's what they make extended warranties for. When the warranty expires you trade it in. Who cares if it wasn't designed to handle the 300+HP. I've never kept one long enough to test this theory. I just rag the hell out of them for 2 years and trade them in after I've used them up. I would like to know what the design flaw supposedly is that limits the engine to 265HP. Is it not already making more HP than this? It outruns a 250HP R/T. Ha!Ha! If torque is so important to 1/4 mile times then DC must have a broke dyno because the 5.9L puts out 40ft/lbs more torque than the 4.7L. I think the 5.9L made 250HP 5 years ago because I had a 98 R/T CC that would blow the doors off anything DC is making today except a Viper. I've test driven an 01,02, and an 03 R/T and all 3 of these were much slower than my 98 R/T and my 02 4.7L. Only the 98 R/T was even close to my 93 X-cab 5.2L. That truck would smoke a Mustang GT. I did it several times back in 93 and 94. Then 95 came around and I got a new 95, 5.2L x-cab. It wouldn't run a 16.7 1/4 mile. The 93 with 66,000 miles on it would run a 14.9. This decreasing HP thing seams to be never ending thing at DC. My 92 x-cab 4x4 Dak 5.2L would out run my 95 x-cab 5.2L. The 92 4x4 weighed 550lbs more than the 2wd 95. It ran as fast as my 02 4.7L RC. They both had the same torque and the 92 had supposedly 15 fewer HP. I could light the tires up on my 92 at any speed below 15mph and I have been able to light them up at 30mph. My 93 was the only other truck in 10 years that ran this good. They have steadily gotten slower every year since 93, yet they keep advertising higher HP numbers.
|
dcxer
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
6/28/2003
02:36:44
| RE: 5.9 or 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Ok, I will try again. First everything I have posted are facts.First hand.My only concern is that because of built in design limitations due to cost constraints this engine doesn't have the same margin of strength that the older engines have.I see that I haven't made this clear.The parts are fine and the engine will do everything you want but there are some concern areas.I have spoke with Duner and voiced those concerns.When he sees what I spoke about I am sure he will agree 100%.Duner's engine output is most impressive as is the 380 H.P. that notchlx is seeing.The margin of safety may be a bit more than I believed.I truly hope that is the case.I was not trying to alarm you folks or start wild rumors on the net only raise concerns that in a very HEAVILY modified engine there could and I mean COULD be serious problems.Besides the 360 is still a good piece....haha.I didn't post to start a pissing match only help.I hope this will clear up this and we can get back to helping one another to do what we do best.Crush Chebbies and Mangle Fords.Thanks P.S. No kids in PVO Notchlx just Mopar gearheads like in here.
|
| | <<Previous Page P 2 Next Page>> |
