| From | Message |
Dr. Dink
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/06/2004
12:16:01
|
 Subject: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
Tell me what you would like to own overall.
5.2
|
Pongo
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/06/2004
12:29:29
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
Depends on several things but for my R/T I'm glad it has the 360, my 66 dart on the other hand is much faster than the R/T with a hoped up 318. I like the low rpm torqe in the R/T and the high rpm power of the light weight dart. 2 seperate worlds there.
|
Durango
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/06/2004
17:28:26
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
5.9, although...
59 & 52 blocks are same size, just 5.2 has smaller bore? Why is anyone picking/going to pick 52? It just doesn't make sense, there is nothing better about a 52 block. This vote should be between 59 & 47 - alhtough this too has been done countless times on this board.
|
boggerdak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/06/2004
19:26:34
|  RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
I.M.O. it depends on where you like your power. If you like it down low, then 5.9. If you like it up in the rpm's, then 4.7. I've owned both. I personally feel that the 5.9 would be better suited in 4x4's with automatics to take advantage of it's torque on the low end. The 4.7 makes for a kick a$$ 2 wheel drive stick shifted truck because you can rev it up to where it sings.
|
DSW
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/06/2004
20:10:14
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
Haven't had the 5.2 or 5.9, but I like the 4.7. I drive a lot for work, 3K/month and the 18-20MPG is realy nice. Wished I had more low end torque for towing the boat, but the 4.7 is a good compromise between good milage and acceptable towing power.
|
Wadak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/06/2004
20:21:50
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
I have a few mod's on a 92 4x4 5.2 when i tromp on it I can roast the tires for at least 50 feet.
|
Kowalski
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/07/2004
09:51:58
|  RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
I love the 4.7 in my Dak, but would also love a 360 to put into my '69 Baracuda. They're all good motors...
|
FORME
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/11/2004
02:09:07
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
For me I'll stick with my 5.9 just based on its current reliability. 50K Not a single problem.
|
01Motorsport
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/11/2004
10:14:46
|  RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
The '92 5.2 I had made it to 217K before I got my '01 4.7. I'll probably vote for the 4.7 when it reaches 218K.
|
chris95sport
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/11/2004
18:20:12
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
yeah i have only owned 5.2 and my odometer is sitting at 205,000 and no major problems yet.So i have to vote for the 5.2
|
sammydogs64
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2004
13:16:36
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
I would take the 5.9 out of the vote as who wants a performance truck with an auto trans?
I vote the 5.2 (which I own) as you can only get the 5.9 in a crappy auto trans, my 5.2 5 speed runs with 5.9 auto anyday. RWHP is almost identical and the 5.9 sucks even more gas than my 16-18 MPG pig.
|
WipLash
R/T
3/04/2004
13:33:33
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
5.7?
|
Chet
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2004
14:25:18
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
All I know is that the 4.7L I have seems to be a great motor. Fat midrange through 3rd and 4th, and you can hang onto the power through those gears with the 5-speed. Makes a lot of car drivers take a second look on highway entrance ramps. that combo really is a lot of fun. The weak link seems to be the 3500 tranny, though.
|
GSMarquis
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2004
18:36:14
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
After having my 2001 4.7 for about 36,000....i would perfer my
older 98 318...I would rather have the 318 for more available
upgrades, easy head changes etc. Plus ive been waiting for a
powerdyne blower for my 4.7 for like 2 years. Been thinking
about the kennebell but 4500.00 is a little steep.
|
fst4dr
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2004
20:00:57
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
If you could get the 5.9 with a 5-spd, I'd be all over it. I have the 4.7 because I prefer to shift my own gears.
|
WipLash
R/T
3/04/2004
20:47:18
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
fst4dr,
The 5.9L is way over rated. Trust me, I have one. Now, of course, it has more potential. But, stock for stock the 97 5.2l averages over 273ft=lb of torque from 650rpm thru 5000rpm. The 97 5.9L only averages 231ft-lbs of torque from 650-5000rpm. The 4.7l averages about 265ft-lbs from 650-5000rpm. The 5.9l kicks ass in a very narrow rpm range from 1500rpm-3000rpm. For that narrow band it produces 30ft-lb more than the 5.2L. The 5.2L makes 40lb more than the 5.9L below 1500rpm.
Here is the real BIG difference:
At 4000rpm the 5.2L is still making 290ft-lb of torque. The 5.9L only makes 195ft-lb at 4K. At 4500rpm the 5.2L is still making 280ft-lb of torque. The 5.9L is making a wimpy 130ft-lb of torque. THE 5.2L is making more than twice the torque of the 5.9L at 4500rpm. I can vouch for this because I own a 5.9L. At 4500rpm it is like hitting a wall. If the truck would shift at about 4k instead of 5k it would run pretty fast. At 5k it is making a measly 60ft-lb of torque. I can make more torque than that on my mountain bike.
Like I said, that is easily adjusted with some bolt ons. An R/T cam will solve most of these deficiencies.
|
Pittdawg
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2004
21:44:46
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
Interesting breakdown wiplash....question, why does everyone argue the 5.2 is so superior to the 4.7 in torque when the average torque from 650-5000 rpms is nearly identical, the 5.2 winning by a measly 8 lbs/tq?
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
3/04/2004
22:02:06
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
The 5.9 falling flat must just be the way Dodge has them set up stock in your trucks. The only 5.9 I have had that I rebuilt myself was capable of 6K RPM's easy. It didn't fall flat. It woke up at 3K RPM's. At the track more people run a 360 than a 318. (They don't talk Liters much with Muscle cars).
Oh, were we comparing STOCK?
I like my 4.7 just fine. It's capable and is going to get more capable real quick!
|
WipLash
R/T
3/04/2004
22:25:08
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
Going by the torque and HP graphs there is almost no difference. The 5.2 has a little more from 650-1500rpm. The 4.7L has a little more from 4-5Krpm. I'm only speaking from actual driving experience when I say I prefer the 5.2l for all around performance and utility. The main reason I like the 5.2L over the 4.7L is the availability of aftermarket parts. Neither engine out does the other more than 5% on anything.
|
RadioMan
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/05/2004
09:03:09
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
By far, the 5.2! 5.9 (360) great engine but it's
kinda hard to pass a gas station with it. The 4.7
is a great little package but lacks the torque it
needs to do a real tow job and if it's got that
five speed O/D automatic hooked to it, it's a
total looser for up and down hills of any grade.
I've owned them all and right now stuck with a 02
4X4 4.7 w/five speed auto. I wish I had my 98 4X4
5.2 (318) w/four speed auto back. By far, it had
more torque to get the job done and no shifting
in and out of O/D going up and down grades.
|
WipLash
R/T
3/05/2004
13:33:46
| RE: 4.7 5.2 5.9 vote
IP: Logged
Message:
RadioMan,
Most of my experience with the 5.2's is on the 95's and down. That was before the XXre transmissions. If you liked your 98 you would have really liked the pre-96 models. For overall torque, my butt-dyno said my 92 4x4 5.2L was the best small block engine Dodge has made up until they made the Hemi. I don't know what they were thinking. It seems liked they changed a little here and a little there every year on the cam/timing of the 5.2L and each time they screwed with it they made it worse. The 93's were more powerful in the mid and upper rpms than the 92's, but for towing the 92 was the king of all the factory 5.2's.
|
| | P 1 Next Page>> |
