| From | Message |
Mikes99Dakota
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/25/2004
17:00:34
|
 Subject: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
I was wondering If my RC 318 Dak could beat
a 5.3L RC Chevrolet Truck. I had raced one
out by an old lil freeway about 4 days ago and
each time we ran he won by about a few feet.
Should I be losing to these 285 h.p. trucks or
should i be beating on them.
Could anyone tell me as to whether I could
beat him or I should lose.....BTW both trucks
are stock except we are both running
flowmaster 40 series. I ran the same guy in
my 94' 239 and I lost kinda badley but wanted
to get some payback.
He said he outran a 5.2L CC Dakota a 2001
and beat him worse than me....but like i said
he kept beating me by a few feet. We kept
doing like rolling punches....so I wouldnt know
if i could get him out of the hole?
Any opinions would be appreciated?? I would
just like to know where i stand and if my truck
is in good running condition as to how well it
picks up in speed?
Thanx !
Mike
|
Jag
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/25/2004
21:29:02
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
Yes...he should beat you. Suck it up, yours cost way less then his.
$550 will get you a 100shot
|
Mikes99Dakota
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/25/2004
22:14:12
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
Im not pissed....im just sorta surprised....but
then again I shouldnt he has about 50+ h.p.
than me and im sure alot more torque. For
even a bigger truck it hauls balls!!
Any other ideas?
|
rick
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/25/2004
23:32:18
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
Well, let me tell you. I have an '02 QC 4 x 4
4.7. I was coming home from work on the local highway and someone came up next to me in a, what looked to be a brand spanking new chevy full size. Now mind you I obey the speed limits and my truck give no indication to anybody that It is fast. Actually the truck is pretty slow. The only mods I have done was a k&n drop in, gibson stainless cat-back system. The truck sounds nice. Anyway, he had dual pipes as well. He came up next to me and started giving me some pipe action. Me being in my 40's and the better part of my racer days behind me, did not bite. As i looked over he was laughing at me. Well, that was all I needed. We both stomped, let me tell you, as I started to pull away from hom I rolled down my window and hung out a tissue. Not only was he suprised (and probably disapointed) soooo was I.
I have not seen him since. but, if I do you can bet he probaby went straight home scatching his head wondering how he could have lost to a dodge.
the truck had a v-8, not sure on the size,but it was a regular cab,8' bed 4 wheel drive. It made my day.
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
8/26/2004
00:43:22
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
It was either a 4.8 or a 5.3 if it was new.
I don't get it. They go to a new modular engine as they call it, but I think the 4.7 is better.
And a lot cleaner. Chevy uses big bulky coils with spark plug wires hangin all over it just like the past Z71 engines, etc used.
I like not having spark plug wires.
I don;t know about the 5.3 as much. But had a 4.8 in a Chevy work truck. It had NO torque out of the hole then seemed to really rip once it hit 4K RPM's. Kind of felt like a Honda with V-Tec I guess. But the feeling of that power coming on at 4k RPM's could have been felt from the complete LACK of it down low. The 4.7 is pretty flat throughout the power band.
|
Mikes99Dakota
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/26/2004
10:03:25
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
Should I be where I am at....hanging with the 5.3L Chevys? Or what?
|
NO
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/26/2004
17:29:35
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
They are a bad bunch, you shouldn't be hangin out with trouble makers.
|
daffydak
GenIII
8/27/2004
01:03:48
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
I would think so (you hangin with a chev 5.3L) and your truck looks BETTER then his :-)
did they make a 5.2L dakota in 01?? I thought they were replaced in 00 by the 4.7? maybe he was running a 3.9L (no offense to anyone) or it was a 97-99 dak (if it was a 5.2L). Please correct me if i'm wrong.
Dan
MOPAR=More Power!!
|
Mikes94Dakota
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/27/2004
16:04:48
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
I will have pics on my truck on here soon....just
got to get them on cardomain.com and redo
everything since i upgraded and got an old
school v8 with new school add ons!!! : )
Any others?
|
CraiginTenn
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/29/2004
23:50:54
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
Well, if this helps any, I have a '99 4X4 Durango w/ a 5.9L. The only mod is a Flowmaster with duals from the muffler on back. A guy at work kept telling me to get rid of it because he had a '98 Ram with a 360 and always talked about how sluggish it was compared to his new Chevrolet w/ a 5.3. He ended up next to me on the interstate one day on the way home from work and just kept agging it on until I finally decided to humor him. I was expecting to get my doors blown off because a heavy 4X4 Durango is anything but a racing vehicle. However, to my suprise and his, from about a 60 mph punch I walked off and left him no problem, then I slowed down and we did it again with the same result. Needless to say, he hasn't said another bad word about Dodge trucks to me.
|
CraiginTenn
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
8/29/2004
23:53:38
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
By the way, my '98 5.2L 5 sp. Dakota will blow the doors off my Durango and he won't even attempt to play with me in it! lol
|
Keith
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/01/2004
23:30:25
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
Funny this should come up. Driveing down the street tonight i stopped at a light with a new/newer silverado with the new paper tag still there in the lisence spot. He looked at me from his RC shortbed with contempt and floored it when it turned green. My stock dakota 5.2 is modless but i decided to run him at the next light anyway. Side by side through first and walked away in 2nd. Next light he told me he had a new 5.3 and asked what mods i had. LOL
|
Keith
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/01/2004
23:32:04
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
CC 4x4 auto
|
Mikes99Dakota
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/02/2004
09:48:08
| RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
Interesting......but the guy I ran as far as I know he just had flowmaster exhaust and thats it. I didnt pull him over to find out anymore on h8is truck. But i will be sure to find out this weekend. And if all in all is true and the guy I raced was stock, then I need to find out how much power my truck is putting down cause its highly unlikely you beat that truck versus my rc 318 4x2.
|
RadioMan
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/02/2004
10:23:13
|  RE: 99 5.2L vs. 2000 5.3L
IP: Logged
Message:
Jeez oh peets guys, I got a 79 AMC with a 258
six banger 2v and auto. I'll rip a new a$$ hole in
all of you!
This ought to get you going!
Happy Motoring...
02 Dak 4X4, 4.7, auto.. Not a racer, it's a truck!
|
| | P 1 |
|
Post a reply to this message:
Username Registration: Optional
All visitors are allowed to post messages
|
