| From | Message |
jay
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/01/2005
18:55:46
|
 Subject: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
i dont think a 5.9 is worth the time of the day. i have a 5.2 in mine, and if i dumped that 5 grand into the 5.2 it would stomp that 5.9 any day of the week. how? cams, heads, intake, nitrous, exhaust. supercharger. i just dont see why people dump thousands into putting a gas gussling 5.9, then they keep it stock too. i see alot of 5.9 dakotas and they leave the motor completely stock. when if they dumped half the money into the 5.2 it would be way more worth it
|
ur point
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/01/2005
18:58:21
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
And if you dumped that same stuff into a 5.9 it would still be more powerful than the 5.2, thats why.
|
.boB
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/01/2005
20:38:54
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
There's no replacement for displacement. If you don't understand that, you haven't been doing your home work.
|
matt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/01/2005
20:39:50
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
uh, yeah. so twat? you'd still have to dump another grand into it to get the lowered stance, and sway bar set up the R/T comes with, and another 2 grand to get the larger wider rims and tires. OH YEAH!!! and another grand to get the 3.92 limited slip differential too.
mine? 2001 dakota R/T, 275/60 17 tires, ported polished and milled beer barrel intake and TB, no cam mods yet, no head mods outside of ported and polished intake side, no roller rockers. still running very close to 0-60 time of 6 seconds. I haven't had a 5.2 come close to me, and mines not that heavily moded. take on one of KRC's trucks with 5 grand into em, and you'd be left at the line.
Stock 5.2 hp is 230 @ 4400rpm, and 300ftlbs of torque at 3200, while the 5.9 is 245HP @ 4000, and 335 at 3200 RPM. while that may not be a huge difference considering we're talking only 42 cubes of difference in the engines, comparing the torque and HP curves, it shows a HUGE difference, based on the bore and stroke, 3.91" X 3.31" (5.2) to the 4.00" X 3.58" (5.9) .... so you're trying to say that 5 grand spent on the same parts would yield MORE power out of a smaller engine? I don't see that, and even still, you're over 3 grand in the hole compared to the stock R/T's suspension, differential and tire/rim size. I'd like to see that happen.
THERES NO SUBSTITUE FOR CUBIC INCHES.
|
IntenseDak39
*GenIII*
4/01/2005
21:31:59
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
the R/T actually had 350 lb tq... more than the rams.
i'd rather dump $5000 into my 400ci.
|
dak287
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/01/2005
21:41:09
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
why buy the 5.2 when the 4.7 will smoke that a$$!!
|
IntenseDak39
*GenIII*
4/02/2005
06:30:25
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
... sure
|
Mopar360RT
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/02/2005
12:27:41
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
there are some real idiots on this site,the more and more I read,only a few of you seem to know what the hell you are talking about. where does a 5 grand difference come from when talking about a 360 and 318.you can use the same parts for both engines and the 360 will have more power with same mods.the 318 is a kickass engine but the 360 is a better choice.Too many morons on here thinking whatever they have is the best and no one seems to know what mods actually work
|
matt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/02/2005
17:29:48
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
mopar360rt, you get my vote! 5.2 and 5.9 use the same basic layout, just bigger pistons and crank. pretty much everything else is interchangeable, to a point. 5 k into a 5.9 would produce a much higher percentage gain than a 5.2 getting the same parts. yeah, I messed up on the torque earlier too, thanks for the correction, intensedak39
I'll be the first to admit that I dont know everything about the daks, thats why I come to this forum, but I'm not stupid enough to think that a smaller engine will be more powerful than a larger one.
|
IntenseDak39
*GenIII*
4/02/2005
17:49:31
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
oh i know man... i just wanted to let ya know it made even more torque than you posted. That's the good part about a 5.9, all the torque.
|
zinnmaster
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/03/2005
00:37:07
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
you would probably have to put a decent set of headers a cold air intake and a few other bolt on mods to even catch up to a stock R/T. So why not pay a little extra to get a 5.9 and the dump the money you would spend to catch up to the 5.9. By the way iam drunk right now let me know if i dont make sence
|
pete
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/03/2005
00:51:47
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
there is no basis for this comparison unless the origional arguement is new price vs. new price...
and even then, it doesnt hold water.
find me a gen3 5.2 4x2 on ebay and ill find you an r/t for the same price or cheaper.
|
pete
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/03/2005
00:53:57
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
not to mention:
i bought a brand new 5.2 4x2 in 99 for 21,000. 8 months later i bought a new r/t for 19,000
|
Fox
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/03/2005
01:22:40
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
The 5.9 has a bigger bore, bigger stroke, 42 more cubes, even with the same heads, same cam, same parts, the 5.9 is still a bigger engine. More low end torque, more potential horsepower. Im not saying in any way that the 318 is a bad engine, but the 360 is "bigger". End of discussion. :)
Fox
|
zinnmaster
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/04/2005
08:38:57
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
last time i checked bigger is better
|
Mikes99Dakota
GenIII
4/04/2005
10:55:40
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
Well I have beaten 5.9s and 4.7s!!
They were stock...basically same mods as me like CAI and Catback systems.....beat an CC R/T and RC R/T<-----STOCK on a roll from 10 mph. VERY CLOSE about 6 inches in front of him when we hit 70 mph.
RC 4.7 Auto 3.55 Posi....kicked his azz about almost a truck length by the time we hit 70 mph.
5.2 is a badazz motor or at least mine is....I dyno at 180 RWHP and 251 RWTQ. OF course my truck is lighter than an R/T and has a better torque band than a 4.7. From 2200 rpms - 3600 rpms my torque is above 195! So 5.2 cant be that bad unless I got a lucky one!
1999 RC Auto 5.2L
Bulet Glasspack, K&N FIPK, Viper Electric Fan Kit
Track Times: 60' - 2.223
1/8 - 9.78 @70.37 mph
1/4 -15.33 @ 88.16 mph
|
hybrid
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/04/2005
13:59:15
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
I thinbk you guys are missing his whole point.
I don't know how much it would cost to drop a 5.9 into a truck (cost of motor and parts for install) but we'll use his $5,000 figure.
I think he's trying to say why dump $5,000 on a new motor that makes a little more torque and a little more hp (apparently a broader powerband too)...when you can take that same $5,000 and drop it into the motor you already have?
New motor 245hp 335ft lbs $5,000 or
same motor 350hp 400ft lbs (rounded number I have no idea how much power it would really make) for $5,000
I see what you guys are saying because the 5.9 is a better platform (hell I swapped my stock motor in favor of a larger more powerful motor then turbocharged that) Had I known that my quest for power would take me beyond the capabilities of the new motor I would have stuck with the stock motor and built that instead of buying another stock motor and then still building it.
With $5,000 you can take the 4.7 to the power level and beyond that of the 5.9. You can have one sick set-up.
Now before everybody jumps on the bandwagon and trys bashing my idea....there are ALWAYS exceptions.
Sure one could then turn around and sell the stock motor (4.7 or 5.2) to offset the cost of the 5.9 so your not in the hole that much...or one could argue that the 5.9 would still be stock and not stressed like the other motor being pushed to it' limits, blah blah blah I've heard them all. I'm just showing both sides of the coin, you know thinking outside of the box...
|
jay
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/04/2005
16:30:41
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
thats kinda what i was saying there. yes. stock to stock 5.9 IS better. but hey, lets just say it cost you $2500 for a motor, and all if any parts you need to do the job. now take that $2500 and dump it into a 5.2. im sure it would punch out more power than a stock 5.9. if you have the money to buy a motor, then spend even more in the same parts that you wouldve dumped on a 5.2, then ok. it makes sence right.
bottom line is, i just wanted to see how much better it really was.
im a chevy mech. yes i have a dodge now, but i dont know as much about a dodge like i know chevy and even fords so.....
|
IntenseDak39
*GenIII*
4/04/2005
18:35:37
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
i understand what you are saying hybrid but jay didnt say that (no explonation).
Jay,
i agree with that logic. I took it one step further...
why would i swap in a 5.2/5.9 in place of my 3.9 when i could just buy a new truck with that motor.
So i went big block and did the whole swap for around $1500-2000.
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
4/04/2005
22:27:07
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
But don't forget intense, you must live where you can throw the emmissions out the window :P
I lived in an emmissions free area for years and years before I moved the the city.
Like You, I swapped engines into vehicles that didn't belong all the time.
Hey I was thinking of your truck the other day.
What did you say you wound up using for a speedometer these days?
|
Fox
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/05/2005
01:38:22
| RE: why the 5.9?
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey intense, how tight of a squeeze was it to fit that 400 in there?
-Fox
|
| | P 1 Next Page>> |
