| From | Message |
Raiderjm
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/02/2005
01:23:30
|
 Subject: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey kinda new to the whole Dakota thing just wondering about which engine is the better choice. Both of them are pretty close in the hp and torque but i have never driven either of them so any insight would be good.
p.s. just wonderin i think i might be buying one
thanks.
|
GOOD OL BOY
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/02/2005
01:32:28
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
I have the 4.7 now, had a '95 318 (5.2). I'd have to say that if I did it all over again, I would've traded in 2000 so I could get another 318.Theres nothing wrong with the 4.7, it just dosent seem to have the low RPM ass of my old dak.
BTW, 4.7 with 3.55 rear VS. 318 with 3.23 rear
|
Raiderjm
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/02/2005
11:20:02
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
thanks
|
VA GoodOlBoy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/02/2005
11:22:16
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
318s are good for that low end, but I believe that the 4.7 is capable of the same or better. if you get 3.92 gears, and some HO cams, you will have all of the low end you would need.
2001 Dakota Sport 4x4 Club Cab 5-speed HD manual 3.55 rear
4.7L V8
HO cams
KN FIPK
70mm Ported F/B TB
Gibson Shorty Headers
Flowmaster 40 series.
(still have that third cat)
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
4/03/2005
01:06:25
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
My bro in law has a 2WD RC Ram 318 with no extras. It probably weighs a lot less than my QC 4X4 Dak. He's got 33's and 4.10's, I've got the stock height but wider wheels and the stock 3.55's. Out of the hole we seem fairly even. At certain points my 4.7 rips where his redlines.
But when we've both towed our ATV's on trailers mine has pulled the same load faster on the big hills and with more people in the truck.
the better tranny probably helps too.
And if I had a RC 2WD 4.7 Dak it wouldn't even be close.
|
Kowalski
GenIII
4/03/2005
07:41:16
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
4.7 makes similar power at the low end; and a lot more at the top end.
Lead, follow, or get out of the way
|
IntenseDak39
*GenIII*
4/03/2005
08:49:53
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
318 makes 5 more lbs of torque
4.7 makes 5 more horsepower
i dynoed my stock 5.2 with some 4.7 buddies and my 5.2 beat all of them except for somebody with a 4.7 five speed. We matched torque and and he beat me by 15 hp at the wheels. Not bad considering i was stock/auto and he had cold air intake, exhaust and a five speed (less drivetrain loss).
One guy has a 4.7 quad on 31" tires and my durango is on 32" tires. We raced and it was pretty much dead even till about 50 mph when we let off(stop sign on a 50mph zone).
i'm just not gonna say either motor "ownz" the other.
|
dude
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/03/2005
14:00:48
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
close performance until you like at gas mileage. 4.7 wins that.
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
4/03/2005
18:02:05
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
I'm sure they are close. 5.2 has more cubes. 4.7 makes nicer revs. I like the high revs of a V8 myself.
Like I've said before. I WANTED a 360 when I bought my Dak but the 4.7 was pretty much it in my platform.
I've been happy with it. And one thing that is cool is it's kind of a "cleaner" set up. In that there are less gaskets to leak. mostly o-ringed on the valve covers, intake, etc. No valley pan to leak. No spark plug wires. No anything close to the exhaust manifolds. Changing cams is a quick task.
As I remember, many people have had 4.7 5 speeds beat 5.9 R/T's at the track stock to stock. so they can't be too bad.
All 3 motors are good. The 4.7 is too new to know how long it's internals really hold up. We all know 200 300K miles is normal for a 5.2/5.9
|
GOOD OL BOY
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/03/2005
23:56:39
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey VA GOB , yea I'm stareing at a box containing 3.92 gears, and a sure grip right now. Think that might help with the low end a little.
Intense, the 318 made those five more lbft of tourque at a lower RPM than the 4.7, thats why I've got to slip clutch to climb a certain hill in town from a stop. The old 318 could do it at idle with higher gears.
But I can vouch for the 318 bottom end, I had 314,xxx miles at trade in, and she'd still whup a 5.0 'stang.
|
IntenseDak39
*GenIII*
4/04/2005
09:47:35
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
i'd like to see a full dyno graph of both a 5.2 and 4.7 stock to stock just to see where all the power is.
i know that my 5.2 peaked better than two modified 4.7's on both hp and tq, but peak numbers dont tell the whole story.
such as my big block... now keep in mind it was running hella lean 15-18 on the a/f(carb issues)
i dynoed it the other day and my peak torque was less than my peak torque from my previous dyno. I've done a lot of good work to it to make it more powerful and it does have a lot more mid to top end and i found out why. My new graph shows it's making 100 more lbs of torque from 4000-5500 rpms than the old combo was.. It's a pretty flat torque curve.. up to 5500 rpms, the torque curve never crosses the hp curve.
|
Mopar318
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/04/2005
23:09:41
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
I raced my 96 318 reg cab against my buddies 2000 4.7 reg cab.I got him off the line by a pretty good distance but the 4.7's are much better at top end. 318 doesnt seem to pull as hard above 80 MPH. 318 redlines at 4800 pretty standard for a american V8. Dont know how high the 4.7 goes, I think redline is at 6000????
|
IntenseDak39
*GenIII*
4/05/2005
05:02:04
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
my 2000 5.2 redlines at 6000 rpms.
it pulls very strong up to 100 mph and slows down a little there... but ya gotta know it's a 5500 lbs SUV on 32" tires
|
Mikes99Dakota
GenIII
4/05/2005
09:53:14
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
My 5.2 pulls good up to about 105 but its out of breath b/c i am at redline. You also have to remember that the 4.7L flows better as an intake and exhaust is concerned it has a hella better flowing system than a 5.2L Put HO Intake and Headers on a 4.7L and Put a M1 2BBL and Headers on a 5.2L and I bet ya anything that 5.2L would mess that 4.7L up!
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
|
nickyb
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/05/2005
10:20:32
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
my buddy and i race all the time at lights, highway, and where ever. he has 99 with a 5.2 auto with 3.55's 4x4 and i have a 03 4.7 auto with 3.55's 4x4 beat him every time. from start to finish i would always be pulling away even with our atv's in the rear. now i have 4.10's he doesn't even stand a chance.
|
01Motorsport
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/07/2005
10:01:31
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Mopar 318, your GenII '96 is 200 pounds lighter than a 2000 RC. I had a '92 5.2 RC 3:55 with 25HP Mopar PCM, Catco cat, and Flow 70 duals. The '01 4.7 RC 5-spd 3:92 I have now has HO cams, TB mod, homebrew air intake, Magnaflow y-pipe and cat, and Flow 70 duals. Again, the '92 was 200 lb lighter, but the 5-spd 3:92 cancels out that and the auto 3:55. I have tried to approximate the '92's performance with the '01, and right now, it's an "apples and oranges" comparison. The old 5.2 would go from idle to redline so quick, something I fondly remember. The '92-'93 5.2's with the 1/4" larger exhaust manifolds were just awesome.
|
Mikes99Dakota
GenIII
4/07/2005
12:01:19
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
Like I said....I would love to own a 4.7L and modd it. I know for a fact that a 5.2L torques lower than a 4.7. BUT the 4.7 all around has a better and broader torque curve. I would like to do the same mods as both. Headers, mild cam and Intake, And I bet you for those mods the 5.2 or 5.9 will come out top. When it comes to boost the 4.7L will take the old DYNO motors to school. Turbocharging a 4.7 is death to a supercharged 5.9L At leats from the numbers I have seen at KRC. Honestly I have taken an CC R/T and a RC 4.7L auto with 3.55s. Granted he started pulling on me at about 80 or so but slowly. Both badass motors but if i were you go ahead and get the 4.7L.
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
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
4/07/2005
23:15:25
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
I saw Duner with his cheaply Turbo's 4.7 just kill most of them supercharged 5.9 R/T's last year out here at SpeedWorld.
Mid 12's isn't bad when it's still as streetable as it was stock. I know he tows with his truck too.
Click on my banner below and somewhere on my website I have some videos and pictures of those races.
|
01Motorsport
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/09/2005
08:48:31
| RE: 4.7 vs. 5.2
IP: Logged
Message:
I've heard mention before that an internal combution engine is basically an "air pump". Given that, you have some clues to the 4.7's top end breathing ability with its SOHC and 68mm throttle body. The 5.9 was single cam, pushrod, and 52mm TB. Volumetric efficiency, or something like that.
|
| | P 1 |
|
Post a reply to this message:
Username Registration: Optional
All visitors are allowed to post messages
|
