| From | Message |
Jack Landston
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/26/2002
23:17:03
|
 Subject: RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Well LlBlackdak, some intersting news for ya the Wrangler 4.0 runs 0-60 in 9.4 thats a 4700 pound vehicle same as the ML320, which runs 9.2 0-60 (compliments of motorweek). Maybe you should have just bought a jeep if it bothers ya that much.
|
Big59er
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/26/2002
23:19:51
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
By the by dont forget guys... a good set of nitto's on a stock R/T should get it going atleast mid 14's from the get go, thats not too bad for a 3800lbs truck that supposidly dyno's 190 horse power at the rear wheels if ya ask me.
|
boon
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/26/2002
23:41:19
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
hp = rpm x torque / 5252 You have to increase one or the other if not both. hypertech power programmer 3 will be in production very soon. I got a part # this week for my '01 r/t.Maybe that will help the engine mgt. keep up with the rest of the mods and utilize some of the potential in these trucks. (To a point any way)
Indy cylinder heads and intake with a streetable roller cam can produce 700+ hp on a pre magnum block. Try that on a Ford.
|
LI Blackdak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/27/2002
09:38:07
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Um what kind of heavy ass wrangler are you talking about?
Curb Weight 3454lbs.s
ML320s are 4700 with 3.2 V6s that are still a tad faster then V6 daks(though not by much)
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/27/2002
22:41:54
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Yea, Big59er, if Dodge will just put the Hemi in the Dak I won't have to do anything except sign that dotted line. You know if Dodge doesn't do it someone like Carol Shelby will. He started the whole V8 Dakota thing back in 1989 or was it 1990? He will probably do it again. Who knows, a year or two from now you might be able to pick up a Hemi out of a wrecked Ram in the bone yard for around $3000.00 to $5000.00. If Dodge or Carol Shelby doesn't do it I just might.
|
Big59er
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/28/2002
00:10:11
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Well while im sure Carol Shelby would come up with an incredibly awsome idea for the 5.7 in the Dakota (like all other shelby oriented projects) I kind of hope that dodge does it eventually themselves. I figure with a title like shelby on the truck, it would probably tend to lean a bit to the costly side.
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/30/2002
21:50:52
|  RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
To Big59er and everyone else, I have bad news. I've been writing to Dodge every week for about 3 months now and they finally answered my question about the future of the Dakota R/T. The good news is they do not plan on dropping the DAK R/T. The bad news is they have no intensions of ever putting the Hemi in the Dakota. They plan to keep the dog 360 motor in the line up for the Dakotas and 1500's. Of course they could just be a covering up for what they really intend to do. They wouldn't let information like that out this early. But, they were probably telling the truth. So every body just read it and weap! I will just have to build my own. It seems like that has been the motto for Dodge loyalist for over 30 years now.
|
Big59er
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
9/30/2002
22:02:29
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
I figured that a few months ago... that sucks... Surely sooner or later they plan on pulling more power out of the 5.9 if they arent going to grant us the 5.7... Maybe a manual tranny at the very least.
|
Travis P.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/15/2003
17:35:45
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
This equation is so simple I cannot even believe some of you can't figure it out. I can buy a 03 dak r/t r/c for 20k, prety well equiped. A lightning is going to put you right at 30k, and from my limited inquires, that price is pretty firm. You can't add the extra 130 hp for 10k?
WTF????
For about 1500 you could add a 150shot, do all the things suggested above to lighten it, and put on some slicks/traction bars. Hmmmm that leaves me about 8500$ to buy a used F150 to haul my real truck to the track.....
|
big_torque
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/15/2003
20:00:11
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
I`m 160 !!! Yahoooooo !!!
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/15/2003
20:48:30
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Just purchased a new 2002 RC 4.7L Dak. Gets better gas mileage than the 3.9L RC Dak I traded in and it runs almost as good as an R/T for $5,000.00 less. They had my 02 4.7L SLT RC for $19,000.00, an 03 RC R/T for $24,000.00 and a 02 RC 4.7L Sport for $16,000.00. I want an R/T, but I could not bring myself to pay $5k more for an outdated/obsolete engine like the 360. With a few mods I can produce the same HP as the R/T.
|
Travis P.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
12:18:47
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
You can get an 03 r/t r.c for about $20,500 right now. If you don't believe me I will forward you an actual offer I just made to a dealer.
Same H/P as a stock R/T you mean? Don't think for a second that us R/T guys are sitting on our duffs with our stock setups. For every mod currently availiable for the 4.7, there are 3 for the 360.
The 4.7 stick is a good factory setup, but dont piss on our parade because you can't (or choose not to) afford the R/T or the gas a real v8 requires.
Let me ask you this - If DC came to you and asked you to build a competition dak for drag racing (4.7, 5.2 or 5.9), and money was no issue, would you seriously start with the 4.7? I dont think so.... and if you did, you wouldn't be asked back. Yes the 4.7 puts out good numbers off of the showroom floor, but don't convince yourself that the engine has the POTENTIAL that the 360 does.
|
xplikt
GenIII
1/16/2003
13:23:18
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
We all aren't dumping 8000 into the 360 to get it at it's potential. Your engine and it's modifications should match what you are willing to spend on it. A Hemi would be useless if you didn't have the money to modify it, it would be better spent on a 360 with a lot of modifications. Same thing goes for the 4.7L. It all depends on the situation, always. Nothing is for certain and nothing is constant. So the 5.9 is not always the better pick, nor is the 4.7. Somtimes the 3.9 is!
-Mike
http://www.dodgetruckworld.com/xplikt/
2002 2WD RC SLT 4.7L 5spd 3.92 LSD
MBRP Single in/out | straight piped 3rd cat | turndown tip
Full Hotchkis (bars, springs, shocks) and RAS
Shaved emblems and antennae
150BM fan | removed clutch | HD Radiator
|
Texas Todd
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
13:45:00
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Have you seen dynos for both of these engines in stock form? Dodge did also.
So, they had to reduce on paper the HP/TQ rating on an engine they also offered that had 1.2L less displacement, to make it somewhat worth considering a 5.9. The 4.7's are underrated #'s from DC!
Granted, the 5.9, has more available MODs, oh.
With less than $200, and a factory manual, put down at least 225 rwhp, with a 4.7.
Did you read the others that joined in on the 'My R/T is a pig' thread? Thousands of mods spent on the R/T, same 1/4 times in many cases as a lightly moded 4.7. And granted, the manual tranny does seem to make alot of the difference, with 1.2L less displacement.
|
Buddy Jones
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
20:19:37
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Is F150 still around?
|
01 RT
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
20:48:48
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
If you want to evenly compare the 4.7 to the 5.9. Take a stock,auto 4.7 and race a stock,auto(duh)5.9....Who do you think would win? Anyone with half a brain knows a manual transmission is more efficient than an auto,that's the ONLY reason a 4.7 can come somewhat close to the performance of a 5.9. I've raced both a manual RC 4.7 and a auto RC 4.7 in my CC R/t.The 5sp did fairly well,I had about a truck and a half on him by 75mph..but the auto(even with the lighter weight of the RC) got left in the dust.My truck was stock except for the K&N CAI,and both of the 4.7's were stock except for cat-back exhaust.
If the 4.7 is a better engine,then a 4.7 auto,CC should be able to beat my auto,5.9...right? ...doubt it~
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
22:34:24
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Would of been, could have been, should have been a HEMI.
Travis, I would not choose any of those engines. I would choose the 340 race block w/steel crank, forged pistons and fully ported racing heads. You couldn't give me a 360 for racing. It is a piece of #$@%. It is a dog motor. If I had to have a factory engine I would choose the new HEMI.
I have also found an R/T for $20,500.00. It was a Sport model and the only option it had was the R/T option. The R/T I looked at was a sport plus model and it had every option including a few custom add ons like a fiberglass bed cover, fully tinted glass, CD changer, etc.
I purchased a Ram in 94 when the 360mag was only a year old and you couldn't get anything for this engine unless it was interchangeable with the 5.2. The 4.7L is a little over 2 years old now. I bet in another 3 years there will be as much if not more aftermarket goodies for the 4.7L as there are the 5.9L today. I can already find more stuff for my 4.7L today than I could for my 5.9L back in 95. If that's any indication of what's to come, I predict several bolt on goodies to become available from both mother mopar and the after market.Face it,the 5.9L is history. The x.7's are here and they are BAD! The fact that a 4.7L Dak can even come close to a 5.9L Dak is sad. It just goes to show how sorry the 5.9L really is. Of course the 5.9L has more "POTENTIAL". If I wanted potential I would still be driving my 68 440 Charger!
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
23:09:11
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
01 R/T, I have not raced a stock R/T lately. I did have a 98 CC R/T. Off the line it was unbeatable. After 4K it fell on its face. The 4.7L pulls much stronger beyond 4K and even 5K. That is why it runs as good as an R/T. Looking through all my archives, the best time a stock R/T ran was 15.4sec 1/4 (motor trend Oct 99). That was a RC R/T. The worst time a 4.7L has run is a 15.8sec 1/4 and that truck was a QUAD CAB that weighed 600lbs more than the RC R/T (motor trend Aug 02). My 93 CC 5.2L Dak ran 15.1 and all it had was a cat back and an intake. I'm still waiting on my break-in. I bet I can beat the 15.8sec 1/4 that Motor Trend posted with the quad cab. Using the old school technology, every 200lbs you loose is worth 1/10th of a sec. That should get me 3/10ths.
Hmmmm 15.8sec-(600/200x.1sec)=15.5sec.
I don't know about you, but I'll take the gas money I'll save and the sticker price difference and install a cat-back, HO cams, remove 3rd cat, remove clutch fan, add a TB and WALLA! I have a low 15-high 14 Dak with lower insurance rates.
|
Travis P.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/16/2003
23:48:53
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
R/TBlues - That must have been a hell of a c/d changer and bed cover for 4k.
You say you would pick the 340 with forged everything. I guess your saying they don't make forged everything for the 360? Cubes still rule, even the ricers will figure that out some day.
As far as the mods your going to buy with the 7$ a week you saved on gas... I got them too, and I didn't even need to collect cans or sell plasma to get them. And the R\T falling on it's face after 4k...hmmmm 400 bucks solves that one (M1).
We are all very sure that you feel like you made a smart decision when you bought your truck. Why does it make you feel better to rip on a truck that is still faster than yours (stock and forever) even if you did save a couple grand?
If you feel like you have something to prove, then prove it at the track! Scan those time slips with those blistering runs, and show us that your truck will out run all of those 11sec r\t's we all know about.
Peace :)
|
adam smith
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/17/2003
01:25:27
|  RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
I dont care what anyone says the 360 in the R/T only needs minor help after 4k like a k and n filter, 8mm spark plug wires accel of course and a 40 series flowmaster whick will run you maybe 150 to 200 bucks and then itll make the 5.2 and 4.7 eat high octane gas fumes!!!!!!!!!
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/17/2003
01:26:36
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
If the 5.9L was so good why did Dodge feel compelled to build the 5.7L HEMI? Why did they replace the 5.2L with the 4.7L semi-hemi? We all would hope DC made these decisions because they are better. I've never seen an 11sec R/T. If one ever does run that fast it would need about $15,000.00 worth of modifications. You've sniffed too much nitromethane at the dragstrip! Nobody on this web site has an 11sec R/T that is street legal. Most of the people with R/T's can't even run 14's with a supercharger. The reciprocating weight of the 5.9L's internals and the overal design of the combustion chamber is not favorable to high reving engines. The 340 race block addresses problems such as crank journel diameter, cylinder wall thickness, water jackets, etc. The difference in the bore diameter of a 340 and a 360 is only like .040". The old NASCAR engine is a 340ci block with a stroke the same as the 360 to make a 355ci engine. The 340 has twice as much metal around the cylinder walls, main webs, and the upper deck. This gives the 340 superior heat retention, structural rigidy,head seal, and ring seal over the 360. That's why they made the 340 race block! The stock 360 block can't take the heat or the horsepower to run 11sec 1/4 miles reliably. It makes a good towing motor to pull a 4.7L or a 5.7L to the track.
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/17/2003
01:42:05
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
I forgot to mention that the 340 race block can be bored .125" over. None of the 360's can be bored safely more than .040" over. Many of the 360's have such a bad core shift that they can't be bored more than .020" over. You can stroke a 340 the same amount as a 360. If you bore the 340 race block to its max it will be .045" bigger than the 360 bored to its max due to the fact it has more metal around the cylinders. Therefore, the 340 race block can be made BIGGER than the 360. And, it is a real race engine not a camper puller.
|
Rob454
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/17/2003
01:50:59
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
You guys are so full of it. I read a couple of the posts in the begining and all the back patting is making me sick, Dude there is NO WAY ON THIS EARTH a stock RT will beat a stock lightning. Unless the lightning is chained to a tree. Ive raced a lightning in my bro in laws Camaro SS and it was a run for my $$. and I can smoke stock RTs liek its nothing when im driving his SS. The only way that RT would beat the lightning is 2 ways. Either the lightning driver had NO CLUE how to drive his truck or the RT was modded and the lightning was pure stock jsut off the trailer.
Personally I love the way Lightnings look. I like them a lot better then the new dodge rams and I sure as hell like them better than the crap chevy is putting out. Sorry I have to say BS to this story. mabey it happend but I dotn believe it.
As for the guy in the van that blew the 2 lightnings away Dude did you ever consider that they werent racing you. I mean come on who the hell is gonna race a van
Rob
|
big_torque
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/17/2003
09:30:52
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Maybe it was a 93 Lightning.
|
Texas Todd
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/17/2003
10:51:34
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
LOL-'Chained to a tree'!
|
IntenseDak39
*GenIII*
1/17/2003
15:41:35
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
"I've never seen an 11sec R/T"
just because you havent seen one doesnt mean they dont exist. There are several 11 second RTs around and there is one itching to get into the 9s in the Houston area....
"lightning was pure stock jsut off the trailer"
if its so stock than why was it on a trailer?
Now onto the 4.7 vs 5.9 crapola. I am pretty neutral in this because i have a 3.9. From what i have seen at the drag strip is all i am gonna talk about. I have seen many 5.9s beat the hell out of 4.7s but also vice versa. I dont think that the 4.7 is a better motor, i think it just proves how much better the stock 5 speed manual is better than a stock 46re. There is a guy in the dfw area who doesnt know how to drive worth a damn but runs 9.6 (1/8th) with a RC 5.2 5 speed. only mods are intake and exhaust. I think that the debate should be more about the tranny.
Turbocharged V6
|
Travis P.
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/17/2003
16:26:43
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
R/TBlues - Do they offer the 340 race block in a dakota? No, they do not. So why are you talking about it? Also if you want to talk 440 chargers with 6 packs, go to the charger board. This is a DAKOTA board....
All I was saying is that for the 10k you save on the dak r/t you should be able to mod it out, beat a lightning and save money.
Maybe you think you can beat a lightning with your 4.7. If so we would all love to hear about it!
11 Sec R/T's:
http://www.dragtruk.com/ENTRIES/bennettdan.html
http://www.dragtruk.com/ENTRIES/vincentjustin.html
http://www.dragtruk.com/ENTRIES/HZRSBLTA5HSF.html
Rob454 - I don't think anyone here said that a stock r/t could beat a stock lightning. But with the 10k you save with the r/t you can easily mod it, beat one and stick some cash in your pocket. And yes, R/TBlues the same could be said about the 4.7 being modded with the money you save to beat a stock R/T - the difference is the Lightning is already pretty built, the R/T has great Potential.
IntenseDak39 - Well said. - if the 4.7 is all that, why can't a 4.7 auto even come close to the r/t?
I guess these people have selective reading syndrome. They only remember what makes them feel good about thier trucks. Hey big discovery - 5speeds are faster than Auto's (stock) AMAZING NEWS!!!!!
|
R/TBlues
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/17/2003
20:58:45
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Travis P, do you think a 360 R/T will run an 11sec 1/4 mile without pulling the engine and doing some extensive modifications? I guess it's possible. I wouldn't want that much HP on a stock cast iron crank. Have you ever seen a grenade go off?LOL!!It damn sure won't run a 9sec 1/4 for very long. The crank and the main caps on the 360 are too weak to handle this kind of horsepower. Since you have to pull the 360 out of the truck, why not drop in a real engine (340R) that won't drop the $1,500.00 crank you just bought out the bottom? Also, with that kind of power, you don't want blow-by at the rings because the cylinder walls are distorting. That will scorch the rings and cause a piston to sieze. You need an engine that the cylinder walls will retain their shape when they heat up. Especially if you plan on driving this 9 or 11sec Dakota to the grocier store. LOL!
Just found me a trick supercharger set up for the 4.7L. It fits the Durango/Dakota and is good for 322HP with no other mods. Add a TB, cam's, underdrive pulleys, cat-back, etc.... and I ought to be able to SMOKE any stock Lightning for about $2,000.00 more than an R/T cost, maybe even less (that is a FULLY equiped R/T). I'm guessing they will be asking about $5K for this thing. I couldn't get a hold of anyone. Has anybody heard or seen or purchased the
"NOVI 1000" supercharger made by Paxton for the 4.7L?
|
Rob454
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/18/2003
01:24:21
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
LOl when i said " lightning was just off the trailer I meant the Car carrying trailer that delivers it to the dealer not a race trailer
As for the stock RT vs a stock lightning I thought thats what the guy was saying in the original post. Oh yeah get a 23 000$ RT a and stick 10 k into it jsut to beat a lightning. I think its a really unfair comparision. heck its no better than the guys who compare a full size extra cab chevy to a Dakota and they say the chevy is better all around. Well its a different truck they arent even in competition with each other. Anyway i personally like the R/T dakotas. they look good have a nice stance handle well and are quick. I jsut wished that Dodge would stick the HEMi in it jsut cause its there and the RT does need a better motor.
the 4.7 Vs 5.9 I wont even get into that. basically youre comparing 2 different motors. as far as Im ocncerned I see it liek this. the 4.7 puts out a lot of power for a compact motor. the torque band is a little high for a truck motor. The 5.9 is a great towing motor and reliable. the 4.7 is reliable also consideringits only been around for what 4 years or so? ( Jeep GC)
I prefer the 4.7 cause it seems to pull harder at speed where the 5.9 tends to start wheezing at 4-4500 RPMs. Nothing a air intake exhaust and manifold cant fix but stock for stock the 4.7 is a little better IMo
Rob
|
milleR/Time
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/18/2003
04:46:20
| RE: 5.9 r/t vs lightning YAH!
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey today I beat a "L" in the middle of heavy traffic in the snow in a 3.9l V6 Dakota... who the fuk cares... NO ONE... Does this mean I can say my almost unmodified V6 can out run a "L"... of course not... I caught him by suprise and before he could catch me I ran a Yellow light... it was fun watchin him lose traction on the snow though... I dont like the "L" as much as anyone... I couldn't even afford the damn R/T... but Ill just save until the day Dodge does finally remove the thumb from their a$$ and put the Hemi in the DAK... they finally put it in the 1500... who knows maybe we're next
Mark
|
| | <<Previous Page P 6 Next Page>> |
