| From | Message |
aggieR/T
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/26/2003
12:21:38
|
 Subject: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
what will give me better performance for my money?
M1, 1.7 roller rockers, and 4.56 gears
or
2.02 heads
|
Anthony G
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/26/2003
12:53:01
| RE: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
1.7RR
Good: increase power, less resistance, small increase in gas mileage.
Bad: Aluminum wears out faster(steel better), lash adjustment (non-adjustable better), bigger valve covers (Southeast R/T might make some that doesn't require bigger covers), seem to tap louder.
4.56 gears
Good: Better Low end take off, shorter top end to enter higher power band quicker. (If your engine makes good top end)
Bad: More whine noise, higher rear end temp, less gas mileage.
M1
Good: Better Top end, No belly pan gasket
Bad: Lower-mid range 0-3000, less fun daily driving, fail visual inpection, warrenty.
2.02 heads
Good: Better Top end 4000+, better valve springs ( recommend to install before install)
Bad: Need larger cam, lots of labor and new bolts and gaskets.
|
texaslawdawg
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/26/2003
15:28:10
| RE: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
I have the "non-adjustable" Harland Sharp 1.7 aluminum RR's in my 2002 R/T, these are a super easy install and are available through John Mercedes SoutheastRT.com for about $295 shipped. Ive noticed a considerable difference in the 3000 to 4000 range. If you get crower or comp 1.7's the install is much more difficult due to lash setting, these you just rip out the old ones and bolt these in.....took about an hour and a half. I will have my 4.56's installed hopefully in a few days, Ill keep everyone posted on the results. I have a M1 intake for sale right now for $375 shipped, the bennefits are too high in the rpm range to meet my needs, it really only helps you if you race your truck and rev over 5000 on a regular basis, the low end loss is not what I was looking for. My interest is mainly making low end power, the M1 doesnt help that.
|
aggieR/T
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/26/2003
18:14:41
| RE: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
will the 4.56 gears help even out the loss of low end power you get from installing the M1?
|
aggieR/T
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/27/2003
14:32:43
| RE: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
i would also like to know if there is any advantage to getting the 1.92 r/t heads instead of the 2.02
|
Billy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/27/2003
14:35:06
| RE: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
Most people have not had any loss at all after the M1 install.
|
rtdkota
R/T
 
2/27/2003
14:59:38
| RE: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
AggieR/T-- I took a 'Different' approach, and looked at what people had done head wise-- 2.02, 2.02 ported, 1.92, 1.92 ported, and stock ported (1.92).
The people that experienced the biggest low end loss, initially were the 2.02 (ported)-- though there's been improvements, and different techniques to less the effect. I didn't want to run gears, didn't want something radical, and I did want something that MIGHT have a chance passing smog.
I went with the RT 1.92 non ported heads, a custom cam from Crower w/my 1.7 Crower rockers. M1-4bbl was already in place... 290 rwhp & 325 ft lbs. of torque... Not the fastest by any means, but I am definately happy with it (stock was 204whp & 270 torque.) It has proved to be nitrous friendly too-- netted a 13.98 @ 99 NA, and a 12.65 @ 109 on a 100 shot (best is a 12.56 on a 150, cold bottle-- 750 psi)
Sam
RTDKOTA
|
aggieR/T
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/27/2003
18:20:31
| RE: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
wow rtdkota
those are impressive numbers
about how much did all that cost you?
|
AlmightyDart
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/28/2003
04:38:42
|  RE: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
Ok lemme get this straight... so you guys are suggesting getting an M1 2bbl manifold is a bad descision? I was thinking of getting it with a 50mm or 52 mm TB then add some MP headers and an MBRP exhuast. Now if I did all of that would the manifold loose any low end? I love having my baby chirp with the slightest pedal of gas.
|
Anthony G
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/28/2003
09:08:20
| RE: more performance for the $
IP: Logged
Message:
You'll have a good chance that you'll notice torque loss, if this wasn't true the Turtle option wouldn't be so popular.
|
| | P 1 |
|
Post a reply to this message:
Username Registration: Optional
All visitors are allowed to post messages
|
