Went to a local Wed night car show at the A&W. Got to see a really nice 54 Dodge pickup belonging to a guy from Marinette WI (about 60 miles north of Green Bay). His 54 has a Mustang IFS and coil over shocks 4-bar rear suspension, 360 under the hood with a 727 behind it. Nice clean interior. Was talking to the owner about my 56 pickup plans, and that I planned to use most of my Dakota chassis and interior parts in the 56. He said "one thing about that, please don't use the Dakota steering column and wheel in your 56, just looks so wrong in a vintage pickup."

Gotta say I agree, the Dakota column and steering wheel would look out of place in my 56 pickup. Although the Dakota steering wheel has all the controls I want. I'd much prefer the looks of a custom vintage steering column and wheel, so are there options for a custom column and steering wheel with cruise control switches?

Nuts, I forgot to ask him what rear axle ratio he has. He did say he gets about 9mpg on the highway, which to me is horrible. Maybe he's spinning the engine well above 2500 on the highway. I know a carbed 360 is not good on gas, but 9mpg for highway driving? I couldn't enjoy my 56 if it was getting far worse MPG than my Dakota already gets (17 to 19 on a good day).

I don't argue that the Dakota column with the cruise control buttons on the wheel look way out of place in a vintage truck because they do. I don't especially like the Dakota column in my truck, and I don't especially like the Dakota instrument cluster.

I don't know what other buttons are on the Dakota columns past 96 other then the cruise and the horn buttons (actually switches).

That said, if you really want the switches on the steering wheel, it is not going to look right in the 56, doesn't matter if its an aftermarket wheel or not. Aftermarket steering wheels that will fit on your column's clock spring unit are going to be pretty limited. You have to go back to about 92 it loose the clock spring, but when you loose the clock spring, you loose the switches on the wheel. The wiring your Dakota uses the buss bar for all the electrical functions on the dash and those switches on the steering wheel. You can probably work around the clock spring and make the switches from the steering wheel work separated from the wheel, but then you have to figure out how and where to mount them. Any aftermarket switches are probably not going to function with the buss bar and its wiring.

Many believe even the older pre-clock spring Dakota columns are not compatible with the older trucks either (they still have the plastic covered column top 1/2 and are considered ugly by many). The older columns still had the turn signals, cruise control, and dimmer switches mounted to the turn signal lever, the ignition switch are still on the column, they could be had with a tilt column, and you could put aftermarket steering wheels on them, and they will bolt into the place the modern column is. But the cruise control switches and some of the other switches will probably not be compatible with the buss bar system. The only other option is an aftermarket column and figuring out how to deal with the buss bar wiring your Dakota has for the switches to function.

The aftermarket column, steering wheel, the needed switches, and the wiring alterations required to work with your Dakota wiring just bumped your budget up probably over a grand and added a lot more complexity to your project. How bad do you not like that Dakota column?

As far as the 9 mpg, a 360 4 bbl with a 727 (non OD) and 3:55 gears @ 70 mph is an 8-12 mpg highway ride, but if the truck is light, it might be a fun 9 mpg.. If your really careful, and have it really dialed in, maybe you can squeeze 15 mpg out of it on a good day. Some people don't care about the MPG their toy gets.

My 49 EFI 5.2, Re46, with 3:55, gears gets 10 (winter)-13 (the rest of the year) MPG around town, 17-19 on the highway (has a noticable decline much past 70 mph). But mine is a 4x4 Dakota chassis.

I agree on all counts. But since my goal is a daily driver with all the functionality of my 2001 Dakota, that makes a stronger argument for the Dakota column. All the functions going through the clockspring in the Dakota setup makes it harder to give it up, especially if it drives the cost up. I'd rather put those dollars into something like a 4-bar air-ride rear suspension. Given I plan to retain the stock 56 Dodge color (typical 50s turquoise), and I'm already painting the bezel that goes inside the Dakota instrument cluster with white faced gauges, so I may just paint the Dakota column to match the interior, leave the steering wheel black. Actually, I'd be alright with column mounted stalks for functions like cruise control. Until those moved to the wheel we never gave it a thought right? We were happy just to have cruise control. So an older 1st Gen Dakota tilt column with control stalks would be ok if it worked with the 2001 Dakota canbus system. Hmm, wonder if any Jeep columns and steering wheels would be compatible with a similar vintage Dakota.

The guy I met last week had a really nicely done 54 Dodge, Mustang IFS front, 4-bar coilover rear, 360 with a 727. But only 9 to maybe 11 on the highway? I couldn't do that for a daily driver. So my 5.2 Magnum will got some upgrades for performance, but I think the biggest gain in performance and daily driving will be the 8HP-70 trans I'll install. It has two overdrive gears, 0.75 and 0.62, with the 3:55 rear axle I should be about 1800 rpm on the highway at 70 mph. I know 2,000 and below seems to be the magic RPM range for decent highway fuel mileage. I texted with a guy that put a 8HP-70 behind the 318 in his early 80s Dodge pickup, and he claims if he drives it steady he gets 20+ mpg on the highway.

I suspect that if my truck was a 2wd instead of a 4x4, it would easily be in the low 20 mpg range. The truck would drop 800-900lbs, and the 4x4 has parasitic draws a rear wheel drive doesn't have.

I have a pre clockspring non-tilt Dakota column here, complete with keys, but I would have to look at it again to see if it had the cruise control stalk. Just don't think those switches will work with the newer buss bar system. A Jeep column might add still another level of challenge, or maybe not. Jeep hung on to the "other company's stuff" for several years after Chrysler bought them back.

People have been putting those Mustang IFS and 4 link set ups under these old Dodge trucks for years. You have not cut anything at this point, so you can put anything you want under your 56. Maybe someone makes a MM2 kit that uses the 56 Dodge front frame and you don't have to fabricate the entire front frame. Its been done for many years. Just be sure you buy a really good MM2 setup, some have some issues. Talk to the people that put that stuff under everything they build as the front suspension, and see which MM2 set up they like the best, and why.

If you are serious about the MM2 and the 4 link, you may be farther ahead to build a fresh new ladder frame for your 56. You can hang the MM2 from a straight level frame like they like it, and put the 4 link connections where they need to be. Then you can add your EFI motor and trans and put everything pretty much where you want it, by theory anyway. Might be faster and easier then doing a Dakota chassis and you can drive your Dakota until the 56 is ready to drive.

Now your messing with my head. Kinda. The option to keep driving the Dakota may be viable but now it has driveability issues. It starts fine, idles nice, runs up the RPM great, shifts fine, doesn't leak or use any oil, does use some coolant (typical 4.7V8). The power steering reservoir drains fluid like there nothing attached to the bottom. So the steering has no assist. I had planned to use the Dakota chassis so the cab floor and firewall, once welded into the 56 cab, would mean whatever is in the cab through the firewall and under the seats is at least Dakota familiar parts for years to come, same for the front suspension, brakes, steering system, etc, etc. Also, I am so familair with that Dakota chassis as I have worked on it for so many years. It has decent front suspension and ride, which will get better once I rebuild/replace all the bushings, etc. And I already have a set of tubular A-arms for it. Of course using my Dakota chassis means I have to splice the 56 frame to it, to make the chassis whole for the cab and box.

If I were to use the 56 frame and install all new suspension to it, I suppose I could still position the front spindles centerline where I think they should be in the fender operning (like I've said in other messages I feel the 56 stock front axle spindles centers are too far back in the fenders). But then I'd have to figure out where everything goes through the 56 firewall, build motor mounts, etc. I'm hopeful that using the Dak firewall most of whatever needs to go through the firewall will remain as is. I guess I still favor using the Dak frame, front suspension, firewall and cab floor, and install new rear suspension once I get the 56 rear frame spliced to the Dak frame like Russ did for his 55 on his 2005 Dak chassis. I know the 2005 Dak frame is different than my 2001 Dak chassis, so there will be some things different on my chassis versus Russ's chassis (especially since he used a Hemi, versus my 5.2 Magnum).

Just pointing out options.
Once you step outside of the box and begin frame altering and drive train swapping, you are entering into a completely different world. Your imagination is your only limiting factor, well, except making things operate together, that could be considered a limiting factor too, I suppose... .

The 04 (and newer) Dakota and Durango frame was completely different from the 03 (and older) Dakota and Durango frames. They don't look at all like the other. The 03 was still the old frame slightly revised. The 04 and newer frame has very few straight sections in it. The side rails are curved in both the horizontal and the vertical directions, both ends are very different, and both the front and the rear suspensions are different. Nothing that applies to the 03 and older applies to the 04 and newer.

My son and I shortened an 04 Hemi Durango frame to fit under a late 80s/early 90s Dodge Ramcharger body. We got it done and he is driving it, but lets say we won't be doing that again. Some of us learn by trial and error, and we are trying to save you from some of our less then fun experiences.

When you splice that back 1/2 of the 56 frame to the Dakota front frame, you are really going to want to watch the differences in the ride height of the two frames. While both trucks are still basically together (both frames on suspension, with or without both frames either having the cabs or drive trains present), run a tape measure between the ground and the bottom of the frame, at the point you are planning to splice them. If those numbers are different, you will need to figure out how to manage the difference when you join the two frames. Failure to do so will result in one end of the united frame being low, and the other end being high.

Yeah, when time comes to cutting frames its only after a LOT of measuring and planning. I'll probably start by getting each frame level to the shop floor, and take lots of reference points measurements, diagram each one out so I have data to check against before I get to the point of actually splicing the frames together.

Now the more I think of it and the more I want the total functionality of the Dakota under my 56, I'll likely stay the course and use the Dakota steering column and wheel. I have seen some swaps where the builder notched the bottom edge of the dash to fit the column up higher like its kinda meant to be there, plus it gets the wheel in a higher more comfortable position relative to the pedals and seat. Maybe if notch the dash bottom edge and I paint the column covers the cab interior color it would blend in a bit better. Not much I can do with the steering wheel, unless I ditch the airbag and wheel, and install a different wheel and figure out some switches to work with the original Dakota clockspring. If I ditch the airbag in the wheel will that cause a code of sorts as the system controller would be expecting a resistance signal or similar from a connected airbag.