Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: northcoastmopar]
#2213895
12/14/16 03:05 PM
12/14/16 03:05 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,631 Freeport IL USA
poorboy
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,631
Freeport IL USA
|
The 4.7 doesn't have a very good track record, they self destructs if they have not seen very regular oil changes, and then they still has issues. I think MB decided the 4.7 only needed to survive to 150K miles, sure some go longer, but they are the exception rather then the rule.
I'm looking for a drive train for my next hot rod, and will probably get a Dakota as a donor. If it has a 4.7, I won't even look at it. 5.2 or 5.9, or even the 3.9 would be the better choices, in my opinion. Gene
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: northcoastmopar]
#2214006
12/14/16 07:37 PM
12/14/16 07:37 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,423 Kalispell Mt.
HotRodDave
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,423
Kalispell Mt.
|
the 5.2 and 5.9 engines are great but the trans in stock form kinda sucks. The 4.7 engine kinda sucks but the trans is awesome.
I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: J_BODY]
#2214926
12/16/16 03:25 AM
12/16/16 03:25 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,310 Walnut Creek, CA
blown340
master
|
master
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,310
Walnut Creek, CA
|
I've had alot of experience with the 4.7L's and they have been bulletproof for me for many many many miles. With that said, I bought all of them new and maintained them properly from the start. Without maintenance they seem to fall apart quickly.
I'd take a 4.7L stock for stock over a 318 anyday if I had really good documentation of its maintenance history. Without that I'd probably go 318 unless the 4.7L was very low miles.
-Jon
70 challenger convertible. 340/5 speed. blown, intercooled, efi, blah blah blah
71 valiant scamp 318/A833OD/AC/PS
00 dakota RC 4.7L 5 spd autoX'r. SRT10/T56 swap in process
73 W200 Power wagon, PTO winch, 4 spd
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: northcoastmopar]
#2215187
12/16/16 05:48 PM
12/16/16 05:48 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,306 Laveen, Arizona
GTSDart340
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,306
Laveen, Arizona
|
I have an 01 Durango with the 4.7, 191k miles. Runs great, but uses a fair amount of oil.
1949 International KB-2 "Mater" - 302/T5
1968 Dodge Dart GTS "The Drat" - 340/727
2006 Dodge Magnum R/T - Hemi
2016 Dodge Durango Limited - 3.6
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: northcoastmopar]
#2215470
12/17/16 02:39 AM
12/17/16 02:39 AM
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,113 N.W. Florida
Fat_Mike
master
|
master
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,113
N.W. Florida
|
I've never owned a 4.7, but have driven a friend's 2007 Ram 1500 4X4 that has one, and am impressed with the performance compared to my same truck of the 2001 model year with a 5.2. HOWEVER, when, not if, but when it's time to replace that 4.7 (they all fail eventually) you'll spend twice the money of a 5.2/5.9 ... IF you're lucky enough to find one.
Last edited by Fat_Mike; 12/17/16 07:24 PM.
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: poorboy]
#2215473
12/17/16 02:44 AM
12/17/16 02:44 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 954 garnett kansas
rhad
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 954
garnett kansas
|
my sis in law has a 01 dakota with a 4.7 she bought new,changed oil on time every time,its now somewhere north of 200000 without a problem,she drove it back and forth to work about 50 miles one way 5 days a week i changed out one in a durango and wasnt to impressed with all the plumbing ,chains,etc,and it was kinda a dog in the durango,and piggy on fuel
my ladder of success is missing some rungs
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: northcoastmopar]
#2217312
12/19/16 10:53 PM
12/19/16 10:53 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,423 Kalispell Mt.
HotRodDave
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,423
Kalispell Mt.
|
I have an 01 dakota 4.7 5 speed and a 99 dakota 318 5 speed, both 3.55 gears both ex cab 4X4 both pretty much bone stock and the 318 will out pull the 4.7 by a lot any day of the week no questions asked and spank it in a race, the 4.7 will get about 1 more MPG empty about the same full. My 07 4.7 HO auto will pull with the 318 and might even beat it in an empty race but it would be close and would come down to the NV3500 not being able to shift fast enough.
I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: northcoastmopar]
#2217638
12/20/16 11:42 AM
12/20/16 11:42 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 21,318 Manitoba, Canada
DaytonaTurbo
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 21,318
Manitoba, Canada
|
Check your local for sale ads long enough and you'll see a trend. Plenty of Dodges for sale with blown 4.7's, none or very few with pooched 5.2 or 5.9's. 93-96 5.2 magnum with the 518 overdrive auto I think you mean 92-95. 96+ was the electronic transmission. Either one would be paired to an automatic. The vehicle would be occasionally used by my son in college or the wife and neither can nor want to drive a stick. Sounds like the best reason to hunt one down with a stick! If they don't want to learn they don't have to drive it. Sounds like a win-win to me.
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: northcoastmopar]
#2217752
12/20/16 02:26 PM
12/20/16 02:26 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,662 in a cattle trailer down by th...
Guitar Jones
Paddle faster! I hear banjo music!
|
Paddle faster! I hear banjo music!
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,662
in a cattle trailer down by th...
|
I had a 92 Dakota with the 5.2 in it. I beat that truck hard and it took it. Had 450,000 miles on it when it was sold and was still running.
"Follow me the wise man said, but he walked behind"
'92 D250 Club Cab CTD, 47RH conversion, pump tweaks, injectors, rear disc and hydroboost conversion. '74 W200 Crew Cab 360, NV4500, D44, D60 and NP205 divorced transfer case. Rear disc and hydroboost conversion. 2019 1500 Long Horn Crew Cab 4WD, 5.7 Hemi.
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: Guitar Jones]
#2218423
12/21/16 03:42 PM
12/21/16 03:42 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,991 new jersey usa
11secdart
master
|
master
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,991
new jersey usa
|
I had two Durangos an 00 and a n 02 . The 02 I bought new with 4.7 ,, 3.91 rear and trailer tow pkg and it was great it towed my 20 ft enclosed with race car etc all over the place with no problems I did have to have the ball joints done for a recall and the rear started acting up at 80,000 mikes so I traded it on my 08 H.Q.C. . I have the 5.2 Magnum in my 92 D150 I bought new in 92 and still have the motors been great with 0 problems even after tears of bracket racing it on occasion. I always liked the Dakotas , all years. My friend has an 02 R/ T with a 408 that runs mid 12s for sale, cool truck.
Last edited by 11secdart; 12/21/16 09:38 PM.
68 Dart 410 / 904 92 D150 original owner 21 Ram 1500 Quad Cab, Big Horn , Hemi ,4x4 23 Audi Q5 16 Honda HRV
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: northcoastmopar]
#2222253
12/28/16 04:31 PM
12/28/16 04:31 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345 Marysville, O-H-I-O
70Cuda383
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345
Marysville, O-H-I-O
|
I'm the kind of guy who can't ever leave anything stock, so my opinion will be somewhat biased.
I've owned both 5.2/5.9 and 4.7 dakotas.
I've heard horror stories of catostraphoc failures of 4.7s. Lots of them. Most of the time these get chalked up to poor maintenance. I also know of a few 5.2/5.9 horror stories--also from poor maintenance.
The 4.7 truck I had, was bought used with 35k miles on it. I changed the oil every 4-5k miles. At 100k miles it developed a tick that sounded like a valve noise, but drove it another 20k miles with no oil pressure issues, no loss of power, and no misfires or engine codes.
I don't like the 4.7 because there's virtually no aftermarket support for it. As for daily driving, it was ok. Got around 17 mpg in a 4700 lb truck. (Quad cab dakota). For towing, it was weak. Required lots of RPM and downshifting. I couldn't imagine this same engine in a full size truck trying to pull 7k lbs like they were rated for.
I like the 5.2/5.9 because there's a ton of aftermarket for them, and they respond well to mods. I've never towed with a 5.2 or 5.9 though. They can be fairly bulletproof though and when maintained will easily go 250k+ miles with minimal wear because of the efi. I've opened up 100k plus motors and found original cross hatching still in the bores.
**Photobucket sucks**
|
|
|
Re: 2nd Gen Dakota V8s - please school me - 4.7 or 5.2
[Re: northcoastmopar]
#2223392
12/30/16 03:27 PM
12/30/16 03:27 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,423 Kalispell Mt.
HotRodDave
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,423
Kalispell Mt.
|
3.7 in a 2wd dakota is a dog, down shifting needed unless your going down hill, especially in an automatic. Have all the same issues as a 4.7 with no up side. It feels like driving one of those old dump trucks with a slant six when you try to pull ANYTHING and the MPG sucks.
Don't be afraid to look out of your area, they salt the roads in OH to ruin all the cars and support sales of new ones, even a trip down to nashville could net a great deal on a no rust dakota. I lived in TN for a long time and was appalled at the young rust bucket cars that would show up ocasionally from OH.
I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!
|
|
|
|
|