|
Re: Third generation Dakota's
[Re: 8secDart]
#925049
02/10/11 10:49 PM
02/10/11 10:49 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 142
Maryland
Sick 660r
member
|
member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 142
Maryland
|
Quote:
I would cut that front croosmember out in a heart beat.Good god you got that big a$$ crossmember with the rack on it!!!!!!!!!!With a boxed in frame like that it will not fall in on it's self,LOL
The Gen 2s frame is no where near that beefy.
The gen 3s are pigs! lol
Leon, if its not to much to ask could you post pics when you get done with the truck?
Last edited by Sick 660r; 02/10/11 10:55 PM.
2000 dakota
418 magnum
paxton novi 2k
T56
|
|
|
Re: Third generation Dakota's
[Re: Sick 660r]
#925050
02/10/11 11:59 PM
02/10/11 11:59 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,330
Lynchburg, VA
Leon441
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,330
Lynchburg, VA
|
Yes, planning on posting pics. Waiting on rear end parts from Strange and Aerospace. A little paint and the pics will come.
I agree with you Lenny on the 2nd crossmember being strong enough to elliminate the 1st. I plan to absolutely murder the 2nd crossmember. So we might need a peice of tubing to hang the brake line on.
Nothing to be scared of as the frame, once ahead of the control arms, does nothing but hold the front bumper engine and radiator. The frame is also boxed all the way to the rear of the cab. This will not be that way when I am done either. These things are insanely heavy up front.
IMO opinion trucks are for towing race cars LOL. But, what do I know. People tell me 65 Barracuda's are for making new beginnings under the moonlight not ripping up the 1/4 mile.
Leon
Career best 8.02 @ 169 at 3050# and 10" tires small block power.
|
|
|
Re: Third generation Dakota's
[Re: Sick 660r]
#925052
02/11/11 11:16 AM
02/11/11 11:16 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345
Marysville, O-H-I-O
70Cuda383
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345
Marysville, O-H-I-O
|
Quote:
Quote:
I would cut that front croosmember out in a heart beat.Good god you got that big a$$ crossmember with the rack on it!!!!!!!!!!With a boxed in frame like that it will not fall in on it's self,LOL
The Gen 2s frame is no where near that beefy.
The gen 3s are pigs! lol
Leon, if its not to much to ask could you post pics when you get done with the truck?
True statement! mine weighed 4,000lbs with just a V6 and 5 spd manual!!
now with the big block, TKO, and the 9.25 axle in place of the original 8.25, I'm tipping in at 4200.
Weight reduction is a good thing on these things!
you think it's alright to cut out the fully boxed frame and open it up to just a C-channel? or would that be detrimental on a street truck? in some ways, I want to reduce weight on this thing, but in other ways, I don't want to make the frame weaker and susceptible to twisting and flexing.
**Photobucket sucks**
|
|
|
Re: Third generation Dakota's
[Re: Sick 660r]
#925053
02/11/11 11:25 AM
02/11/11 11:25 AM
|
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
|
Quote:
Here is the lower rad support. Its not much!
Definitely not a load bearing piece! I mistakenly started to lift my truck by that one time when I wasn't paying close enough attention, and it immediately started to bend and flex instead of lift the truck. it looks big, but it's made from pretty thin sheet metal.
but as said, I see no reason why that big giant cross member needs to be there up front, when there's already one a foot and a half back that sits under the engine. if you're worried about it, cut it out, and add a piece of 2x2 tube steel and save all that weight!
**Photobucket sucks**
|
|
|
Re: Third generation Dakota's
[Re: 8secDart]
#925054
02/11/11 11:42 AM
02/11/11 11:42 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 226
lino lakes,MN
onebaddakota
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 226
lino lakes,MN
|
Quote:
Thanks for the info
I got tublar lower with the drop pocket and stock uppers.I still had to cut a 1/4 round out of a 6cyl spring to get it down.The upper ball jouint is at more of an angle than I like.It's not in a bind but just not perfect.
PS,sorry to hijack the thread Leon,LOL
Where did you get the tubular lower with the drop pockets, Lenny? I've tested several different moroso drag springs over the years. I was amazed at how much of a difference they made in weight transfer. The best one seemed to have the most compression and thus stored energy. It was also the longest and was a PITA to get in. Unfortunately, it would easily bottom out on the street so I had to take them out. I'm wondering if the dropped pocket would open up some more spring choices. Did the tubular lower help with anything? Weight savings? Sorry Leon. 
Tom
10.56 at 125.6, with a 1.43 60 ft.
E85, Hyd. Roller 410 magnum,full exhaust, 3500 race weight.
|
|
|
Re: Third generation Dakota's
[Re: onebaddakota]
#925056
02/11/11 12:39 PM
02/11/11 12:39 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,256
Salisbury North Carolina
8secDart
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,256
Salisbury North Carolina
|
Quote:
Quote:
Thanks for the info
I got tublar lower with the drop pocket and stock uppers.I still had to cut a 1/4 round out of a 6cyl spring to get it down.The upper ball jouint is at more of an angle than I like.It's not in a bind but just not perfect.
PS,sorry to hijack the thread Leon,LOL
Where did you get the tubular lower with the drop pockets, Lenny? I've tested several different moroso drag springs over the years. I was amazed at how much of a difference they made in weight transfer. The best one seemed to have the most compression and thus stored energy. It was also the longest and was a PITA to get in. Unfortunately, it would easily bottom out on the street so I had to take them out. I'm wondering if the dropped pocket would open up some more spring choices. Did the tubular lower help with anything? Weight savings? Sorry Leon.
Tom
They were on a truck I bought.I used them on mine.When I got it all together it set up high as hell.But I think the problem was I took a lot of weight off the nose.I think the lowers had a FatMan Fab sticker on it.
Mine seems to work fine.Not a lot of bump steer and still has a lot of spring to the front.Just don't like the upper ball jounit angle.
|
|
|
Re: Third generation Dakota's
[Re: ram87]
#925060
02/11/11 05:02 PM
02/11/11 05:02 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,330
Lynchburg, VA
Leon441
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,330
Lynchburg, VA
|
I would like to install a manual rack. The owner is unaware of any available on Gen3 Dakota's. We also need a steering column from a manual shift cheap truck. He doesn't think there was a such thing.
If someone has a Mopar or Advance auto part number for these items I would appreciate.
Leon
Career best 8.02 @ 169 at 3050# and 10" tires small block power.
|
|
|
Re: Third generation Dakota's
[Re: Leon441]
#925061
02/11/11 05:06 PM
02/11/11 05:06 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 142
Maryland
Sick 660r
member
|
member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 142
Maryland
|
There is no manual rack. Why the need for the manual steering column? When I put my t56 in I just took all the stock shifter stuff out. I need to find manual plastic piece but thats it.
2000 dakota
418 magnum
paxton novi 2k
T56
|
|
|
Re: Third generation Dakota's
[Re: ADakotaRTGuy]
#925064
02/11/11 05:38 PM
02/11/11 05:38 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,330
Lynchburg, VA
Leon441
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,330
Lynchburg, VA
|
The column we have is a tilt wheel with shifter. I found a parts source that showed manual rack and pinion available for a 96-97 4 cylinder truck.
Just searched google. It was $129
Career best 8.02 @ 169 at 3050# and 10" tires small block power.
|
|
|
|
|
