Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Dodge Dakota Future Models

12357

Comments

  • My stock '01 ClubCab w/ 4.7 4x4 3.92 AT factory 2.65x70x16 tires has published payload of 1800#. Looking forward to same 2005 w/ new 4.7HO, but published payload is 260# less (1560). Anybody know why? Regularly haul close to a ton on rough roads & trails here out West, and my '01 squats only an inch or so and handles great. What's up w/ lighter max P/L for '05? LUV MY TRUCK -- not a single problem @ 50K mi., lots of them tough! :-)
  • I waited about 10 years in Jeeps w/ QuadraTrac for Dakota w long-promised full time 4WD/AWD, and when they finally did in '01, I jumped for it. In sum, out here in UT in all kinds of weather, on/off all kinds of roads, it had been a GREAT drive system! Not a single problem, good mileage & I don't have to remember to unlock hubs, get out of 4WD, fumble for the switch when hitting icy stretches, etc. It's so good, I don't know why anyone who ever drives on snow and ice or slick grades would ever have anything else!
    DRIVE ON! GO DAK! GO AWD!
  • sunburnsunburn Posts: 319
    It's probably because the truck weighs more, but the GVWR did not increase. So, less payload capacity. I was hoping that a larger, stronger frame would mean an increase in GVWR. It didn't (at least not for the QCs).
  • Fishkiller, wondering what mileage you get with the full-time 4wd, was wondering if it drops a few compared mpg all the time to the regular part-time 4wd.
    Also, for anyone, what are the chances of ACTUALLY finding a 6-spd manual V-8 Quad cab? Dodge offers a manual, but never stocks in Up Upstate NY. I searched they simply dont exist. A buddy of mine has an 03 and had to special order (waited a over a month)his to get a manual, ridiculous. Any EPA estimates on the V-8 6spd vs the auto (15/20). Thanks
  • ron35ron35 Posts: 134
    atlgxt - The 4.7 high output requires premium fuel.

    Ron35
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,931
    Ron, does it REQUIRE premuim fuel, or is it optional, producing less horsepower when run on regular like many other engines?

    Bests,
    Dusty
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,931
    Marsha,

    For 2005 the box lengths are 64.9 inches (Quad Cab) and 78.8 inches (Club Cab). Payload is 1740 pounds with a 7000 GVW tow rating.

    Following a trend in the industry, the '05 Dakota is heavier by about 250 lbs. The 4x2 Club Cabs are 4275(A) and 4286(M), with the SLT coming in at 4295(A).

    The Quad Cabs are 4397(A) and 4408(M), with the ST being slightly heavier at 4411(A).

    As far as I can tell power seats are available for the Quad Cab.

    As far as no rear disc brakes, I'm probably one of the few in here that believes that they're not a necessity on a light duty pick-up. This would be especially true if you will be doing most of your driving empty. The rear drum brakes on the Dakota are more than adequate, and are as large as some full-size LD pick-ups were ten years ago.

    Bests,
    Dusty
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,931
    Basically because the '05 Dakota is approximately 250 lbs. heavier than the previous generation.

    Best regards,
    Dusty
  • ron35ron35 Posts: 134
    Dusty - The spec sheets I have seen list the 4.7 HO as requiring premium fuel. I have heard of some having sucess with the mid-level grade.

    Ron
  • My old 1988 Dakota just went to the junk yard, so I'm in the market for a new truck. I drove the new 2005 Dakota last week, and I was impressed with the overall quality, and how it handled. This truck represents a significant improvement at least in the seat and dash materials over recent Dodge models. Since my old 3.9L V6 never gave me any problems, I am looking for anyone's experiences with the newer 3.7/4.7 family of engines. My experiences with older Chrysler engines that have a iron block with aluminum heads has made me very cautious of this engine family. I've had to pay for head gaskets twice on the old 3.0L Mitsubishi built V6 and their old 2.2L 4cy. Can anyone summarize the recent experiences with this new engine family?
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,931
    Capt,

    So far the 4.7 has proven to be bullet proof. The 3.7 hasn't been out quite as long, but should be just as reliable. I have not heard of one head gasket problem yet, and some 4.7s are over the 100K mark.

    I'm familiar with the older 2.2 Chrysler-built 4-cylinder engines and head gasket problems. But keep in mind that towards the end of that engines life head gasket failures became much less of a problem. My wife had a 2.5 Plymouth Acclaim that got to 130K on the engine with no engine repairs...ever.

    With respect to the Mitz-built engines, yeah. Those appear to be a problem.

    Best regards,
    Dusty
  • mopar67mopar67 Posts: 728
    6 bangers were also notorious for dropping the valve guides. Follow any Chryco minivan, Dynasty, or Acclaim and if its spewing blue smoke, it has the mitsu 6 cyl engine.
    Not to mention the dist cap wiring was a nightmare as was water pump replacement. From what I reall, the pump was driven by the timing belt of all things! Certainly not a sturdy design!
  • Empty, 17+ on hwy @ 70-80; 15+ in town. W/ 1300# cabover camper + small boat, 12-13 on flat roads @ 70mph.
  • Captjohn,

    I have an 01 quad,4X4,4.7 with 97,000 miles. I have had no problems (knock on wood)with the engine and it runs as good today as when I bought it. I have done nothing but change the plugs, oil and put gas in it. The one complaint is gas mileage, I get about 14 miles per gallon with mix city/highway driving and about 10mpg towing my 3200# boat. But with the performance of the engine it's hard not to have a heavy foot.
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,931
    John,

    At what mileage did you think that 4.7 was finally broken in?

    Best regards,
    Dusty
  • I almost bought a '05 Toyota Tacoma this afternoon (extended cab/long bed). The biggest drawback to this truck is the old style on-demand 4 wheel drive system. You have to choose bewteen locking rear diff/open diff when unlocked, or a limited slip diff. Each has its pros and cons. I'm very excited about the Dakota'a full 4 wheel system. I also like the fact that the Dak's short bed is almost 5" longer than the Taco's short bed.

     

    This truck will be on the streets 90% of the time/10% in the woods. I am NOT a true 4 wheeler, that is, no boulder hopping, tree stump climbing stuff. My wife and I are avid hikers and we often travel long distances on some pretty rough Forest Service roads to get to trailheads.

     

    The one thing that I find disturbing about the Dakota is the 7.9" ground clearance. I'm accustomed to the 8.1" ground clearance in our '97 Pathfinder SE (prior to that we had a really crummy '84 Jeep Cherokee- don't know what it's ground clearance was). I noted that some of you have actually BEEN in the F.S. so you're intimately familiar with the kinds of roads I frequent.

     

    Do you think that this '05 Dakota will meet my needs??? Thanks loads for your experienced opinions!
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,931
    I think the new Dakota is a very good contender when compared to any of the less-than-full-size trucks. Considering power alone, it is even competitive with some full-size entries.

     

    The 7.9 inch ground clearance may be an issue for you if you think ground clearance is of vital importance. For most 4-wheel drive work that I've seen it would be fine. Then again, I am not a died-in-the-wool four-wheeler. For the average use of a 4-wheel drive I think the new Dakota will be okay, but for the more serious off-roading it will not be.

     

    Maybe in a few months someone will offer a lift kit for those that like all the virtues of the new design but need extra height.

     

    Good luck with your decision.

     

    Best regards,

    Dusty
  • spike50spike50 Posts: 481
    After 4 yrs, I'm still waiting for Energy Suspension to offer alternatives for those "squeakers" Mopar used on the sway bar and rear leaf springs. I guess it's a volume thing so don't hold your breath on many lift kit offerings.
  • Has anybody bought a new 05 Dakota yet? I've only seen one on the road (2wd ext cab) and there doesn't seemed to be much action on this board. Looks like all the action is on the frontier and tacoma boards.
  • spike50spike50 Posts: 481
    We're all current owners of '00-'04 models. Back in "The Old Days" ('99-'03), we were breaking new frontiers and figuring out everything about the new design (4 door body, the IFS front suspension, etc.). Just look at all of the forums that we filled up back then and are now archived. Now we all have what we want and most have between 40K-70K of mostly good experiences. Some moved up to Rams or off into other brands but most come back to the forums to contribute. This was the most civil (to one another) forum I've ever participated in.

     

    I don't know where the newbies hang out but we're just old fuddy-duddies around here.
This discussion has been closed.