Dodge Dakota: Problems & Solutions

dataguru · June 2003

Yes, higher altitudes will surely have a larger impact on air/fuel mixtures than at sea level. I'm surprised that there is that much improvement on gas mileage (up to 7 mpg) due to the addition of the Intenseperformance Z-tube and 9" Pro Filter setup. What was the cost of this system?

Glad to hear the Magnaflow system works for your needs. However, I'm quite surprised that the customer went back to the factory exhaust due to higher resonance levels of the Gibson. Gibson's single side outlet cat-back is said to be the quietest on the market due to thicker 14 gauge thickness of the muffler and pipes providing very little resonance back into the cab. Perhaps that customer had a dual system which would be a much louder over stock? Actually, I believe the stock factory exhaust is pretty decent as is. But, I guess a certain amount of improvements can be had by relieving more backpressure.

Wish you smooth sailing with the rest of the performance mods.
dataguru

sunburn · June 2003

dustyk - I cross-rotated the tires and the whining sound is still there. It's not real loud. When the windows are down at 45 MPH, you can't hear it. I know that some read ends are noisier than others, but I was not expecting this after converting to a synthetic 75W-140. I have also check the fluid level, and it is up to the full level. Probably just another thing the dealer will say is "normal".

sunburn · June 2003

The Intense Performance (www.intenseperformance.com) Z-tube runs a little over $200, depending on the type and size of filter you get with it. Another alternative is the 360 AirIntakez (www.360airintakez.com) setup. It is similar to the Z-tube, but starts at $170.

dataguru · June 2003

(sunburn)

Thanks for your feedback re another alternative for an air intake system. There are some many vendor products available these days one needs to do an evaluation to compare actual gains. Thanks.

dataguru

ronslakie · June 2003

ready10 - I have a 2K CC with a 4.7 5 speed and am interested in the irirdium plugs for my next plug change. Please provide any info you have on them (model #, price, place of purchase, etc.). I have seen them advertised on ebay at a good price but they don't seem to provide much info on specific applications.

Ron

ready10 · June 2003

Ron,
For the 4.7, the model number for the Denso Iridium plugs is IK16. They are engine specific and come from the factory pre-gapped.

I bought mine from "www.ltbmotorsports.com" for $10.99 ea. That was the best price I found on the internet. I had them in less than a week with UPS ground shipping.

Glad to help out!

P.S.: Anyone know where I can find a 180-degree t-stat for the 4.7? I'm still searching for one (unless they're not engine specific and I've just been wasting my time).

bpeebles · June 2003

The thermostat for the 4.7L V8 is very unique. The cooling system on this engine is a "bypass" design.

Unlike previous Dodge engines, this type of cooling system maintains constant coolant flow thru the engine and the thermostat perfoms "double duty".

You may have noticed that the thermostat is mounted LOW on the engine. This is because the thermostat is actually controlling the temperture of the coolant ENTERING the engine. (not leaving the engine as in other designs)

The thermostat has a "2 stage' action. The first 'stage' of the thermostat controls how much coolant is 'bled' thru the bypass. Under extreme conditions, the thermostat BLOCKS OFF the flow thru the bypass and forces ALL flow thru the radiator.

BOTTOM LINE: Use only a thermostat designed for the 4.7L V8 lest you will have serious problems.

Check out the DML website (DakotaMailingList) for the approprate 180degree replacement for the 4.7L V8 engine. The folks over there have what you are looking for. Just search for "thermostat" on the DML website.

sunburn · June 2003

The 180 deg thermostat that the 4.7L community is using is the Robertshaw GT755-180. It needs to have a small notch filed into it so the gasket fits correctly. Other than that, you are all set.

dustyk · June 2003

Here's a short list of plugs for the 4.7:

Autolite
Double Platinum APP5224 .040
Platinum AP5224 .040
Resistor 5224 .040

Bosch
Platinum +4 4418 Do not Gap
Platinum Part 4230 Gap=.040
Super Plug FR8LCX Gap=.040
Platinum Plug R8LPX Gap=.040
Platinum 2 4301 Do Not Gap
Super Part 756 2 Gap=.040

Champion
Double Platinum RC12PYP #7071 .040
Truck Plug #4071 .040
Platinum Power #3071 .040
Copper+ RC12MCC4 #439 .040

Denso
Iriduim IK16 .044
Double Platinum PKJ16CR-L11 .044
U-groove KJ16CR-L11 .044

NGK
IX Iridium ZFR6FIX-11 (6441) .040
Double Platinum PZFR6F-11 (3271) .040
GP Platinum ZFR6FGP (7100) .040
V-Power ZFR6F-11G (6987) .040
Platinum Laser PZFR5F-11 (4363) .040

Best regards,
Dusty

dustyk · June 2003

How many miles is on your Dakota?

Did I understand you correctly that you've just started to hear a noise since you changed to synthetic differential lubricant?

Regards,
Dusty

dustyk · June 2003

The only time I can remember seeing a thermostat design like the one in the 287 (4.7) motor, was on a diesel engine application.

As Bpeebles pointed out, this one is unique among American gas engines.

The thermostat will look very similar to the one's you're use to seeing, except that the body is deeper and the valve pintle extends a long distance from the bottom. As the valve opens, the pintle shaft covers the bypass port that's directly behind the thermostat body.

This design is quite effective. This past winter, my Dakota got warm heat almost instantly. Faster than my Nissan or our Toyota, which are much faster than any other "American" cars I've ever owned.

Regards,
Dusty

sunburn · June 2003

dustyk - I have just over 25K on my Dakota. Yes, I changed to redline 75W-140 in the rear diff back in March. This was followed by 2500+ miles towing a 2800 lb trailer in April. When the fluid was replaced, it was refilled with a total of 2.5 qts (including the friction modifier). This was what my local dealer said the capacity of the 9.25" diff was.

dustyk · June 2003

Are you sure?

According to my 2003 Dakota service manual, the 9.25 limited slip axle fluid capacity is 4.9 PINTS of gear oil, plus 4 oz. of Mopar Limited Slip Additive.

Two and-a-half quarts is way over capacity.

Regards,
Dusty

sunburn · June 2003

Dusty - Isn't 4.9 pints plus 4 oz equal to 2.575 Qts?

dustyk · June 2003

You know, all it takes is just a little mental strain to make a mistake like that!

Yes, two-and-a-half quarts is about right.

Bests,
Dusty

jhorl · June 2003

For anybody interested in the Edelbrock performer IAS shocks for the Dakota Quad cab, I found a set of four for 279.00 with free shipping. This is the best price I found. If you go to the edelbrock web site click on buy online and the dealer was Desert Rat Truck Products.

livnlrn · June 2003

Put my Rancho RSX shocks on this weekend. Boy were those factory ones shot. I could depress the rear shocks over 2 inches before they would begin to dampen, no wonder the rear was bouncing all over the place.
Ride is much better now. Not harsh yet firm. It was interesting getting the fronts in. They can only slide into place one way between the sway bars and axle and steering ect... The tabs on the rear bolts were interesting too. Glad they are there though.
So far I like them a lot. But I was rideing on shot shocks before so...

bpeebles · June 2003

I was wondering when you would get to them....I have been peeking under your truck checking your shocks out in the parking lot. 8-)

My originals were shot after about 2 frost-heave seasons.... you have been thru more than that with your original shock absorbers.

Have you tried a dirt road to see how your new absorbers handle up the bumps? It will still ride like a TRUCK, but the handling / braking is better when the tires are ON THE ROAD.

livnlrn · June 2003

You can peek now! White shocks with red boots!
I picked up a set of Bosch 4418's this week. Hopefully it will cool off some so I can put them in this weekend. Just gotta pick up some silly grease. I got every other type, waterproof, general purpose, waterpump, hydrolic.. ect... no silicone.
With new plugs and my just installing a K&N replacement air filter (figure Dodge knew enough when they designed the air box, so left it). I am hopeing to maybe see better MPG but am not too hopeful.

livnlrn · June 2003

By the way, I hit a deer on Fri. the 13th! It was just a little guy, who will now never grow up. Anyway, all it did was break my passenger side turn signal. I checked local salvage yards but they wanted $40 for the one. So I got a pair off ebay for $30 after shipping! Now I gotta figure out how to remove it.

spike50 · June 2003

After about 2 weeks, I started hearing metal clunking while going over shallow road holes at slower speeds and front-end noise when applying the brakes. A check revealed that the brake caliper's pins had unthreaded themselves. One was gone and the other was still in the rubber sleeve. A new pin was less than $3 and all noises disappeared after tightening everything up.

I'm wondering if anyone else has had these pins work loose? Would anyone recommend using the blue Loc-tite to lessen the chances of this happening again? My concern is that the combination of PowerSlots and ceramics might be more than the original "dry" connection was designed for. I "know" that I tightened everything originally, why else would there be about 2 weeks of noise-free operation. Also, during those 2 weeks / 500 miles, I followed their recommended break-in procedures - no power stops. Not that I do those anyway, because it usually denotes poor planning.

bpeebles · June 2003

(spike50) I have the same front brake equipment as you. I used a torque wrench to snug those pins to spec... no problem with loosening in over 20K miles.

Those pins DO NOT have any "loading" on them. They only guide the caliper and allow it to float over the brakepads. All of the loading from using the brakes is directed thru those stainless-steel shims that came with the brake-pads directly into the brake-pad guides.

This 'seperation of duities' for the guide-pins and the brakepad-guides part of the
Full Floating" design of the brakes. The caliper just floats over the pads and apply squeezing pressure. The pads just rub the rotors and put the weight of the vehicle into the pad-guides.

Some thoughts:
*) Make sure that those pins are 'lubricated' with the approprate rubber-grease to allow the caliper to slide back and forth easilly
*) Make sure that each pad can slide easilly on its guides. (Those SS shims have various thickness imprinted on them... use the approprate ones)

PERSONALLY: I use a hand-file to remove rust and smooth the pad-guides. The special hi-temp grease that came with the pads is to be used on these pad-guides.

Why all the above attention to the caliper and pad sliding free?..... Any sticking of the caliper or the pads will result it BRAKE DRAGGING and reduced MPG.

Any 'normal' mechanic does not take the time to scrutinize and verify all of the these deatils. The brakes will stop the vehicle either way..... but may not fully RELEASE if there is binding or sticking in the moving parts.

spike50 · June 2003

Thanks for the quick response and I'll look into all of those points you made. Been trying to do too much maintenance recently. Focused much attention on getting a 1981 BMW R100 motorcycle ready to travel to the rally in West Virginia from July 10 to 13.

bcarter3 · July 2003

The "Service 4WD" light illuminated on my instrument panel yesterday. I crawled under my truck and verified that I still had a 2WD. There is a Service Bulletin covering this. Apparently it only affects a small number of '01 Daks built prior to 10/13/00. The cure involves replacing the HVAC control assembly. I haven't a clue what the two systems have in common. Maybe the PCI bus. HVAC control is on order. No MIL light and no pending codes. Truck runs good.

bookitty · July 2003

Byron, what your truck is telling you, is that the 4WD offers more service ability than the 2WD. Especially during those long, bleak snow storms and ice storms that grip the Homestead, FL area in the winter-time. Usually, chains are not necessary.

Bookitty

lotech1 · July 2003

"4WD offers more service ability than the 2WD."

And more expensive repairs, less payload capability, more preventative maintenance, lower fuel mileage... and on and on. LOL

bpeebles · July 2003

(lotech1) You are , of course, 100% accurate in your assessment of 4WD. But you are missing an important point. Let me explain....

Here in Vermont, a 2WD pickup truck is worthless. The light weight rear end has virtually no traction in the snow. The resale value is so low that most folks will turn their noses up at a 2WD pickup truck if you try to sell one.

How do I know all this? I purchased a 2WD pickup some years ago. The price was really really low. I thought it was great deal. In the first snow storm, I could not even back out of my driveway. I had to purchase expensive studded snow tires just so it would move in the snow. When I put a sign on it and tried to sell it... folks would stop to look at it and when they realized it was a 2WD they just left.

BOTTOM LINE: Here in vermont. If a truck has 4WD and it runs... it is sellable. THE 4WD SYSTEM DOES NOT DEVALUATE IN VALUE. If it cost an xtra $1000 to purchase 4WD new... then that $1000 stays with the vehicle as long as it runs. (The 4WD system is still worth $1000 after 100K miles)

I liken this to the value of A/C in the southern states. Try to sell a vehicle without A/C in the southern USA... Ill bet that most folks will just turn their noses up at it and leave.

mopar67 · July 2003

can be every bit as good as cast iron. Remember the 4 cyl offy engines at the indy 500? Ferarri? Masterati?
I have news for you...aluminum is here to stay and you'll see more and more of it as automakers search for ways to lower weight in order to meet EPA mileage requirements.

Push rods are fine....many millions of big ole v-8s came from detroit with that very design. Its proven reliable but not so good for high revving.

When the competition is offering up smoother, more responsive, more refined engines, detroit has but one choice.....ante up or get left behind.
Pushrods will be around. Harley has used them in their v twins since day one. But with car makers wanting to get more ooopmf from a given displacement, they will turn to whatever helps them meet that goal...incl. OHC and aluminum!

lotech1 · July 2003

If the 3.7 "buzzer" I drove yesterday is any indication of what's to come... I might as well trade the Daimler for a rice burner. My 3.9 is definitely quieter and smoother than the 3.7 hi-tech.

I went back through many of the posts here and the common thread seems to be complaints about the hi-tech engines rough idle and check engine light problems. I'll keep my lotech motor and spend less time at the shop.

The Dak is a TRUCK, ya don't need hi-reving motors. Give me low end grunt any day of the week. If they ever put a diesel in it people will find out what they've been missing.

mopar67 · July 2003

can be every bit as good as cast iron. Remember the 4 cyl offy engines at the indy 500? Ferarri? Masterati?
I have news for you...aluminum is here to stay and you'll see more and more of it as automakers search for ways to lower weight in order to meet EPA mileage requirements.

Push rods are fine....many millions of big ole v-8s came from detroit with that very design. Its proven reliable but not so good for high revving.

When the competition is offering up smoother, more responsive, more refined engines, detroit has but one choice.....ante up or get left behind.
Pushrods will be around. Harley has used them in their v twins since day one. But with car makers wanting to get more ooopmf from a given displacement, they will turn to whatever helps them meet that goal...incl. OHC and aluminum!

usaf52 · July 2003

I don't know what the prices are in Vermont, but a 4WD costs quite a bit more than 1K over a 2WD and much more than those "expensive" studded snow tires you mentioned.

dustyk · July 2003

Aluminum is durable material used in a wide variety of industrial and military applications. Cast iron or steel used in place of it does not necessarily make a component more durable. Aluminum is an alloy that is available in many different qualities and has been used very successfully in aircraft engines since World War I.

Push rod valve train designs are not necessarily more durable, either. Depending on the design, a push rod system almost always introduces more friction losses, can increase power and flex losses as well as offer other valve train stability problems.

Regards,
Dusty

dustyk · July 2003

It's pretty snowy around here most winters, maybe not as bad as Vermont, but two-wheel drive pickups are far more numerous in Western New York state than their 4x4 counterparts.

In the case of the Dakota, the 4x4 option is just over $3000, the RAM over $4200. Looking at used local prices the depreciation factor appears to be slightly more than two-wheel drive versions of the same make and model.

My Dakota with the limited slip differential and the Goodyear Wrangler SR-A on/off road tires has done remarkably well this past winter. In fact, I bought four 70 pound sand bags and only used them for a short time. The added weight did help, I will say. With the ATV loaded in the back my 2-wheel drive Dakota climbed every icy hill in the Southerntier last deer season without a hint of a problem.

Now, I would not want to try to convince anybody that this means that a 2-wheel drive pickup is the equal to a 4x4 in terms of traction. All other things being equal, it is indisputable that any 4x4 will offer a traction advantage, especially when the conditions are at the extreme. The tire & axle combination probably makes my experience above the average for a 2-wheel drive PU.

But neither do I think that a 4x4 is an absolute neccesity for wintery conditions. In fact, I watched a 4x4 pickup truck with all season radials that could not climb the same icy hill that I had traversed all day.

There are few absolutes.

Best regards,
Dusty

mopar67 · July 2003

perhaps dustyK. But don't overlook the hemi, the greatest engine of all time! It had double the pushrods and rockers of a typical v-8 and it certainly was no lightweight.
I was referring to basic, run of the mill engines.

dustyk · July 2003

Well, I assume you're referring to the legendary 426 Chrysler Hemi, and if so you might be surprised to learn that I would most certainly agree that it was at least a contender for that crown, if not THE greatest engine. I'll go even further and say that just about any Chrysler designed and built engine was superior in most ways to their American competition.

However, it's enormous weight and descrete push rods is not what made the 426 the greatest engine of all time.

Bests,
Dusty

bookitty · July 2003

Ben, Dusty, nobody can win this one! It's like arguing whose mom makes the best meatloaf.

Bookitty

mopar67 · July 2003

gave the motoring public some of the finest engines and transmisions ever! I never did break my slant six, my 727 torqueflight(complete with shift kit)my 2.2 and 2.5, my 440....oh my......those were the days.....the more I fiddled with my cars, the more and more I admired Mopar engineering when compared to Chevy and Ford. My cousins 69 GTX was a beast and he won his fair share of spur of the moment drags..
How I fondly remember dads 66 sports fury, with maroon red paint, black interior, fender skirts, the 383 with a fat and sassy Carter 4 bbl sitting up top, the RV-2 compressor that introduced me to hypothermia in summer! I gazed at his wrecked 66 Barracuda (courtesy of a drunk driver in Indiana circa 1968) it was torquioise blue and it looked magnificient.
I recall Dan Crawleys 10, factory new, still in crate 426 hemis, my first eyeball of that creation, with valve covers as wide as an Indiana cornfield. No amount of money would be able to change from your hands to his and one of those engines from his garage to your car! Might need em someday he'd say! My uncle's 71 Newport, 383 equipped and how it sailed down the highway and yet would simply bury the speedo anytime you wanted to.....the trips to the dog n suds drive in with its am/fm 8 track playing moody blues or Janis Joplin......oh the stories I could tell you about that car!

No, pushrods do not a great engine make, but they're still used with modest success. Yet, we all know that OHC is the way to go in the long run...just look at the 4.7 v-8, truly a marvel of Mopar engineering (too bad Chrysler dropped the ball on the rest of my truck). Its smooth powerful and a gem of a motor. And in beating the 318, it had a tough act to follow.

BTW....I alone make the best meatloaf! Mom is english and just does not make a good one but her beef roasts are to die for!

dustyk · July 2003

Oddly, my mother was English, too. Mom's cooking would best be described as utilitarian. My grandmother, born a subject and not a citizen, could've been Britain's secret weapon during World War I ...... if she'd had cooked for the Kaiser.

Actually, Mopar67 and I are far from miles apart. I think that Chrysler deserves far more credit than they ever got. During the 1930s it was Chrysler who advanced the state of American engineering technology, not GM or Ford.

Unfortunately, good engineering by itself does not guarantee success in the market place, especially to a culture that values form over function.

Just think if the 426 was ressurrected today using modern design applications, materials and casting techniques. Reduced weight, overhead cams, and new cylinder head geometery. Well, actually, except for the overhead cam, the new 5.7 IS a modern example of a very efficient cylinder head configuration.

I guess I part with Mopar67 in feeling that negative about the quality of Chrysler-built products today. My 2003 Dakota so far appears to be the best assembled vehicle I've ever owned, even better than our Sentra and Avalon. Long term? We'll see.

Everything I read and know lately seems to indicate that Chrysler is actually doing a pretty good job. Have they made mistakes in the past. Most certainly, yes. But that could be said for just about all auto manufacturers. I worked for GM a number of years ago. I know.

Bests,
Dusty

mopar67 · July 2003

or rather more significant accomplishments......

....first production, road worthy hemi powered v-8
....first alternator
....first electronic voltage regulator
.....first to use full flow spin on oil filters (developed with Purolator)
...first electronic ignition
...first lockup torque converter for automatic trans.
...first use of microfinish process in engine machining...later used by P&W, Curtiss Wright, and ALlison in WW 2 piston aircraft engines.
....Not the first, but biggest user of torsion bar suspension...then and still the finest, lowest weight suspension
....first to include safety rim wheels in standard design, not an option like with other makes.
....don't forget the decades long foray into gas turbine design....came very close to making it to production were it not for emissions.
...speaking of emissions, Chrylser had a system that would have met the first round of EPA regs in the 1970's that did NOT need a catalytic converter
....gave us the torqueflight......the finest automatic made.
...gave us the RV-2 cast iron v-twin A/C compressor, the most solid, durable, and easy to service compressor provided on an automobile.

Even Lee Iacocca admitted that Chrysler had the best engineers around. Usualy, though, they were never given the proper resources to build good products.

Can anyone else add to this? Most of this comes from memory and I am sure Mopar is credited with far more than I can provide here.

I think my bias is fairly obvious; I admit it and am not ashamed to do so. Now perhaps some of you can see how it truly pained me, shook me to the core to go thru two years of headaches with the Dakota. Chrylser vehicles are more than steel stampings and glass and rubber, they embody the essence of automotive design. They have soul.

Ford by contrast has always been 3 or 4 steps behind. Old Henry felt the simpler the better. And it showed.

GM was dominated by non risk takes and bean counters. Harley Earl and Billy Mitchell would not have had a snowball's chance in hell at GM in the 70's and 80's.

Notice how it took a former Chrysler man, bob lutz, to shake GM out of its doldrums. They may once again be a force to be reckoned with.

Where oh where is there a modern day Walter P Chrysler when we need him?

dustyk · July 2003

I'm pretty sure that Chrysler was the first to use full hydraulic brakes, at least on a US production car.

First to isolate the engine from the frame by using rubber motor mounts.

They also were the first to use all steel bodies.

First US manufacturer to use quad headlights

First to use 12 volt electrical systems.

First with power steering.

I seem to recall a Chrysler in the early sixties with a automatic braking system called "SureBrake" Whether that qualifies as a first in ABS, I don't know.

Chrysler did find their turbine research valuable when it came time to developing the M1A1 Abrams tank, which techically qualifies as the first use of a turbine engine in a production vehicle.

What I always like about Chrysler engines were the little things, like the only V8 engine line in America that did not require the removal of the intake manifold to replace a valve lifter.

Regards,
Dusty

anonymousposts · July 2003

We are looking at a 97 Dakota Club Cab 3.9L 5-speed with 68,000 miles. Any problems we should be aware of before we buy? We don't like alot of unscheduled trips to the service station and will pass if these have proven to be problematic. Very clean nice truck.

dustyk · July 2003

'95 - '97 were not notable quality years. They've gotten much better since 1998.

Air conditioning and brake components were probably the most troublesome, followed by intake manifold gasket failures, plus a plethera of various little problems mostly caused by marginal supplier quality issues.

You don't say whether this is a V8 or 4-wheel drive. '97 was before the major automatic transmission upgrade, although if your particular specimen has been treated reasonably and the fluid changes were done regularly, it shouldn't be a problem.

The Dakota of any year is actually a sturdy truck, and you'll find that they'll be the last to disintegrate from rust. From a problem standpoint they're much better than an S10, but likely not as good as a Ranger.

Best regards,
Dusty

dustyk · July 2003

An addendum.

From 1998 onward, Chrysler began resolving the Dakota component quality issues and by 2001 I'd say that they were equal to or better than the Ford Ranger. In 2002 and 2003 the Dakota received a quality award for best in class.

My 2003 Dakota has, so far, demonstrated impeccable assembly and component quality.

Regards,
Dusty

anonymousposts · July 2003

it's a 3.9L V6 with manual transmission. Pretty base truck. But it's nice. It will be our 4th car and will be used for getting our bikes to and from the bike trail and Home Depot trips. But considering it's a real truck and offers a comfort level not found in the smaller Tacomas and Isuzu trucks we were looking at, I will probably drive it to keep the miles down on my car since I am commuting 40 miles each way. Have 13,000 miles on a 6 month old car.

dustyk · July 2003

Sorry, you did state that. Just old age setting in.

The 3.9 is a very sturdy motor. It's just 2 cylinders removed from a 318. My son has a '91 with 270,000+ miles and it still runs pretty well.

Best of luck,
Dusty

lotech1 · July 2003

"Depending on the design, a push rod system almost always introduces more friction losses, can increase power and flex losses as well as offer other valve train stability problems."

I wonder what the difference really is when you take into consideration the fact that the OHC 3.7 V6 & 4.7 V8 have 2 camshafts and all that extra timing chain to deal with. More parts to wear out.

anonymousposts · July 2003

No problem dusty. We are going to have the truck inspected today or tomorrow and hope to buy it by Wednesday. It will be around $5500. We checked out Consumer Reports and 97 is one year that they actually recommend for the Dakota. Only problem area is the brakes according to them. I've seen a few people mention that Dakotas have crappy brakes, what can go wrong with them? Do they just suck or does the ABS unit go out often?

dustyk · July 2003

When in correct condition, the Dakota has very good brakes. I'm not aware of any reported failures of the ABS system, either.

The problem appears to be mostly poor quality rotors in those years. Although, I've heard people say that some replacement rotors did no better, there are others that report having better service out of different ones.

They did upgrade the brake system in 2000 or 2001.

Regards,
Dusty

dustyk · July 2003

Yes, there are friction and load losses with an overhead cam system. I can't state emphatically that they are less, but that is the general impression. Maybe they aren't.

The one area that would be reduced is loaded weight since in a overhead cam system the lobe is working directly upon the valve stem, obviously through some type of follower.

There should be a reduction of casting and component complexity, and any flexing attributed to a push rod as well as instabilities in a rocker arm mounting system would be eliminated.

Bests,
Dusty

bpeebles · July 2003

(lotech1) I have to comment on this too. (you knew I was going to) In addition to what Dusty has said....

You suggest that the rotating mass may not be that much less with the 4.7L V8 due to all of the xtra moving parts (Idler sprocket, 2 more chains, additional cam...etc)

Do not forget that it is the RECIPROCATING MASS that is the killer. Anything that has to come to a stop then accelerate in the opposite direction is FARRR more of a load than any xtra spinning parts.

When we consider the RECIPROCATING mass... the Pushrod engine has a lot more weight to throw around.

Think about this:

Pull all of the RECIPROCATING parts from the valvetrain of the ol 318CI engine that the 4.7L replaces and weigh them on scales. (16 lifters,16 Pushrods, 16 rollerrockers, 16 valves with springs...etc)

Now weigh the RECIPROCATING mass from the 4.7L V8
(16 fulcrums, 16valves with springs) The hydrolic valve lash compensation is NOT part of the RECIPROCATING mass and only part of the fulcrums are reciprocating.

Now take the difference in weight, throw in some physics, and mathematics and you will find that the OHC engine is FAR ahead of the pushrods when it comes to parasitic horsepower losses to run the valvetrain.

Check out this comparison between these 2 engines:
http://www.imajeep.com/2001%20Grand/Engine/4.7%20Write%20Up.htm

Dodge Dakota: Problems & Solutions

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Dodge Dakota: Problems &amp; Solutions

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Dodge Dakota: Problems & Solutions