Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Dodge Dakota - Quad Cab

18586889091101

Comments

  • tmatthewtmatthew Member Posts: 26
    2001 4x4 quad, 4.7, auto, lsd, 3.55. Have 40,043 miles. average 15 - 17 MPG with mixed rural and in town. I get the 17 when I drive like an old geezer, 15 when I lean into it a little. Two problems so far. Lost a battery at about 28K. Dealer replaced it for free. It is a crapp one but free is free. Just after my factory warranty ran out last month my stereo stopped working.I had the cassete model. Dealer stated it was shot and needed replacement. Of course my expensive extended warrenty won't cover it. I wont due that again. So I had a nice Kenwood CD player installed, About $200. It is 180 watts and the stock infinity speakers handle it well. No other problems.....I have kept up on the owners manual maintenance......Lets hope she holds together for another 40K.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Bruce, interesting article, thank you for the link to the Post. Even more interesting is that the inventor of this engine, Rudolph Diesel committed suicide by jumping off of an ocean liner. He considered himself as well as the engine; a failure. Initially, he experimented with coal dust prior to trying coal oil (kerosene).

    Bookitty
  • kevino40kevino40 Member Posts: 2
    I have a 2000 dakota that makes a clunking noise when i make a tight turn, told dealer they greased the bushings helped for a short while but returned, truck also sounds like one of those ( covered wagons ) that you see in the westerns maybe bad shocks need some suggestions
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    (kevino40) If you still have the original shock absorbers... they are shot. I installed Edelbrock IAS performer shocks on my 2000 Dak and it is SIGNIFICANTLY better. (ride, cornering and stopping.)

    As for the other issues you have, the upper balljoints are a known weak spot on the 2000 dak. One of mine got pretty squeeky and I replaced with a GREASABLE "Moog" balljoint.

    I am sure you are aware that the front antisway bare bushings are known to squeek.

    Be aware the the front brake rotors may need attention soon too. Mine rusted terribly after 2 Vermont winters (roadsalt) I installed some powerslot rotors and the braking is much better.
  • time2littletime2little Member Posts: 3
    Has anyone besides Click & Clack commented on the fact that the mirrors on the 2000 Dakota are just too big? I have a 2WD QC SLT with the remote heated mirrors, and while they don't give me too much trouble (I'm 6'1") my wife refuses to drive the truck since so much of her critical viewing area is obscured by the mirrors. I know they down-sized the mirrors in 2001 and I'm wondering if I can replace the mirrors with either Mopar or after market. I don't need to keep the heat function but power would be useful still.

    Any thoughts??
  • dustykdustyk Member Posts: 2,926
    If they didn't change the mounting base pattern from the 2000 vintage, the newer style would probably fit right on. Hopefully, the electrical wiring would be the same.

    By the way, after this icy winter the heated side mirrors was the one thing I'd wish I had on my Dakota.

    Regards,
    Dusty
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    (time2little) The 2000 Dak was available with at least 3 different mirror styles. You must have orderd the unfamous "elephant ear" mirrors.

    Personally, I orderd the standard mirrors. Although I felt they were too small at first, I have learned to back up with them just the same.
    (I have a cap on my tuck and cannot see behind me any other way)
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    I ordered and enjoy the larger (6X9) powered mirrors. I would have opted for the heated version, except that I wanted the sliding rear window. The slider was not available in 2000 in the heated mode, and the heated (fixed) rear window was required in order to have heated mirrors. I wanted it all, but took what I could get (matter of priority). As we are building a home in FL, selling our PA home and spending the warm months at our NJ beach house and the winter in FL, the heated mirror issue has solved itself. I really like the larger mirrors, as I am used to using only the outside mirrors, and they come in quite handy when towing the 5X8 HD utility trailer.

    Bookitty
  • ferousferous Member Posts: 226
    The 6x9 mirrors are worth every bit of extra $60 for the option. I ordered them with the tow package option because I often pull a utility trailer or my pop-up camper. I am now upgrading from the pop-camper to a 21' travel trailer, and I'm glad I have the bigger mirrors.
  • traumagastraumagas Member Posts: 64
    hello all
      Has anyone seen a quad cab pulling a 5th wheel trailer ? I want a 5th wheel trailer utility, I know I can get a box type utility but like the look of the 5th and the ride and pulling characteristics of
    the 5th wheel. Also I know the towing cap of my 4x4 4.7 3.92 rear end quad. I know those ratings are rated for stopping. Would you guys think a trailer with elect 4 wheel disc brakes would allow little more towing capacity? The truck has the HD tow pkg
     Whats your take on this ?
                      Thanks Jon
  • ferousferous Member Posts: 226
    First of all the manual states that the QC should not pull a 5th wheel. You really can't attach it over the axle and still be able to turn.

    As far as towing, I have done a lot of towing with my QC. I have pulled utility trailers, pop-up campers and now I have a new camper that weighs around 3,400 lbs loaded. My 4.7 5spd 3.55lsd with P215-75R15 tires pulls it just fine. I have a Prodigy brake controller and added Air-lift air springs to the rear of the truck. The biggest weakness I found was the rear springs, but the air springs have really helped that problem.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    My wife and I are currently on the road flat towing her 1999 Jeep Wrangler behind my 2000 4X4 Dodge Quad cab with 4.7, 5 speed and 3.55 rear(s). We left Eastern PA yesterday afternoon and overnighted in Christianburg, VA (south of Roanoke). We took the PA turnpike west to I-81 south. Lots of hills, trucks who get into the left lane and suffer diesel failure, and a bunch of folks who think that the turn signal lever is an accessory for storing rubber bands. The Quad was in fourth gear for much of the time in order to maintain highway speed. This morning we drove from Christiansburg to Hickory, NC. We are here shopping for furnishings for our new home in Punta Gorda, FL. That is the next leg of our trip. The Quad performed without flaw. It is going easier than I imagined insofar as the towing. I have never flat towed a vehicle this kind of distance, but we learn new things everyday, even at age 70.

    Bookitty
  • traumagastraumagas Member Posts: 64
    Thats a shame about the 5th wheel, I understand the box being in the way of turning. The trailer I am looking at has a v nose for decreased wind resistance The hitch is in the end of the V. I plan to park the truck in all positions Almost jackknife before purchasing the trailer.
                        Jon
  • Karen_SKaren_S Member Posts: 5,092
    "...and a bunch of folks who think that the turn signal lever is an accessory for storing rubber bands."

    LOL!

    Hope the rest of your journey is safe and pleasant!
  • hennehenne Member Posts: 407
    I met a guy a few months back that had QC pulling a 5th. He had a slider hitch and said it was the best money he spent. He was so happy to finally be pulling a 5th than towing a regular rv trailer.

    When he gets to a place he has to make tght turns, he pulls a lever and the slider hitch slides backwards to allow room between cab and 5th and when hes done he backs up and puts the lever back and the slider is back into position.

    Robert
  • mikeintorontomikeintoronto Member Posts: 5
    I have a 2001 quad cab, 3.9, 5 speed with 60,250 km on it (250 km over the warranty!). I haven't had any problems at all with it. Driving down the highway at 110 km/hr 2 nights ago all of the 6 lug nuts on the rear drivers side came undone 1800 km (1000 miles) after they had been installed by the dealer (had changed my winter tires to summer). I had heard a kind of faint howl from the back at about 130 km prior to the mishap. I had pulled over about 100 km prior to the mishap and looked over the back end and didn't notice anything. Unfortunately I hadn't looked at the lug nuts. It was also quite windy so I rationalized the occasional vehicle drift/wobble and howl as a wind effect. All nuts finally came off and I managed to pull over onto the shoulder before the wheel fell off (the rim is aluminum).

    Between towing, repair (by another Dealership since I was out of town) and the cost of a new rim I'm out $900. The dealer insists that if he had not installed the wheels properly that they would have fallen off within 100-200 km after installation and that the other 3 wheels are OK. He figures that one wheel has been tampered with however I know that the vehicle hasn't been anywhere where this could have happened. The only concession I'm being offered is that he'll give me a rim at his cost plus 10% and install and balance the wheel for free. Whippee!!

    The dealer said that they torqued the nuts using a torque stick at 100 ft-lbs. My question to him was how often do you calibrate them and his reply was they cost $400 so I know they work.

    Any ideas for recourse????

    As an aside can anyone explain how a torque stick works? When I looked at it, it looked like a drive extension and socket made from 1 piece of metal. I saw no moving parts. I don't understand how the air gun gets feedback to limit the torque.
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    (mikeintoronto) I am so sorry to hear about your mishap. Are you aware that any alumininum wheels should be RE-torqued after some miles?

    I always torque mine to 90ft/lbs .... then after about 50 miles... I RE-torque them to 90ft/lbs again.(The spec on my Dak is 85-115ft/lbs)

    I am not familear with a "torque stick", I am aware of several different types of torque wrenches. (needle-gauge, clicker and digital-readout.) I use the "clicker" type which is priced right in the middle. (around $50 USD)

    To use the "clicker" type of torque-wrench...
    I twist the handle which tightens a prececion spring. There is a calibrated scale on the handle that tells me when I have reached my desired "setting". Now, when I use the the torque-wrench to tighten a fastener, when the "setting" is reached, there will be an audable CLICK that tells me that the desired torque is reached. This makes for fast, repeatable torque on multiple fasteners. (Virtually all good mechanics use this type)

    The needle type is the least expensive... One just looks at a needle that will point to the amount of torque that is being applied to the wrench. It is not any less 'accurate' than the 'clicker' type... it is just slower to use because one has to LOOK at the needle while using it. The repeatability of torque settings with this type is harder to acheive.

    The "digital" type is really just a gimmick (in my opioion) It consists of an 'extension' to a standard ratchit that has some wires coming out of it... the end of these wires are plugged into a digital meter which displays the torque. Although this may be cool-looking... it is not very practical to have to carry a wrench AND a meter around... you then have to LOOK at the meter while using this cumbersome assembly. Repeatability is also reduced.

    All 3 of the above torque-wrenches are available at Sears.... (do you have Sears in Canada?)

    Your question about CALIBRATION is a very good question indeed. The instructions with my torque wrench mention annual verification of the calibration. (If it is dropped.... it must be immediately removed from use until re-calibrated.)

    Your dealers response to your inquery about calibration is just plain stupid. (Costing $400 does not make a tool immune to innaccuracy!!) (I work with $250,000 machines that need daily calibration)

    BTW.... I have asked tire-installers about the last time their spin-balancing machine was calibrated.... (This machine tells them how much weight and where to put it around the perimiter of the wheel to bring it into balance.)
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    kevino40 - Before you replace tie-rod ends, etc. look at lubricating the rubber suspension related bushings fore & aft. My '00 started making all sorts of bushing related noises in the second year of ownership. These were all of the "classic" noises described in numerous posts over the years: slow speed hard turn and slow speed rough road. I went all over this thing and loosened each bushing bracket (individually) and shot some lithium grease. At times, I needed to slide a thin stainless steel rod (former CB antenna) in between the bushing and sway bar to open a channel to introduce the grease. I also shot grease in between the rear leaf springs (plastic sliders need to move) and the leaf spring's rubber bushings that attach to the frame. Success, but I have to do it again this summer.

    I'm trying to "design" an easier way to lube each of these points without so much work. I've also researched the possibility of replacing as many of the black rubber bushings with urethane but it seems these are not available.

    The source of your noise problems may be completely different from mine (bad shocks, etc.) but this is what worked for me.
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    time2little - My '00 has the 6x9" heated mirrors and I love them. My only problem has been that the heating feature has stopped operating. The driver's side was replaced under warranty (really didn't research what caused the problem) but the other one just stopped now.

    I've got out BOB and will look for electrical tests I can perform. If I'm unsuccessful, and you want to sell yours - let me know.
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    Had the inside cover of the door off today to run my electric tests. It appears that the element went bad (although there was continuity the resistance was very high and out of spec). Called the dealer and they do sell replacement glass for the 6x9's heated at $32 (ordered). I think the whole mirror assemble is around $200 so this is good news.

    Latter on the results.
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    Installed the new glass today. Too bad that the glass is so thin, because it's junk once you pull it off. Any minor twisting causes it to crack in multiple areas but the glass stays affixed to the backing and doesn't create a clean-up problem.

    New one snapped right in but I put some dielectric grease on the heater terminals. I did this because once the old mirror was out, I ran the resistance check described in BOB, and it passed (6-8 ohms). So the heating element was still good but the contacts had enough corrosion on them to stop the heating function. Too bad that there wasn't a way to get to the contacts short of replacing (destroying) the original glass portion of the mirror at $33.
  • ferousferous Member Posts: 226
    Don - thanks for the updates on your mirrors. It's great to learn these small lessons from each other.
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Member Posts: 552
    Time for me to bid farewell. My Quad is gone in a few hours, leaving because of my bad clutch leg. I'll hate to see her go. She has been the most trouble free vehicle I have ever owned. I hope her replacement can fill her tire tracks. I'm picking up a Ram 1500 Quad with a Hemi and 5 speed auto, 3.92 posi and 20" wheels. What a GAS HOG!!!, on board computer showed 12.5mpg average on a gentle 23 mile test drive. But it is worth it because my leg doesn't hurt and I have a grin a mile wide. The power come on in a more refined way than the Dakota 4.7 5 speed manual combo. It almost feels like you are in a jet plane taxing down the runway except for the almost sub audible rumble of the exhaust. Now I have a garage full of excess Dakota parts. A full set of Blizzak snows on factory aluminum 15x8 rims. A brand new 255 65/r15 Goodyear LS tire on a 15x8 aluminum rim that was the spare on the Quad. A Leer topper as well as a bunch of air filters and oil filters and the famous BOB. I never realized how much support stuff accumulates over time. Guess I'll clean the garage and hit the online auction to clear it out. I need the space to start my collection for the Ram 1500. I'll still be around to keep up with the trials and tribulations of all my Dakota friends but more as a lurker. Good luck. Rick
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Rick, okay, so you're not driving a Dakota. But that is no reason for you to say goodbye. We have always enjoyed your insight and friendly humor. Like mopar67, you are not allowed to leave our group. I wish you the best with your new mount and hope that you will continue to post, as you now have an interesting comparison to write about. I do hope also that your leg continues to mend. Please! Stay in touch.

    Bookitty
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Member Posts: 552
    Well the Monster Quad is in my driveway. I spent 1/2 an hour at the parts counter ordering the options I felt I really "needed". Ordered a set of wheel locks to try to keep the 20" rims on the Quad. No wheel flares so I had to get molded mud guards to keep the mud/crud off the side of the Quad. Got a rubber bed mat so Boomer, my Doberman could get traction when we went for a ride. I think I'll eventually get a Line-X spray in bed liner to keep thing pretty between the fender wells. Lastly a hat with the ram head and the word Ram on the front. I'm on the look out for one that has a big "Hemi" on the front. Got 67 miles on her (IT?) Hard to think of anything that massive as a her, maybe Monster Quad is an appropriate name for my new baby. Already bidding on a set of 17" rims on Ebay for the winter tire/rims. Those 275 55r20 Eagle LS tires may look good but I don't imagine they will work well in the snow. My BOB is now a little white CDRom, I do my reading on my laptop now. The laptop will even fit inside the storage area in the Premium seats. Will keep you informed as I get used to my new Quad and find the strengths/weaknesses compared to my little Quad. Rick
    PS How is the weather in Florida? The weather channel showed some monster thunderstorms earlier today.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Rick, your new mount sounds awesome. "Monster Quad" would do it for me. I noticed that you were going to look for 17" rims for winter usage. If the truck is equipped with 20" rims, wouldn't they afford more ground clearance in deeper snow? Does your truck have LSD? How much horsepower does the "baby" generate. Facts Rick, we need facts! The weather here in Punta Gorda (Florida West Coast 26 miles north of Fort Myers) has been hot, sunny humid and interspersed with some showers, but in general very nice. The weather in the Northeast has been horrible. The Jersey Shore has had rain every single weekend, and people are looking for ark blueprints. My younger son, Richie, was rained out of a local car show where he was showing his '62 Austin Healy Sprite. Our new home here in FL is beautiful, but we are staying in a motel as our belongings and other ordered furniture have not as yet arrived. I'm happy that you have chosen to continue on these threads.

    Bookitty
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Member Posts: 552
    Bookitty. Have 202 miles on MQ now. About 60 miles city driving which produced 11.5mpg and the remainder running 55mph on 2 lane blacktop. 1/2 of the blacktop cruising was pulling a empty 1000lb trailer. Overall average mpg after this went up to 13.9mpg. The interesting part was pulling the trailer. When I pulled it with my Dakota Quad I could feel the drag and my MPG took a 1mpg+ hit. With MQ not only could I not tell I was pulling a trailer but the average MPG continued it slight average increase to the final 13.9 figure.

    MQ has 265 55R20 tires which are 31.8 inches in diameter. The 17" tires I intend to put on for winter driving are 265 70R17 which are 31.6 inches in diameter. They are so close the computer won't even know the difference.

    MG has the Hemi which is rated at 345 horsepower. It also came with 3.92 gears and limited slip as a requirement for the installed 20" rims. I would have preferred the 4.7 V8 but I bought from dealer stock. 4 wheel anti-lock brakes were a must for us. The only trucks that had this option had the Hemi engine as it is a mandatory option. None of the dealers in the area order any 4.7 V8 Ram 1500 or Dakota with anti-lock brakes since it is a $495 option. I did find one flaw after delivery. I have a small area of bad paint on the front fender which will be corrected when I return the truck for them to install my body side molding. I'm also considering some stainless steel nerf bars to help my wife climb into the cab. This truck makes a Ford Excursion look normal sized. The overall height to the top of the cab is 75" on my 2wd and the 4wd I looked at was 77". I had to use a small ladder to clean the center of the windshield and I'm 6'2". Well thats enough facts for now. I'll keep you updated as the miles progress.

    As long as you enjoy my rambling I'll keep contributing. Rick
  • mailman54mailman54 Member Posts: 111
    Rick, does the 5.7 Hemi require premium gas to get all that horsepower? Glad somebody finally got the Hemi so we can ask questions about it.

    Mailman
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Now that's a truck!

    Bookitty
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Member Posts: 552
    The paperwork with the 5.7 Hemi says for optimum performance 89 octane is suggested however it will run perfectly fine on 87 octane. The dealer filled my tank as part of the purchase and thats what was put in, 87 octane unleaded. Premium is NOT recommended. Rick
  • datagurudataguru Member Posts: 95
    Rick, I confer with Norm...no goodbyes! I/we and many others have enjoyed your insight, feedbacks, opinions, and widom on this discussion forum for a long time. Please continue on...and Congratulations on the new MQ Hemi Ram and wish you many many years of trouble free miles!

    dataguru
  • mailman54mailman54 Member Posts: 111
    That's good news Rick! That was my only concern with the 5.7 Hemi. I was afraid it would require premium gas and I can't afford that. I'm looking at the Ram 1500 regular cab with the Hemi. There is an article on it in the July/August issue of Truck Trend. They liked it!

    Mailman
  • lotech1lotech1 Member Posts: 112
    I've had my 03 Quad Cab SXT for a month now. 1,100 miles on it and the motor (3.9) is starting to loosen up. I had a Dodge van with a 318 in it and can't help but notice how mopar engines seem to run rougher than other motors. My primary vehicle (GM 3800 v6) is as smooth as can be. Can't hardly tell it's running at idle. On the 3.9 you can't manipulate the throttle to get it to stay at 1,000 rpm (with trans in Park). Seems to like either 600 or 1,500rpm but doesn't like to maintain rpms in between. This isn't a big issue, and I'm entirely satisfied with the truck. Just wondering if the Chrysler motors have a little healthier cam or something? Sure wish the 4 speed auto tranny shifted as well as the electronic 4 speed auto in my Buick. What's Chryslers idea behind no coolant recovery system? Guess I'll have to get used to checking the radiator like I did years ago. I realize that a little coolant jug isn't enough to help much but it's nice to be able to add coolant without opening up the system. The 3.9 has plenty of power for my type of driving. Curious as to why the 3.9 is only rated at 175hp when my Buick 3800 is rated at 200hp? What did Chrysler leave out of this motor? Exhaust system is plenty loud. On the highway I can hear the exhaust even with the CD playing. Yes, I know it's a truck and none of this stuff bothers me. Just a few observations from a new Chrysler owner. The new GM mid size trucks will make for some interesting comparisons this fall. I hope the competition isn't too tough for Chrysler. From what I've experienced so far I would definitely buy another Dakota.
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Member Posts: 552
    331 miles and counting. Filled the tank, held my breath and checked the mileage. Computer indicated average 13.6, calculator indicated 14.3mpg. I can live with that! Filled the tank with gasahol, gasoline with 10% ethanol added for those unfamiliar with the product. Cheaper than unleaded and rated at 89 octane but has less BTUs so usually gives poorer mileage. We will see what this next tank gives.
    The motor is so smooth that if it wasn't for the rumble of the exhaust you might think it wasn't running. The transmission is amazing. I don't recall automatic transmissions being this smooth shifting. Of course my last automatic was a Ford C6 behind a 390ci/325hp V8 in a 1968 Mercury Cougar. So far I am pleased with the Monster Quad but it is not as satisfying to drive as my Dakota Quad with the 4.7 and the 5 speed MANUAL transmission. Driving the Ram is more like driving your living room down the highway, only this is one FAST living room. Rick
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    That 3.9L V6 engine is the 318ci V8 with 2 cylinders lopped off the end. It was designed in the 1960s It is being replaced with what DC calls the 3.7L (which is the 4.7L with 2 cylinders lopped off)

    You would have done well to ask here before buying. We would have told you that the 4.7L V8 has more power and better MPG that the ol' 3.9L V6

    My 4.7L V8 averages about 18MPG and has touched 21MPG on the highway. It sounds like a Porsche and is smooth as glass.

    According to my calculations. Based on the MPG that the the 3.9L and 4.7L provide. Figuring in the cost of fuel and miles driven. The xtra $$ I spent on the 4.7L V8 has allready been made up and it is now paying ME.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Rick, it is good to see that you try automatic transmissions every 35 years or so. Perhaps you can write a column in one of the motor magazines as an automatic transmission expert. Have fun!

    Bookitty
  • ronslakieronslakie Member Posts: 58
    lotec1 - I second everyhting that bpeebles said. I have a 2K CC with a 4.7 and a 5 speed. It is an excellent engine, which includes the latest technology. DC announced sometime back that the 3.9 would be replaced by the 3.7. They didn't have enough 3.7 engines to go around so they chose to put it in the Jeep Liberty and delay puting it in the Dakota. The 3.7 gets 215 HP and from all the reviews I have read it is an excellent engine. I have compared my mileage with friends who have the 3.9 and in all instances I am doing as well as or better than them.

    Ron
  • lotech1lotech1 Member Posts: 112
    Dodge must be trying to pull the wool over customers eyes. They brag on the 3.9 "Magnum" as being a new generation motor. I've seen this statement in some of their brochures. Not susposed to be the original 3.9 in their words. As far as gas mileage goes I'm getting 17 mph in town driving only at speeds less than 40mph. On a 300 mile interstate trip at speeds of 65mph I got 24 mpg on the last tank. One thing that sold me on the Dodge (I'm a GM fanatic) over the GMC & Chevy offerings was the Dakota size and the fact that Dodge must be having a tough time selling Dakota's as the local dealer gave me an extra 2 grand besides the 3 grand factory rebate. I did my homework before negotiating. That new mid size GM truck with the 6 cylinder is susposed to be the death blow to the Dakota. We'll see.

    BTW, the day I picked up my Dakota, one of the young salesman was behind the wheel of a new Dodge Dakota V8 out in the parking lot. Just as I left the showroom he laid a strip of rubber about 20 feet long on the asphalt. That really p/o'ed my salesman. I commented "That's a major reason why I wouldn't have a V8".

    Hopefully this isn't a common event at Dodge dealerships, but who knows.
  • lotech1lotech1 Member Posts: 112
    I've been reading posts on other boards concerning V8 gas mileage and I've yet to see a single V8 that has touched my 3.9 gas mileage figures posted above. My first tank yielded 17 mpg in town driving where top speed was under 40mph (no highway miles). Show me a V8 that has hit 24 mpg on highway/interstate only. My Quad has the 4 speed auto with 3.55 rear.
  • time2littletime2little Member Posts: 3
    Spike50 - I see that you solved your mirror problem, but I'll be hanging on to mine anyway. I've found a couple of options to replace them, but the cost is more than I want to bother with. You couldn't have used the driver's side anyway as I've proven that if you crunch it against that invisible column in the parking garage the heater element doesn't work anymore! My wife is just going to have to get used to looking around 'em when she drives the beast. Guess I can't complain, that's been about my only real gripe with the vehicle - otherwise I LOVE it. Commute during the week and haul all sorts of stuff on the weekend - everything from 4 kids to different sporting events to a couple of yards of mulch; exactly what I needed in a truck!
  • 3rdtime3rdtime Member Posts: 7
    I am waiting for my 2003 Quad that I ordered last month. This will be my 3rd Dakota. Started out in 87 with 2WD with the 3.9 V6. I never got better than 15 mpg even on the highway, most of the time averaged about 14. In 94 I got a Club Cab 4x4 with the 318 V8 mileage improved over the V6 as well as the power, up to 17.5 on the highway. No complaints with the 94, just need more passenger room (Grand Kids). My son is eager for the arrival of the Quad, as he will get the 94 Club Cab. I'm hoping to get better mileage yet from the 4.7, although some of the posts about mileage are not that encouraging I'm optimistic. I'll let you know.
  • lotech1lotech1 Member Posts: 112
    Contrary to the "local" experts on this board, I selected my Quad with the 3.9 because of what I read here and the real time experiences of friends who have owned V8 powered Dakotas (one of them traded within the first year of ownership because of the bad mileage). My needs do not include towing heavy trailers, nor do I live in a mountainous area. Why should I pay a grand more just to say I can suck more gas through the motor? I'm getting better gas mileage than the V8's and I didn't get suckered into paying for a V8. Edmunds wrote this about the V8 Dakota and from my research I tend to agree.

    "Our chief complaint with the Dakota is that the V8 models tend to be very thirsty; it's a struggle to average more than 13 or 14 mpg with those trucks."
  • lotech1lotech1 Member Posts: 112
    Also check out the actual consumer rating comments right here at Edmunds:

    "I recently purchased a 2003 Sport plus 4.7 litre 5speed automatic. I only get 12 miles per gallon. And if this holds up wonder if I should have spent the extra couple thousand for the 1500. The truck for someone who wants almost full size capabilities with ease of parking."
  • lotech1lotech1 Member Posts: 112
    bpeebles wrote:

    "You would have done well to ask here before buying. We would have told you that the 4.7L V8 has more power and better MPG that the ol' 3.9L V6"

    Actually I'm glad I didn't look at these posts prior to buying my Quad. I asked a few simple questions regarding my Quad and I get this kind of response. Man, do you use this board to compensate for buying that V8 or what?
  • 3rdtime3rdtime Member Posts: 7
    Geez, chill out lotech1, I haven't seen anything directed at you that has been out of line. I'm sure everyone is thrilled that you are getting the great mileage with your V6. It just hasn't been everyones experience. If you go back in this board you will see many variances in mileage from both V6 & V8 owners. Just one question, when people say good morning do you punch them in the eye?
  • lotech1lotech1 Member Posts: 112
    Sorry, I'm not upset. Just posted a message for the first time in here and I over reacted to bpeebles. My apology to bpeebles. Guess I'm kinda gloating over getting my Quad at the same price as a Regular cab :-) I knew that Quad had been sitting on the lot for months and the dealer was taking a beating on his floor plan.

    At 6' 6", 280 lbs. people usually don't mess with me (LOL). Haven't had to punch out too many people even though I'm not a morning person.
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    Your MPG with the 3.9LV6 is exemplary (better than most have reported) If those numbers you report remain consistent. You have made a very good choice.

    When I purchased my Dak. The 3.9LV6 was reportedly getting 12-14 MPG on a good day. Perhaps they have improved it over the last couple of years.

    I WANTED a V8 and the Dak was the smallest truck I could get that had one. My second priority was RUST RESISTANCE and the Dodge trucks have the best in the business

    If I want to get good MPG....I take my wifes Jetta TDI. At 52MPG, it is perhaps the least-known vehicle available in the USA. It gets MPG rivaling those so-called "hybreds" while being fun to drive and a very well equipped German road car. It is a treat to travel over 650 miles and put only 12.5 gallons in the tank.

     Mark my words... Diesel power is posed to become very popular due to the fantastic MPG and superior torque it provides. Europe has already 'discovered' the magic of modern diesel engines. (for economy...NOT towingpower)

    If the Dak becomes available with Diesel, (that is coming in the Jeep Liberty soon), we will have Dakotas getting 35 MPG.
  • lotech1lotech1 Member Posts: 112
    "If those numbers you report remain consistent. You have made a very good choice."

    I've probably jinxed myself (LOL). I could definitely get behind a diesel Dakota. I'm really concerned about the GM entrance into the Mid size truck market. GM execs usually have their heads in the sand (where have they been since 87?) but they eventually wake up. I know a guy who works for GM and has driven a Colorado. He says Daimler will soon be grabbing their ankles. I certainly hope he's wrong.
  • lotech1lotech1 Member Posts: 112
    My dealer claims the current 3.9 is not the same as the earlier motor. I questioned this and the service manager backs him up on it. Anyone have specific info on this? I'll report back (good or bad) on my gas mileage.
  • dustykdustyk Member Posts: 2,926
    Well, I think your dealer and the service manager are either uncomfortably ignorant, or intentionally being dishonest.

    The 3.9 that's available today is the same block in magnum form as it was when first introduced. Now, there have been small incremental changes, like cylinder head castings have changed slightly, and camshaft profiles as well. But the basic motor block is the same.

    Regards,
    Dusty
This discussion has been closed.