DODGE DAKOTA QUAD CAB

cv59

I know the Dakota is to be redesigned for 2003. Will there be any noteable changes between the 2001 and 2002 model year?

txqc2000

My dealer tells me the big change will be on the 2003 Quad Cab. It is rumored to look like the Power Wagon concept and/or the Durango equivalent that debutted at one of the car shows. Time will tell.

cbacres1

I stuck some foam weatherstriping in the same spot you are talking about and its seems to work. I'm going to try some double sided tape, like 3M, should be able to get it at a auto body supply.

kingquad1

Thanks for the comeback ole3. as the title asked, why the 4417? per Bosch and my dealer(auto parts), the 4418 is recommended. I noticed you are from the west coast. Is the 4417 hotter or colder and is it better suited for Calf.? thanks

highcountrydak

Hi,

Well after a year of reading these posts I still haven't seen my question answered. So here goes.

I bought my QC last August from a dealer, it had everything I wanted (V-8, 4x4, towing package, the works) and is the best truck I've ever owned. It had everything but one item that has been driving me crazy. I thought I could live with the buckets but I still want the option of the 40/20/40 bench because there are more and more occasions that I want to have five passengers.

Anyway, the local dealers have not been any help. Can any of you offer suggestions? I live in the Denver-Boulder Metro.

Thanks

bluebayou

I have a two month old 2001 SLT QC with the Bench. I wanted the buckets and therefore, i made my dealer give me all of the parts that the center console contains. I have yet to do the swap, but it sure looks like everything will unbolt quite easily.

I have not done the swap yet... and I'm not sure when I'm going to get to it... but...

I spent a lot of time looking at the two seats and it sure looks like my proposed swap is feasable. The Bench uses four brackets (two on each side) that tie into the main (40/) seat structure. If those are removed, I should be able to bold the center console to the floor. I would be very supprised it the anchors were not build into the floor plan, as all options should be modular in their design.

You may want to talk to your dealer and see if he knows of this type of swap, and get the cost of the center (20/) section. All of the parts for the console were approx 200, which i made the dealer throw in deal.

Blue

highcountrydak

thanks bluebayou.

Please post your success when you make the change using the /20 bench components. I called a different dealer after reading your post and just as luck would have it the parts guy at the dealer also owns a quad and knew all about what I have been trying to do. His price for the center bench is appr. $450.

I had talked to three dealers before and they all said both buckets had to be swapped to change the console setup to the 20/bench, I never believed that was the case.

Thanks

kojak3

I know other people out there are having problems with their front brakes squeaking. My "5 star dealer" refuses to even pull the wheels to look at it. Two times in and the standard answer is that dodge uses a metallic pad and there is nothing they can do. I'm tired of my 2001 QC sounding like Fred Sanford jsut pulled up. Who has had any luck getting this fixed and what did you do?

Kojak

mopar67

but I have a LOT to say about the lousy rotors which keep warping on me.

kojak3

Mopar67,
I had a 92 Dakota that I traded in on my 2001 QC. Never really wanted to give up the 92, but baby came along and I needed a real rear seat. Anywho, the 92 had 140k on it when I traded it. I had CONSTANT rotor problems with that truck. (other than the brakes, never had a problem with that truck) I know I put at least 2 new sets of rotors on that truck, maybe three. I had to have them cut about every 15-20k. I found out some of the reasons why they warped all the time was because of the wheels not be being torqued back on when changed ( I rotated my tires like a good schoolboy). I found this out too late.

I had the 2001 in today at another dealer. They pulled the wheels and adjsuted the rear brakes and did some mojo with the front. Of course after they do it and road test--no problems. Yep, on the way home ole Fred Sandford showed up. At least this dealer said if this doesn't work, he'll find a set of non-metallic pads to put on.

Frankly, after paying over 20k for a new truck and STILL having brake problems, it tells me Dodge engineers were the ones that graduated college with a 2.1 GPA. With only 6k on this truck, I'm already ready to trade it on on a Honda Odessey. I'm NOT dealing with brake problems AGAIN. I do like the truck, but I don't have the patience for this brake BS anymore.

Kojak

mopar67

for a while I thought I was the only one with rotor issues! lol
I think Chrysler really slipped in recent years on their brakes..once they had some of the most durable brakes going.
NOt anymore.
Thanks to cheap mexican parts, we have to put up with this. But I suppose a VP somewhere in detroit got a bonus for keeping costs down.
Message to the VP>>>>>>how about loaning me some $$$$ to fix my brakes??!?!?!?!

spike50

Not defending DC because I too believe that a there is always a solution and my '00 rotors are getting worse at 17.7K, but my local mechanic has seen more and more rotor wrap on all vehicles. Right or wrong, he thinks it is due to ABS and more of a designed bias to have the front brakes due more of the stopping. FWIW

davids1

Two things are working against todays rotors. Because todays brake pads don't contain asbestos, they don't dissipate heat as well. This means more heat is transferred into the rotors, therefore making them more susceptible to warpage. Todays metallic brake pads are fairly durable, and generate a ton of heat. I have the original pads on my 96 intrepid and they are only about half worn. The rotors are shot.

It's a trade off. If you want your brake pads to last a long time, you typically have to go the metallic route and live with the heat generated and the warped rotors. If you don't want warped rotors, you can buy non-metallic rotors and replace them every 8000-10000 miles. Your rotors should last longer though.

I don't think it has anything to do with ABS.

davids1

Meant to say non-metallic pads. Non-metallic rotors would suck.

kojak3

Definitely not the ABS doing it--I don't have it. Its just the companies not designing stuff right and pushing it off on the consumer--I thought the 50s were dead. Once the dealer sells you the truck--they don't care. Get mad, junk it, sell it--doesn't matter to them they made their money on you.

Funny thing, when I check the message boards about Hondas, BMWs (all foreign) I don't see brake problems.

My wife's Saturn is a 93 with 150k on it. We've never been jerked around by Saturn and they've always been great with their work.

I'm getting non-metallic pads for the truck and see what happens. If that doesn't do it, later this year the truck will be traded in for a foreign one. Unions are the promoter of mediocrity in this country--that's why we're forced with this junk.

I'm off my box now:-)
Kojak

iowabigguy

It is my understanding that the fault lies with the government and the car owners. The government mandated the removal of asbestos from brake pads. The alternative was semi-metallic and metallic brake pads as substitutes. These did not stop as well with the standard hardness rotors until the pads heated up plus the car owners complained about the squealing when brakes were applied. The only thing to do was to make the rotors out of a softer metal. The pads worked better, the tendency for the pads to squeal was reduced. The flip side was the softer metal wore faster and the heat transfer from the metallic pads was more than in the past. A rapid cool down of a hot rotor causes them to warp (like going through a rain puddle after a aggressive stop). After market rotors wear better because they are harder and usually designed to better dissapate the heat (plus are much more expensive than the factory rotors in my experience). Just my 2 cents worth also. Rick

mopar67

don't blame unions for all that ails us. Ever heard of "rising tide lifts all boats" Were it not for unions, most of the rest of us would be in minimum wage jobs with little or no benefits.
How about money managers whose singular goal is to "maximize profits for shareholders?" OR corportate raiders who take a perverse delight in buying up a company with junk bonds and taking on a boatload of debt in the process? ANd shucking off pieces of the company just to stay alive? Or the souless beancounters who, with one phrase, delete an excellent design and tell engineering to go back and "make it cheaper" OR the plant manager that says "get 'em out the back door I've got a bonus to think about" I know for certain on the last statment 'cause I worked in a factory and was right there in the middle of the "hurry up and build it" mentality.
What about the dozens of VPs making six and seven figure salaries? Imagine how much more money could be devoted to R&D if you could get rid of say 20-30 Vps and use that money to build a better mousetrap.
SOrry to rant but when you rail against unions, you are railing against my father, a proud 31 year veteran of the UAW and a man I am proud of.

wfbarto

I've just studied up a bit on brake pad materials and many of those in the know are going to ceramic material brake pads. I just had some put on my wife's car this AM - a little too early judge the performance - but it is quiet as a mouse right now. We were having the same squeaking and squealing problems that is being described on this board with the standard OEM pads. The ceramic pads supposedly eliminate the noisy brakes and hardly dust at all over your front wheels and tires. The brake and tire shop where I had them put on says that they are putting more and more of them on now that prices are coming down on the pads. They also said that they have had no complaints at all from their customers!

kojak3

Where did you get the ceramic ones from? I heard of them. Called a few places and no one seems to have heard of them. I heard all good things about them.

Kojak

wfbarto

My brake and tire shop got the brakes at the local NAPA distributor. I think it said "ceramix" on the exterior of the box and I believe the guys at the shop said they were made by Raybestos. Front pads for my wife's Toyota Avalon were about $50 and the backs were about $38 or so. Hope this helps!

kojak3

Thanks wfbarto for the info. I'll be purchasing them this week:-)

Kojak

wfbarto

I was wondering if someone would look in their Dakota Owner's Manual and see what the wheel lug nut tightening spec is in ft-lbs.? The reason I ask is that I am getting suspicous that many of the car/truck manufacturers are specifiying too high of a wheel lug nut tightening torque spec for vehicles. I currently have three vehicles - two of them specify 100 ft-lbs. for the lug nuts and the other one 75 ft-lbs. The two with the higher factory spec have both exhibited rotor warpage. The one with the lower torque spec - not a bit after 55,000 miles! One of the vehicles with the 100 ft-lbs. spec I purposefully reduced to 85 ft-lbs. about 15,000 miles ago and so far guess what - no warpage or pulsating brakes! Since it is a well known fact that overtightening the lug nets leads to rotor warpage - perhaps there is a direct correlation here. Overtightening is a common problem when you take your vehicle into the dealer or a tire shop as most of them will simple use the air gun ratchet to put your lugs back on without individually measuring the final torque settings - easy and quick is the way they go! I would be interesting in hearing if anyone else has any knowledge or experience in what I am describing - and I would also be interested to see what the Dakota lug nut tightening spec is. Thanks!

bja4

I rotate my own wheels on my new truck. After 10k miles everything is perfect. No squeaks, or warped rotors. It may be a pain in the A?? to rotate tires yourself, but I have had the misfortune of some young kid at Sears using an air-gun to tighten the lug-nuts on my old Dakota. I almost got stuck with a flat tire, in the middle of no where with a flat tire. Finally a helpful trucker with a three foot cheater bar came along and we broke the last lug-nut off. 5 out of 6 lug-nuts for the rest of the 1500 mile trip. Went to Sears to have a new stud installed and have tires rotated. Sears ended up braking 4 more studs off the front rotors in the process. The studs were off-course back ordered. Basically two weeks without the truck. Then one the way home I lost a hubcap. Thank you Sears ($56 to replace). I said the hell with them and will refuse to take any vehicle there for any reason.

namfflow

The "air gun" (air rachet) used in tire shops is regulated to give a torque suitable for most tires. They are not standard air rachets.

I agree that hand torquing is best but don't think that air rachets are the problem. In fact I believe most are set for around 65 lb/ft of torque which is actually less than some manufacturers specify.

bookitty

Ray, I have never seen anyone in a service or tire shop use an air ratchet to install and/or remove lug nuts. An air ratchet does not provide impact, nor does any I have owned produce sufficient torque to do the job. I have air ratchets in 1/4, 3/8, and 1/2 inch drive. I use them for spark plug removal and replacement, along with light duty fasteners, especially for those difficult to reach places. Air impact wrenches are normally used (1/2" for automobiles) for wheel
installation/removal, and the torque values are adjustable up to the maximum torque provided by the the individual wrench. Usually they are rated for consumption (4-5 CFM @ 90 PSI). I personally own 1/2" impacts that deliver from 220 to a whopping 400 foot pounds. For heavier trucks, 3/4 or 1" drive impact wrenches are recommended.

Bookitty

namfflow

Just a formality with tool names. The point is still valid, most tire shops that use air tools usually have the torque preset to a certain value.

It may not be the correct or perfect value but at least it will usually prevent torquinbg anywhere near as much as if the tool wasn't "pre-set". That's all I was trying to get at.

Of course, especially if alloy wheels are involved, can't beat doing it by hand which is what the more knowledgable shops will do.

davids1

Try to explain torque to Billy-Bob at Bubba's tire shop-n-swap!!! Ask you shop to use a hand wrench to put your lug nuts back on. If they won't do it, go somewhere else!

gtownguy

Hello everyone;
I was interested in my hitch I installed on my Dakota QC. Specifically when you add the receiver hitch bar, ( the part that holds the ball) they come in various drop lengths. Ex. 2 in, 4in. etc. My question is what height should your ball be in relation to the ground. This obviously would dictate what length drop bar to get. Any and all help appreciated.

Thanks,
Tom.

lariat1

You should get the reciever that allows your trailer to be level when attached to your truck. If the hitch is to high your trailer will have all the load on it and it will sway a lot. If the hitch is to low the truck will have to much toungue weight and the trailer will "push" the truck all over the road.

steve234

The hitch ball height always depends on the trailer. When the tongue weight is on the hitch, the trailer frame should be parallel with the ground. If the tongue is too low or too high, the trailer will not pull properly and could be dangerous. If you pull a variety of trailers, they make hitches with adjustable ball heights.

I don't know of anyone that doesn't have a tire horror story. I can still remember going to a tire shop and the guy forgetting to properly set the impact setting. I had only two lugs per tire and was doing 65 mph when it started to shimmy. I lucked out. Even the best shops make mistakes, but the good ones make less.

hairydog

August issue of Consumer Reports rated 5 compact crew-cab pickups.

The Dodge Dakota 4WD 4.7 V8 Quad Cab SLT Plus:

High points: Full-time 4WD, acceleration,comfortable cabin,large cargo bed.

Low points: Brakes,fuel economy(13mpg),reliability;no brake interlock.

"Subpar brakes, poor fuel economy, and below-average reliability count strongly against it".

wfbarto

Just saw this article on another board and thought I would post it here for info:

"NEW CERAMIC-ENHANCED AFTERMARKET BRAKE LININGS

By Larry Carley, Copyright 2000 CarleySoftware.com

Most motorists today won’t settle for anything less than the best when buying
replacement brake pads for their vehicles. They want quality pads that restore
like-new brake performance, are quiet, long lasting, low dusting and provide
safe sure stops. A new generation of ceramic-enhanced brake linings are now
available that are engineered to not only meet the expectations of today’s most
demanding motorists, but to exceed the performance of all earlier nonasbestos
organic and semi-metallic friction materials.

The pads are made of a radically new brake material that uses break-through
technology and a unique blend of ingredients to deliver extremely quiet, long
lasting, low dusting brake performance.

In the early 90’s, some vehicle manufacturers began using ceramic-based disc
brake pads in place of conventional semi-metallic pads to address customer
complaints regarding brake noise, dust and wear. Following the OEM lead,
Raybestos Brakes, a major supplier of aftermarket brake linings, spent three
years developing their own ceramic-based friction material for the aftermarket.
Their new ceramic-enhanced linings are now available in the Raybestos " Quiet
Stop" product line as well as NAPA’s "Ceramix" product line. The new
ceramic-enhanced pads are designed to replace OEM carbon/ceramic disc brake
pads and to upgrade brake performance on vehicles that were not originally
equipped with ceramic-based pads.

HOW CERAMIC-ENHANCED PADS DIFFER FROM ORDINARY PADS
One of the main differences between ceramic-enhanced linings and semi-metallic
linings is that the new pads contain no steel wool or fibers. Steel provides
strength and conducts heat away from rotors, but it also makes pads noisy.
Steel also acts like an abrasive and causes rotor wear. Substituting ceramic
materials and copper fibers for steel allows ceramic-enhanced pads to handle
the high brake temperatures with less heat fade, to recovery quickly, to
experience less wear on both the pads and rotors, and to virtually eliminate
noise. Annoying brake squeal is eliminated because the ceramic-enhanced
compound dampens noise and moves vibrations to a frequency beyond our range of
hearing.

Other features that help make these pads extra quiet include chamfers, slots and
insulator shims. These features are also found on other types of pads, but may
not be used on all applications.

Chamfers are angled or beveled edges on the leading and trailing ends of the pad
that reduce "tip-in" noise when the brakes are first applied. Chamfers also
reduce the surface area of the brakes slightly, which increases the clamping
force applied by the pads against the rotors. This further helps to dampen
sound-producing vibrations.

Slots are grooves cut vertically, diagonally, or horizontally in the pads to
reduce noise by changing the frequency of vibration from an audible level to a
higher, inaudible frequency beyond the range of the human ear. Slots also help
reduce brake fade by providing a passage for gasses and dust to escape at high
brake temperatures.

Insulator shims provide a dampening layer to absorb and dissipate vibrations
before they can cause noise.

DUSTLESS
One of the best features of the new ceramic-enhanced pads is the absence of
dust. All brake pads produce a certain amount of dust as they wear. But the
advanced ingredients in the ceramic-enhanced formula produce a light colored
dust that is much less noticeable—and it doesn’t stick to wheels. Consequently,
alloy wheels stay clean.

LONGER LIFE
The ceramic-enhanced formula also extends brake life compared to conventional
lining materials. Raybestos says their durability testing has shown their pads
outlast competitive pads by a significant margin—with no sacrifice in noise
control, pad life or braking performance. This is quite an improvement over
previous brake materials that have typically sacrificed pad life to reduce
noise, or vice versa. Better yet, the price is only a little higher than most
other premium quality pads......"

biglucy

Hello everyone! I see there's been some lug nut talk out there!

wfbarto - I can answer this one since I just looked it up. Page 22-11 of the Big Teal Book states proper wheel lug nut torque range is 85-115 Ft. Lbs.

bpeebles may ask, "Why did biglucy look something up?" Well, because I just turned 6K and decided to go out and rotate my tires. I had wheel locks installed by the dealer when the truck rolled off the lot and it was the first time to give my wheels a different view of the underside of the truck. So I'm pushing, I'm pulling, I'm using my 240+ lbs of leverage to get the lugs off! I used the standard bar and then switched to my breaker bar and I can't get a single lug to budge!!!

bookitty - you've never seen an air wrench used in a tire shop?

In a fit of rage I eventually broke the lug lock key because it wasn't pushed in square as I was yanking on the breaker bar... had to be like 300+ ft. lbs.!!!!
I took the truck to my dealer and they had such a time getting off one of the lug locks that they damaged one of the wheels!! So I have now acquired from my favorite 5 star dealer, new lug locks with new key, new wheel, and 5 tire rotation (no charge, of course)!

I think an important lesson here besides the obvious problem of overtorquing your nuts is that those keys for the lug locks are CHEESEY and should probably be torqued d-e-l-i-c-a-t-e-l-y by hand, so that If you have a flat you don't run into a similar problem.

bookitty

Bob, what I said was that I have never seen an "air ratchet" wrench used for tire work. I was attempting to differentiate between air ratchets and air impacts. Probably not important.

Bookitty

mopar67

Remember this is the outfit that:
A. Did emergency test of Dodge Omni back in the 70's that involves letting go of the steering wheel in an emergency maneuver and then wonders why the vehicle was "difficult" to control.
B. WIll give two entirely different reliability ratings to two mechanically identical vehicles (Geo Prizm and Toyota Corolla) and (DOdge Spirit 4 and DOdge Spirit v-6, the 4 cyl. rates "better than average" in paint category and the v-6 rates "worse than average" in paint category)
C. Had never really said anything good about Detroit anyway.
D. Said Strohs beer tasted best of all the lagers in a recent issue.
E. Has had, of all people, Ralph Nader on its board.
F. Would have us all driving around in faceless, souless, gun metal gray econoboxes if they had their way.
G. Thinks the government is the answer to what ails us.
H. Said the Toyota Tundra "sets the new standard in pickup trucks" because it sounds, feels, and drives like a Camry. And in its first year on the market, grandly predicted it would have "much better than average reliability".

Which is why I take whatever they say about anything with a grain of salt.

On second thought, make that several grains of salt.

swampcollie

I am in the market for a new truck. One of my finalists is the Dakota Quad Cab with the 4.7 and 5 speed. I hear all types of things regarding Dakota mileage. I am of a conservative age and I drive conservatively. Most miles would be 2 lane blacktop at 60 mph. Would like to hear from you guys that have this setup...or the club cab .. with the 4.7 5 speed.

tuvtest

My 01QC with 4.7/5spd/3.55 rear averages 16-16.5mpg. Most of my driving is rural to suburban commutes with varing speeds and a fair amount of stop and go. Additionly, I have to admit my driving style is not condusive to high milage. I tend to tickle the radiator with my toes more often than I should. The 4.7l is a good choice of engines though. better milage than the v6 and nearly the power of the gas guzzling 5.9l.
Good luck in your choice, and we hope to have you join us in the Owners Groups.

dragonhawk

Swampcollie--

Mine's a 01 QC 4x4, 4.7L, 5-sp, and 3.92 LSD rear.

I've put on about 2700 miles in the 6 wks I've had it, with the following mpg results:

18.3 (1st fillup)
16.7 (2nd fillup)
17.2 (etc)
18.2
18.0
17.3
18.5
17.3
13.6
16.7

The low one (13.6) was during a week that we never left our community, which has a speed limit of 15 mph everywhere (never got out of second gear).

I for one am very happy with this truck; good luck on your choice.

bobs5

Check my profile for the truck setup.

Worst mileage was 14 mpg. Truck was new, some 4x4 use and just had to feel that v8 power, arh arh arh.

Best was 18.5 mpg. Easy on the gas pedal, with mixed driving.

Usually average about 16.5 mpg.

Have not had an all highway run yet.
Only 5000 miles on the truck so far.

Had a bad window regulator (manual windows) from day one which was fixed under warranty.

2 flat tires, a piece of metal and a stone, but thats how it goes I guess.

On one occassion had a slight problem with the engine which has never returned since. Still scratching my head about that one. Either a computer glitch or perhaps moisture got into an electrical connection as it had rained hard the entire weekend while the truck sat in the driveway. This problem did not leave me stranded though.

Overall, I am extremely pleased with the truck.

Good luck with your choice and purchase.
Bob

iowabigguy

I have a 2000 Quad with 4.7L 5 speed, 3.55 rear. My personal best was 21.6 on 2 lane blacktop at a constant 50-55 mph. Usually somewhere between 17.5 and 19.5mpg. Had one tank in the high 14mpg in the dead of winter with warmups. If you really want to get good mileage get the overhead console with the computer. You can see what impact your driving style has on gas consumption. Rick

ritzoid

I've got an 01 QC 4.7/5sp/3.55 with T&H and 7700 miles on the odometer. My normal commute is 20 miles (each way) of two lane No. Va. back roads --average speed approx 55-60. I routinely get 18 mpg. I've only had the truck since March so I can't give you an idea on winter mileage. Good luck with your decision. Steve

bpeebles

My results are very close to iowabigguy. I just returned from a >700 mile trip and averaged 19.5MPG with a peak of nearly 22MPG. (mostly >60 MPH with the REQUIRED 41PSI in the tires... see owners manual)

Some points to consider...
1) The 4.7 L V8 Hemi has very tight tolerances and the MPG will improve over the first 10K miles. (It will run smoother too!)
2) I have over 20K miles on mine and is one of the 1st available in 1999 so it is pretty well broken in.
3) I run Castrol Syntec oil.
4) The "flash" to the PCM to "fix" idle problems changes the ignition timing and has been shown to REDUCE performance and MPG. (I DO NOT have this fix and never plan on it!!) (assume that ALL 2001 models will have this "fix" from the factory)

mopar67

and I have not noticed a drop in performance nor a drop in MPG.
I can hit around 19 mpg on the hiway (3.92 axle and auto trans). IN town I run 13.8 to 15.1 mpg
ANd this is AFTER the fix; in fact when the truck was still under 10K, the mileage was not all that good (around 12-13 in town, 15 hiway).
So your point is?

ahasher

bpeebles, while I agree with your choice to avoid the idle PCM 'fix".. in fact, I almost didn't either because of the reported losses incurred as a result, when my 4.7 seemed like it wanted to stall at stoplights, almost "chug" other times and generally made me frustrated. I felt I had no choice.
As a result, I have a very smooth idle now (still waiting on the winter weather to confirm) I have noticed , where mopar67, you say you haven’t.. it acted exactly like it went thru the learning curve again, and I had a VERY noticeable change in "getting to highway speed acceleration" performance. Once at speed it was fine, but the previous "punch" was less. It has settled down now but as we all know, we can tell when our trucks 'change” and it definitely changed.
However, my mileage seems to have remained almost exactly the same.. but I plan on an accurate monitor shortly to update my records.
Overall, I'm happy I did it.. to me, the 4.7 still has enough power to keep me very happy..
Just my .02 worth

bpeebles

It appears that our fellow Dak owner mopar67 has shown that MPG gets better as miles are put on the rig. His MPG was "not all that good" under 10K miles either.

So... those of you under 10K miles.... keep on drivin!

bpeebles

I understand your frustration with the IDLE problem... This is what I mean by running smoother after 10K miles... the hunting idle got less and less as the engine loosened up.
I still see occasional "hunting" whenever the outside temperture makes a sudden change until the PCM can "relearn" how to idle again.

Using my 'patented' method on quick retraining of my PCM... hunting has not been a big problem.

I wonder....how many miles were on your rig before you broke down and had the idle hunting problem "flashed"?

mopar67

on idle quality. And I know given all the emmision crap that no engine will idle perfectly. However, I expected better performance from a fuel injected vehicle and if I wanted to deal with stalling and such, I would have picked up a used duster with a Slant 6 saddled with a Carter BBS series 1 bbl carb!
I have every gas receipt from day one for gas I purchased (cash, check credit) and I check mileage EACH fillup. So, yes, bpeebles my experience has proven your theorem, the more mileage the better the MPG.
However, before and after the PCM flash (recall mine was flashed not once, or twice, but THREE times)has not negatively impacted my MPG....like I said, its only gotten better as time marched on.

bpeebles

I have all of my fule receips too (starting in November 1999)

Do you use one of the available tracking porgrams for automobiles that graphs the MPG, FUEL COST, MAINTENANCE COST? I also like my computer reminding me when a maintenance item is coming due.... who remembers to lube the door hinges every 6 months?

The auto tracking software is so accruate it actually estimates my usage patterns and is within 50 miles of the proper odemoter reading most of the time.

If so... which program do you use?

ahasher

about 26,000 miles when i took the PCM plunge (thnaks to a long daily commute). It was about 10,000 or so when it started to have the problem in the first place. Odd, but for the first 10,000 or so, it was great. As mopar67 (and yourself)just mentioned, it has it's moments apparently scratching its PCM head trying to figure out what to do if the weather changes quickly.

Sooooo. all things considered, I am right about where I was after the initial break-in. Still happy tho :-) and looking to this weekend (gulf weather patterns permitting) to FINALLY get a new coat of wax on her and rotate the contents of my beer cooler at the same time.

mopar67

is a papermate meduim point black pen, the gas receipt and an TI calculator purchased at walmart One trend I have noticed is my mileage on the local SUNOCO is not quite as good as the mileage from local AMOCO,CITGO, or BP.
Tell me more about the program you use. I am keenly interested.
Ahahser>>>>rotating your beer stock is a good idea. I make it a point to rotate mine at least every three days. Method: in with new beverage, drink the old, discard empty. Repeat as necessary.