Dodge Durango
This topic is a continuation of TOPIC 1823....
The Dodge Durango Topic - III. Please continue
these discussions here. Thanks!
Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
The Dodge Durango Topic - III. Please continue
these discussions here. Thanks!
Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Thanks!
Jeff
correct. It should be Topic 1887, not 1823 as it
is now. Can this be corrected?
Thanks,
Drachir
So what did I buy her? A loaded 2001 Nissan Pathfinder LE 4 x 2, leather, sunroof, 6 CD Bose, memory seats, the works. It's got the exquisitely smooth 3.5L 24V 240 HP variable valve timing V-6 derived from the Maxima, (with steel timing chain, incidentally), not those archaic and thirsty pushrod Dodge engines that were born in the 60's and 70's (maybe excepting the 4.7). Yeah, the Pathfinder is a bit smaller, but you know what? 85 cu ft cargo vs. 88 on the Durango. Not a big deal. The Pathfinder is very quiet at cruise. The Durango rides like a noisy log wagon in comparison and it has the usual fall-apart Chrysler interior bits.
I'm a retired USAF test pilot, a practicing airline aero engineer and an FAA licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic. To me, Daimler-Chrysler and Dodge in my particular case, either haven't gotten the word or just don't care about the customer. They need to wake up to the reliability issues plaguing their vehicles. The need to learn that the man with the bucks in his grimy hand is King!
From the previous post, however, I don't know if I'm seeing a light at the end of the tunnel or an oncoming train !
What Dealer are you going through, I live in So. Cal. and still havent heard a word. I did advise carorder.com that the rebates are coming and they said if they announce them I will get them.
very cool since its there fault that they pushed my delivery time back two weeks and i would have already signed the deal if they were on time
Scott Q
mquarantaca@earthlink.net
About the gas mileage. With the 4.7L and the 3.9 gearing, the best I've gotten is 15.4 and the worst is 11.7 mpg. The real problem is my inability to stay out of the Magnum V8. If you don't want the taller gearing for towing, stay with the 3.55's. BTW, you probably know you can't get the 5.2L in any of the 4WD setups.
At 7K I am getting about 13.9 MPG City and 16.4 HW. This is distance/gallons, not from the computer. No problems at all with the D. Oh, I have the 5.9 with FT and 3.92 LSD. I run synthetics in the drivetrain except fot the tranny, which I will convert soon.
It has been very good so far and love the power.
Regards
I wouldn't brag about Nissan's quality, if they were so good, why were they on verge of bankruptcy?
Regards
Sorry to hear of your distress with the Dak. You are definitely the exception, as the Dak has proven to be a solid truck that just keeps getting better over the years. The loyalty of Dak owners is very strong because of the reliability and performance as proven by groups such as the Dakota Mailing List and the R/T group. This loyalty was a key reason why I choose a Durango.
I hope you enjoy your Nissan. I ruled the PF out immediately in my decision because I had commuted to work (100 miles daily) with a buddy in his '96 PF for about a year. Although I found the truck to be reliable with little mechanical failure, the ride was comparable to a VW micro-bus with the wind pushing the truck all over the road. I also felt that my proximity to the door and windshield was very tight, and did not convey a feeling of safety. I also felt this with the Isuzu Trooper. Additionally, this close proximity had the detrimental effect of the sun (which was always on my side) beating down on me constantly.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that OHC, multi-valve, variable-timing engines are so superior to pushrods. With 2.4 litres less in size, the PF is only getting 2 mpg better than a 5.9 Durango. You'll make that up on your first repair bill out of warranty. You've got a high-reving, cushy, grocery getter, and if that's what you wanted, then you're all set. I wanted low-end stump pulling power for a truck that's gonna work hard and not sit in the mall parking lot. Hopefully, we both got what we wanted.
my question is why its not working in my new durango; are any others having problems with it not working ? i'm begining to think that tinting in the rear windshield dims the lights behind you so mauch that the automatic mirror sensor is not picking up the bright light. if this is the case then maybe the automatic rear view mirror was a waste.
My father is an executive with DC. He and my mother used to each get a new lease car every year and now get one every two years (the program rules changed). I also was able to participate in this employee lease program for a while (when I lived with them many years ago). As a result, I have had experience with many Chrysler products. My personal opinion is that Chrysler's quality these days is generally very good. Some vehicles have been worse than others in terms of annoyances (1998 Town and Country minivan just wouldn't stop squeaking in the rear end). And some have even had major mechanical problems (one car had a ticking in the engine that just wouldn't go away no matter what). But these were certainly the exceptions. There will always be people who have bad experiences in any consumer product.
You certainly are justified in not buying a DC product - if I were in your shoes I would hesitate also. But I just bought a 2000 Durango 5.9L that has 7000 miles on it and is solid as a rock. Next year I'll be getting a Chrysler LHS (or maybe I'll wait a couple years until the new hemi 300 is released!). You can disagree, but the styling of DC products is the best of any manufacturer in its price range. Japanese cars all look the same and Ford and GM are just plain ugly, in my opinion.
I'm happy with my purchase and am glad you are too.
Scott Q
trade in real soon for a 2000 Durango. We got the
PF a year ago and have loved it, but when it comes
to towing power, it just does not have it! We have
a 19' Travel Trailer that weighs 3600#, and we
can't get over 45-50mph on small hills with the PF. We are taking the trailer on short trip this
weekend, with the PF, and some real good hills,
6% grade over 3 miles long, we'll see how badly
it does. Nissan makes a real quality and safe
SUV, but even the new engine is not good for
raw towing power, not near enough torque!
We are thinking about the DD w/ 4.7 V-8 & 3.92
rear end gearing, in and SLT 4x4 DD. Can anyone
give me some advise on towing with that engine
and gear ratio. I don't really want to pay the
price at the pump and have to go with the 5.9
and 3.92 rear end. If I have to I will, I need
to tow this trailer with relative ease.
My rebate was applied after the taxes. The pre-printed sales contract has a line for it in the down-payment section after all fees are applied.
Captain13, I am obviously happy to get the rebate, but as I told my wife, I am just as happy that someone else out there in Cyberland could benefit too. That was the reason to post in the first place and the reason to follow up with more info. Good luck with your purchase.
This seems to be the concensus.
I am getting about 13.9 City, over 16 Highway. You dont buy these things for mileage. Note I have friends with Blazers 4.3's, GC with 5.2's and 4.0's, and Explorers with V6's. None brag too much about mileage, usually 12-15 City and maybe 16-20MPG highway. SO I dont feel bad knowing I have gobs of tourque, more pulling power and third seat plus a "proven" drivetrain that has been around for years.
Best advice would be to use synthetics in all your drive train to improve mileage.
As far has performance/gas mileage topics go... I have a coworker that uses a product called "Tornado" in the air intake of his Jeep. It's a fan like device made of sheet metal that creates a vortex in your air intake to enhance oxygen distribution to all cylinders. He says it gives him a 1-2 mpg increase as well as off the line torque. It might be something to research.
Thanks for your time.
Jeff
In 4X4 you have a lot of losses in the drivetrain due to two differntials, Transfer case etc. I use Amsoil synhtetics in mine. I changed the front and rear diffs with their 75W-90 Gear Lube, added the Mopar Posi add for the LSD in the rear. My D takes ATF in the Tranfer case and ATF+4 7176 in the transmission. I have to do the transmission next. I also use their 0W-30 in the engine along with their Super Duty spin on oil filter and a drop in oil wetted foam 2 -stage air filter. This is a life time washable filter, good deal, work great. I have used the AMsoil in all my vehichle for the past 15 years and keep accurate mileage figures. On some used cars I have bought, I changed them over and found bout 3% better mileage in FWD. I dont really know on the D since some of the mileage increase could be due to break in. I would expect better MPG just due to the syns better flow in cold weather, less drag = better fuel economy.
As far as your tornadoe device, I dont know but would be skeptical. I have seen mods to raise the "hat" on the plumbing from the air box to throttle body, but 1-2 MPG sounds high to me. I guess it depends what it costs. I just use my standard air box with the drop in oil wetted foam element.
My personal opinion on the Tornado is that it is a scam. To produce optimal volumetric efficiency in an engine, the intake air must be as "straight" as possible. Creating turbulance in the air produces a negative effect to air streaming and would therefore hinder the movement of air into the combustion chamber by disrupting flow. A reduction in volumetric efficiency translates into a reduction in performance, and ultimately a reduction in MPG.
The auto makers are constantly fighting against better MPG regulations. Don't you think that if something this cheap and simple actually produced better MPG, they would all be using it?
If you want better mileage, keep your vehicle well tuned, keep the proper air in the tires, and go light on the pedal. For more perfomance, straighten out and open up your intake and exhaust.
the "durango" link, then the "incentives" link,
you will see the new rebate up there. Woohoo.
From their site..
==========================
Current national consumer incentives:
U.S. cash allowance of $1,000 on 2000 Durango models available through 7/5/00.
would be a good choice for both towing, and somewhat better mpg than the 5.9 V-8 and 3.92
rear end gears. I think that is what I will end
up going with, if I can find one here in Oregon.
I searched 3 dealers over last weekend and not 1
to be found in over 50 DD's on their lots. A lot
of 5.9's & 3.92. Most 4.7's have 3.55 gears, and
SLT Plus and all the gooey options. I just want
a plain Jane SLT, no leather, big tires, and wife
and son want the rear air, Oh Well!
My brother in Law recently had one of his dodge
vehicles in for service and they gave him
a brand new Durango as a loaner, just 8 miles on
the ODO. I like the styling, its roomy I'm 5 10 and fit in every seat, nice sound system, and lots of amenity's
Power great power
I was concerned however when I took a peek under the hood and found Oil dark dirty oil seeping from around the valvehead cover-nuts. Is there any issue of this with other durango's ?
If so, Can the information be shared to direct me Where to look ?
Any help is appreciated !
Question is, dose this apply to 4x4 also or only 4x2
I called dodge and they said its a regional rebate and they have no info other than the std. $1000 rebate
http://www.erie-insurance.com/carguide/2000cars2.html#Eight tough standards
and include good records for death, injury, repair, and safety features as well as laboratory test results.
Durango is shown on their "preferred" list at:
http://www.erie-insurance.com/carguide/2000cars.html#Mid-range sport utility vehicles
This information may be useful to those concerned about Durango's safety based only on laboratory crash test results.
You didn't mention what engine was in the Durango you looked at, but I have the 5.9 and replaced my valve covers with Mopar performance aluminum covers. When I did, I noticed that the stock gaskets are very good quality with reinforced rubber, and are not prone to leaking. Sounds like it might be a quality control lapse and someone forgot to torque them down properly.
others,
For info on A/C, sunroofs, etc., you might want to try the Durango Owners Forum. There is a good FAQ page on all things Durango, and lots of owners to query:
http://www.durangoclub.com/ceilidh/ceilidh.html
this number was more like 1500. With the Durango, I plan to tow a 3500lb. boat in mountainous areas, and wonder what others know about breaking in the new engine. Any suggestions?
thanks.
should be able to "DODGE" most of them!!!
jimmyjam
Has anyone heard of this? Does he benefit?
Thanks
and $500 dollars on lease's w a 5.9 motor.
I did call a local dodge dealer and the fleet mgr did not want to tell me that there is a rebate. I was inquiring on a R/T and he said there is no rebate on that vehicle fore sure.....
WRONG ......another scam
A Durango with the full time 4WD should be as trouble free as one with part time.I was going to buy one,but it was just a LITTLE too small.So I ended up with a full size 4Dr truck.With a bed lid,it's as useful as a Full size SUV,for thousands less!
The milage penalty with the higher gears would only be maybe a mile per gallon,and the Durango would be peppier in all conditions.
Fboykin: I suggest you go to the Durango Owners' Club forum (http://www.durangoclub.com/ceilidh/ceilidh.html)and ask your question. Someone there will be able to tell you specifically what your limitations are going to be.
(http://www.durangoclub.com/ceilidh/ceilidh.html)
The 4.7 is billed as a next generation engine in the brochure. What is new about it? Is there a reliability advantage with either engine?
Thanks