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

Dodge Dakota - General Topic

12467…17

Comments

  • Options
    zonkzonk Member Posts: 208
    I was reviewing some of the postings today and reread yours about the jet chip. I test drove another 3.9L QC today while the streets were still wet from rain. Decent but not earthshaking power; I'm still not convinced I need all the power the V-8 affords for what I intend (just know I want more than my current 2.4L Tacoma gives me, but that 4.7L sure is a darn nice engine). Anyway, I was wondering if you could provide a little more info as to how your 3.9L operates now. More zip in getting on interstates and such? Better gas mileage? Does the insertion of the chip void the warranty? As you can see, I am of two minds about this and would like any advice you or the other folks might give.
  • Options
    vmanvman Member Posts: 103
    Advice: If I were able to chose the 4.7 and MTX, that would have been a no brainer. Consequently, I ordered a 4.7 ATX (wife's primary vehicle), but my order was cancelled. We had a baby on the way and I HAD to make a choice. I found the truck I wanted minus the engine and tow package, so we went for it. Not being the primary driver, the engine didn't bother me (kinda glad the wife doesn't have the 4.7 (: ). I needed it to tow a camper occasionally, however, and I installed the hitch and wiring myself. Admittedly, the truck was a little lethargic, but not really a concern. I did the intake/exhaust mods, which made a little difference, but figured a little more oomph coudn't hurt. The JET (stage one) gives a lot more consistent mid-range power, which is where I need it most. It's not terribly fast off the line, but now, once it hits it's power curve, the power is more than adequate. I only wish it were a manual at this point.

    Warranty: They claim it won't void a warranty, but you can't run diagnostics through it. It's simple enough, IMO, to just remove it (5 minute job) prior to getting service or inspection. That way, no one can say anything.

    Mileage: Probably a marginal gain, but that's not an issue for me (us). The truck only goes about 50 miles in an average week, so the mpg is somewhat irrelevant. As stated above, fully loaded and towing, I averaged about 16 mpg on the highway. That's pretty good, IMO. The power was more than adequate (that's with a 3.55 rear, too).

    IMO, the 3.9 is a good motor with a lot of upgradability, it's just built for power, not speed.
  • Options
    bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    The 4.7L V8 is rated to get BETTER MPG than that ol V6.... why have LESS power and pay MORE at the pumps?
  • Options
    vmanvman Member Posts: 103
    Exactly! Given that, there's no real choice to make. Under certain circumstances, though, the 3.9 is still a viable option. Don't think for a minute that I'd have conceded to it if the truck were my daily driver. In my situation, the truck's daily function is the wife's kid/family hauler and isn't on the highway too much. When I do use it, it is more than adequate for my needs. When I HAD to make a decision, the motor was a lower priority. If you have the option, Zonk, get the 4.7.
  • Options
    tuvtesttuvtest Member Posts: 237
    Does anybody have the Dark Slate Factory Floor Mats? I ordered the Mopar Accessory ones and though the pkg. is marked correctly, they look more like last years lighter grey. Do the Factory ones match the carpet?
  • Options
    ohc_babyohc_baby Member Posts: 116
    Yes, the mats match perfectly. If the two-tone bothers you (it would me), take them back. Dodge gave you the wrong part.
  • Options
    lmeyer1lmeyer1 Member Posts: 215
    My dark slate floor mats (from the factory) match exactly.
  • Options
    kwanderikwanderi Member Posts: 33
    I would like add my $.02 here as I had a 97 CC 4x4 with the 3.9 and auto. I added a Gibson 3" single cat-back, a K&N FIPK and the stageII Jet chip. I think it was maybe a bit faster and had more oomph, but mileage was unchanged. The 3.9 NEVER got the MPG that I'm currently getting from the 4.7, so I just don't understand why anyone would opt for the V6 when the V8 beats in all areas. The best I ever got from the V6 was in the 18's and the V8 is currently giving me mid 19's.

    But each to their own..

    Keith
  • Options
    skylerkskylerk Member Posts: 67
    I'm looking for help from other 2001 Dakota owners that got the Power Overhead Convenience group with the Homelink Universal Transceiver.

    I got my new 2001 Quad Cab home last week and used my garage door opener to "teach" my Dakota how to open my garage door. It works, but the range is very poor. With my "real" garage door opener, the door will activate while I'm still 100 feet from my 30 foot driveway so the door is all the way open before I get there. However, my Dakota's built-in transceiver won't activate the door until I'm half way up the driveway and waiting for the door to go up.

    Has anybody else noticed this on their 2001 Dakota? Does anybody have any ideas for increasing the range?

    Skyler
  • Options
    tuvtesttuvtest Member Posts: 237
    For all 2001 owners. I Just ordered the new service manual for the 01 Dak. No more 2000 with ammendments we get our own. For now I guess we can call it the B?B til the color is known.
  • Options
    tuvtesttuvtest Member Posts: 237
    WOW! I just left the Popular Mechanics SEMA Show coverage site. Our buddies at DC Engineering came up a way to finally end the truck horsepower wars. They came up with a kit to drop the Mopar Performance 528cid/ 610 HP Hemi into a 2wd Dak. The response was so overwhelming that the kit will be offered by MP soon. Ford Lightning?... more like a matchstick, Chevy SS... yah, Super Slug. Look out here comes the REAL Dakota R/T.
    I want one!
  • Options
    skylerkskylerk Member Posts: 67
    I got some tips from the Johnson Controls web site at http://homelink.jci.com/ and ended up answering my own question about how to increase the range of the built-in garage door opener in my new Dakota.

    I put a brand new 9v battery in my original garage door opener. While I had it open to replace the battery, I took the whole circuit board out of the plastic case to remove as many barriers as possible between the "teaching" transmitter and the "learning" receiver. Then I reprogrammed it while holding the transmitter as close as possible to the overhead unit in the truck.

    Now the built-in garage door opener works from 150 feet away, just like my original transmitter.

    Skyler
  • Options
    bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Skyler, aren't you the clever resourceful fellow. I am certain that your experience and subsequent remedy will prove helpful to many owners. I have a 2000 that utilizes my independent opener encapsulated within the overhead console. Good report.

    Bookitty
  • Options
    nortx01qcnortx01qc Member Posts: 37
    I too have the weak signal on my home link. There were a few times I had to get clear up to the door before it would open. The only improvement I found was to 'point' the door opener antenna wire straight down. Never even considered the HomeLink would 'learn' the signal.

    Anyway, This is the best place (the Dakota club) to get information from a great group of people that are resourceful, sharing and caring about a great truck!!!

    Thank again - everyone.

    P.S. I think themacguy is out "playing" in the snow.
  • Options
    nschmidnschmid Member Posts: 3
    I am considering purchasing an '01 or '00 quad cab (the hauling will be minimal - I lug stuff around once in a while, but not too often). There is an '01 sport model with a 5-speed, 3.9L, 3.92 rear end, air conditions, am/fm cassette (other than that, it's pretty spartan) on 'special' for $18,495 at a local dealer (that includes the rebate, no doubt). Anyway, I drove the truck, and it drives real nice, ample power, great handling, etc. Is this a good deal? Based on your collective experience, how much might I expect to pay for a 4.7L, 5-speed, with say the power convenience group? (I'm not looking for exact figures here, just a reasonable range)

    (steel45) since you have the 3.9L, 5 speed, I was wondering if you're still happy with your purchase (mileage, performance, etc) and if you have the 3.55 or 3.92 rear end.

    Thanks in advance for your help!
  • Options
    tuvtesttuvtest Member Posts: 237
    The 4.7L is, if I remember correctly, (I don't have my figures in front of me) an $570 option and if you go with an auto $963(?) these are invoice prices not MSRP. The Power Convienence Group is $2200 ish. Again I'm just going from memory here, for more accurate pricing check out Edmund's prices or try KBB.com (kelly blue book) I seem to remember that they had the most accurate prices when I was researching mine. As far as a deal, that $18k doesn't sound bad, but I think most of us agree in the group, that the 4.7L is the best all aroud engine. It gets better milage than the 3.9 alog with the obvious increase in power, plus the design of the 3.9 is basically more than 30 years old and the 4.7 is a new design, able to take advantage of all new technology. Good luck in your search, you will be happy no matter with way you go. the Quad is a great truck.
  • Options
    themacguythemacguy Member Posts: 417
    :-P
  • Options
    bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Hi Jack, glad to see you back even if it was one of those long winded types consisting of ":-P".
    Unless this was a coded answer for nortx01qc, you fooled me. Actually, great to see you back, missed you.

    Bookitty
  • Options
    mulderigmulderig Member Posts: 31
    I came across an Dodge ad in the Newark Post, Delaware paper today. It said, "Attention DaimlerChrysler employees and retirees! Now you can help your friends purchase or lease a vehicle for less than factory invoice - 2% less. Just provide them with a Friends Program Certificate!"
  • Options
    deriskderisk Member Posts: 5
    Have any of you experienced the milky emulsion/oil residue on the inside of the oil filler tube on the 4.7L engine? Mine just started appearing when the weather got cold, between the 5000 and 8500 mile oil change. Apparently, there is a TSB on this phenomena, that it is "normal".

    Interested to see your postings on this. Thanks.
  • Options
    tuvtesttuvtest Member Posts: 237
    yes, this is a common orrurance in these engines. My guess is you have a 2000. there is a TSB to correct this problem, and supposedly it was corrected for the 2001. What happens is cold outside air is causing condensation in the filler neck witch mixes with the oil and causes the "goo". I belive the TSB changes the filler cap and adds a rubber/plastic filler flap an the passenger side of the radiator to block airflow. Hope this helps.
  • Options
    pomycpomyc Member Posts: 28
    I have the a 2000 Dakota with 4.7/4x4/auto/lsd. I know that the defrost system uses the air conditioning compressor to dry out the air. However, I was under the impression that the compressor would not kick on if the ambient air temperature dropped below a specific temperature. I really used the defrost extensively this weekend while pheasant hunting in a Kansas blizzard. The compressor seemed to be running all the time with temps easily in the single digits. Can anyone set me straight? I'd sure appreciate it.
  • Options
    bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    (derisk) Although DC did claim that this oil/water/acid emulsion was "normal", it must be understood that there is a followon TSB to correct this "normal" problem.
    (READ... NORMAL DOES NOT MEAN HARMLESS!!)

    Here is the original TSB about the emulsion.

    The "FIX" for this comprises of 2 new parts.
    BAFFLE=PN 53032126AA
    CAP= PN53032389AC

    I waited 4 months for the cap, several weeks for the baffle.

    I was one VERY FIRST person to mention this emulsion last year here in edmunds.I have both of these new items and can attest that they do improve the situation.

    Additionally, the use of any non-dino oil will also help significantly. Stay away from oils with sulfer-based additives. Sulfuic acid will eat the metal surfaces within your engine.

    This is getting long....Please follup in the DAKOTA MAINTAINANCE forum for detailed info.
  • Options
    bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    (pomyc) Yup... in theory you are correct.
    Please follup in DAKOTA MAINTAINCE forum.
  • Options
    bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    It appears that the "C" in DC is heading into rough times.

    http://www.detnews.com/2000/autos/0011/13/a01-148221.htm
  • Options
    bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Bruce, following the article in the Detroit News about 10 days ago, it certainly appears that there
    will be some changes made in corporate structuring. Mr. Schrempp (no relation to Schemp of the Three Stooges) was embarrassed by the American group at D/C and that is considered an "unforgivable" in corporate life. Especially, in public owned companies. Thanks for keeping us "up to speed" as regards D/C.

    Bookitty
  • Options
    tuvtesttuvtest Member Posts: 237
    Are you sure there's no relation, cuz this guy could be the fourth. Maybe I'm just biased, I don't know
  • Options
    bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Harold, I'm pretty certain, because this guy is definitely not funny.

    Bookitty
  • Options
    deriskderisk Member Posts: 5
    Thanks to bpeebles on the TSB regarding the goo in the oil tube. Because of your helpful information, I had the dealer order the parts to do the fix.

    Dave Eaton
    deaton@bandag.com
  • Options
    zonkzonk Member Posts: 208
    But he's still an idiot! Just not funny. Almost as bad as the dopes that sold an American (icon is probably not the right word, but you know what I mean)institution to an off shore owner.
  • Options
    xena1axena1a Member Posts: 286
    I was dismayed to hear of the problems Chrysler is having. Sales are down and inventories are up, but does anyone else take issue with the statement about an "Aging Light Truck Lineup"? The Durango and Dakota look just as aggressive and fresh now as they did when they were first introduced. Add to that the improved engine choices (4.7 now, and possibly the 3.7 and 5.7 in the near future), and I don't think I would refer to these platforms as "aging." I think the Jeep Grand Cherokee also fits into this description. The venerable Cherokee is looking a bit long in the tooth, but that is part of it's appeal. It can be argued that it truly is an icon. However it will be receiving a restyle and new engine choices in the next year or two. The Ram 1/2 ton is due for some engine upgrades but is still considered a unique looking truck, perhaps the best looking of the 1/2 tons, depending on your opinion. So, I guess I'm wondering why this lineup is not selling better than it is. But to blame it on "aging" I feel is a bit inaccurate...
  • Options
    andy_jordanandy_jordan Member Posts: 764
    Well, they are aging, whether they look it or not. Chrysler have always made bold styling statements, whether it be Ram, Prowler, Viper or PT Cruiser. The problem with the Ram line up right now is that the other automakers have caught up - Dodge will be addressing this with the new Rams that are due next year - don't expect major styling chages (as xena1a says, they still look good), but major changes under the skin.

    The heavy duties will be available about a year later, and all indications are that they will be different - an attempt to differentiate the line. All indications are that the heavy duties will be similar to the Power Wagon concept. They will probably also have new diesel powerplants, probably not Cummins. The noticeable absence of a heavy duty crew cab will also be addressed (the absence of one now is the one reason they will be losing my business soon).

    The Cherokee is going to be completely overhauled for the first time in 15 years, and will look like a stretched Wrangler rather than a kid's drawing of an SUV - box on wheels. People will have to make their own minds up whether this is a good thing, but it will undoubtedly help sales.
  • Options
    steel45steel45 Member Posts: 21
    nschmid!
    sorry I haven't responded sooner, doing a lot of traveling for work.
    I am very happy with the 3.9 5 speed. I tow a 14' aluminum boat, using a bumper hitch, and I haven't had any problems.
    Can't help you on the price,I'm fortunate that my company furnishes me with this vehicle.
    I probably would have opted for the v-8 except that the company would not spring for the extra bucks. Again, I am quite happy with the 3.9 since my hotrodding days are gone.
    I also drive a 1945 GMC pickup, talk about no power.
    Good Luck!
  • Options
    zonkzonk Member Posts: 208
    Well, the Germans did it, fired Holden and put a German in charge of Chrysler. I forget the guy's name, but he made his rep in the high end car sales area where almost no incentives had to be offered. Apparently, that was what led to Holden's downfall - corporate/societal differences in understanding the US market and the need to offer incentives to stay competitive. So much for the merger of equals story. The changes, they are a-coming.
  • Options
    wetwilliewetwillie Member Posts: 129
    Zeig Heil!
  • Options
    gravengraven Member Posts: 2
    I have a '99 Club Cab with the 5.2L V8. It runs great with one exception. When on the highway between 65 and about 72 MPH it sounds like the engine is winding out (RPM is still low). Sometimes it sounds like it will blow up. It is much more noticeable in cold weather, but goes away below 65 and above about 72. Along with it there is a great deal of vibration in the gas pedal. It almost feels as if it has problems disengaging from overdrive. Has anyone else experienced this with the 318 engine?
  • Options
    nortx01qcnortx01qc Member Posts: 37
    I had a case like this in a Ford one time and it turned out to be the fan clutch went out.

    Just my guess but peebles will jump in here soon and give a better diag. He is great to have around.
  • Options
    gravengraven Member Posts: 2
    Thanks nortx01qc. I hope you're out there peebles because I may lose it pretty soon if the
    dealer finds nothing wrong again.
  • Options
    waynesanwaynesan Member Posts: 24
    Just 234 miles on my 2001 4x4 and I noticed the rear wheelflare is pulling apart from the body leaving a 1/8" gap. It looks as though the wheelflare is attached with a two sided adhesive tape. I've pressed the wheelflare onto the body and it sticks together for awhile and then separates again. Has anyone else experienced this problem? Any ideas on how to repair it? Thanks.
  • Options
    bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Wayne, that's easy. Take it back to the dealer and tell them that you want it fixed properly. If you play with it and it fails "down the road" it's on you. If the dealer repairs it and it fails it's on him. It may not be convenient to take it in, but 234 miles is ridiculous. You may have a wheelflare that does not fit (warped) and it will continue to separate. Let it be the dealer's problem.

    Bookitty
  • Options
    bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    (graven) Given the limited amount of info, I have to agree with nortx01qc on this. The radiator fan sounds like a roaring or over-reving engine.

    Do not forget that DC must have realized there was some concerns with the noise of old-style engine fan because starting in 2000, there was a different design touted to make less noise.The new design still sounds like a ROAR when the engine is cold but dis-engauges at higher RPMs.

    Perhaps you can further isolate the noise by gently reving the engine in neutral. Can it be reporduced?

    However, if the problem is NOT the radiator fan, I cannot give you any further diagnosis with the given symptoms.
  • Options
    nschmidnschmid Member Posts: 3
    Dan,

    thanks for your response. I too felt the 3.9 had adequate power for what I need. I do a lot of city driving and was thinking the gas mileage might be a bit better than with the 4.7. Do you keep records of your mileage? If so, roughly what do you get? You can e-mail me directly at nschmid@esscor.com if you want.

    Thanks,

    Nick
  • Options
    iowabigguyiowabigguy Member Posts: 552
    2K Quad 4.7l 5spd 3.55 lsd 6,780 miles. Worse tank 16.3 best 20.7, average in low 18s. Now that cold weather here and extended warmups last tank 17.1 and current tank looking like it will be in mid 16s (morning temps in mid 20F. Truck driven generally gently and most starts in 2nd gear. Rick
  • Options
    skylerkskylerk Member Posts: 67
    Wayne, I ordered the wheel flares from Dodge for my 2001 Quad Cab 4x2 and installed them myself because Dodge doesn't offer them as a factory-option on a 4x2. The seven screws on the underside are installed first and at that point in time the top edge of the flares are firmly compressed against the side of the truck body. The last step is to pull off the backing on the double-sided adhesive, but it's tricky because the flare is pressed so tight against the body. I had to use a putty knife to gently separate the body and flare a fraction of an inch so I could get the adhesive backing out.

    My point is that when your flares are properly installed, the tape joint should be under compression, not tension. If your flares are pulling away from the body, something is out-of-wack with their installation or their original shape. Like bookitty recommended, I would take it back to your dealer and make them repair it.

    Skyler
  • Options
    bobsyveebobsyvee Member Posts: 63
    I'm wondering if after pressing the flares up against the body, that loosening all of the screws then re-tightening them will remove the tension.

    Jim H
  • Options
    myersedmyersed Member Posts: 102
    Like bobysyvee recommends- I installed mine in 35 degree weather and found that I could not get them perfect. Later in the spring, I loosened up the screws and found that I could easily put side pressure on the flare and tighten them down to the fender.
    An observation that I have had however is that the Dakota/Durango flares do not fit extremely tight against the fender like other manufacturers. Bottom Line, the readjustment is simple and worth taking the time to try.
  • Options
    waynesanwaynesan Member Posts: 24
    Thank you all for your suggestions and comments. I did take it to the dealer and they replaced it for free. The service adviser said alot of wheelflares separate, but not usually as soon as mine did. The mechanic said the factory installer probably did not clean the adhesion surface well enough before applying the tape. For future reference -after warranty- the installation trick is to pull loose little end tabs of the adhesive tape which rest atop the wheelflare as you screw it into place, but not fully tightened. When in position, pull each end tab upward simultaneously to remove the backing tape, then press flare to body and fully tighten screws below.
  • Options
    zonkzonk Member Posts: 208
    The "Germanization" continues!
  • Options
    tuvtesttuvtest Member Posts: 237
    If anybody else has read the Feb.2001 issue of Mopar Action magazine with the article covering Chrysler's involvement in WW2, this whole "Germanization" (good term, zonk)is just oozing with Irony.
    Did anybody else let out a few nasty words after opening the letter regarding the "recall" on our vehicles before reading the fine print that it's just a owner's manual mistake? I know I let loose a string.
  • Options
    chat_managerchat_manager Member Posts: 14
    I am posting to see if you all are interested in having a Dodge Dakota Owners Chat! Maybe a weekly chat where you could all get together in "real time" and talk to one another. Maybe one or a couple of you would volunteer to host?
    If you didn't want to do that, we could always moderate the chat too.

    Let me know what ya'll think. Post me some ideas of if you want to have one, and what days/times would work for you.

    Thanks! Look forward to your feedback.

    Dana S. Livingston
    Chat Manager
    Town Hall
    Edmunds.com
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles