Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
2000 Dakota Quad Cab -Cross Country Trip
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
One question for anyone who might know. You have the option of getting full-time 4-wheel drive system. Now does that still give you the option of going two wheel when wanted, or are you stuck in 4 all the time. After reading the brochure, it looks almost like you have 4 options with the transfer case.
Neutral (2 wheel drive)
4 high
4 Low
and Full time 4-wheel.
Does that sound accurate?
Allen
The Neutral is just that... (neither driveshaft driven)
The pros/cons of the full-time-xfer-case has been discussed in the past in another forum.
Basically it costs more and offers LESS traction/control in the snow and costs more in fuel due to 4WD parts ALWAYS in motion. It is truly a poor choice for the informed individual(Technical discussion previously available)
Refer to the Dakota review at allpar.com. They recommend the full time case over part time 4 wheel drive. Also, Consumer Reports truck issue (or some other similar quality magazine - I was reading it in Barnes & Noble at the time) noted that full time transfer cases have advantages over part time cases, with the caveat about locking the case in really slippery situation.
I suggest you talk to people in your area with a Jeep Select-Trac transfer case and ask them about their experiences in full time (not locked) four wheel drive. Unfortunately, you won't have the 2wd option on the Dak, but the full time 4wd should work the same as the full time selection in the Select Trac, at least from what I've been told.
I have it ordered and I'm keeping it. Just 'uninformed' I guess.
As usual, we do not recommend getting part-time four wheel drive unless you absolutely need it. It makes the truck much heavier, adds to the price, and has little use most of the time, unless you
happen to live in very snowy areas. The optional NV242 full-time transfer case provides
all-condition, full-time four wheel drive, but is not available with the V6. This system does not penalize fuel efficiency as much, is
more convenient, and it lets drivers use the system on dry or moderately slippery roads as well as very slippery surfaces.
The part time makes the truck much heavier? It adds to the cost? From reading this article.. it seems that the full time system is the way to go. Any comments?
http://www.cs.fredonia.edu/~stei0302/WWW/DAKOTA/ARCHIVES/9907/1215.html
What's really weird is that, from what I've found at various sites on the 'net, the NV242 is the Jeep Select-Trac transfer case with 2wd, full time 4wd, part time 4wd, and 4wd lo. This case was also included on the Durango per some '98 reviews I found. I wonder why the NV242HD listed in the Dak sales brochure is different. Or is the picture in the brochure showing no 2wd selection wrong?? Can someone explain...
I assume you are referring to the following URLs.
http://www.allpar.com/eek/k/SUVs.html
http://www.allpar.com/reviews/dakota.html
http://www.allpar.com/model/cj/power.html
You are mis reading what was written. When it speaks of the Full-time 4WD making the truck MUCH heavier it is obviously comparing it against a 2WD. The difference in weight between
the two xfer cases is less than 50 lbs with the NV242 being the HEAVER of the two.
Additionally, the NV242 is the one that costs MORE than the NV231.
Sure the NV242 xfer case is more convenient ... but do not expect it to work like a real 4WD.
Using your own argument of weight/cost...A 2WD with trac-lock rear end would be a better choice if one does not need 4WD. Plus it makes the truck MUCH lighter than the NV242. If you do not drive on snow or mud...what woud you need 4WD for anyway? and... if you need 4WD then the NV231 (PART TIME) is superior.
For those of us that actually NEED a 4WD, the NV231 provides MUCH better traction and does not constantly spin the front driveshaft. It goes in/out of 4wd with the flick of the wrist at any time. plus, the front tires will not wear out extremely fast as on the NV242 xfer case.
ANYONE that has owned a full-time 4WD based on a simple open differential in the xfer case will attest to the excessive front tire wear.
(Dakota NV242 -vs- Jeep Selec-trac)
This reminds me of a multi-car accident that occurred during a snowstorm recently. The out-of-stater that had caused the accident by sliding into another lane was interviewed and said something like... "It must be my full-time 4WD was not working" ... This man actually thinks that 4WD allows him to drive at any speed he wishes!
They will allow anyone to drive a 4WD ;-)
As far as I am concerned full time 4wd is a waste of money in a modern vehicle. The effort required to shift to 4wd is minimal in the modern vehicle where shift-on-the-fly is the norm. It is literally no more effort than changing gear, but without the need to declutch. Full time costs more in initial cost, running costs (less fuel efficient) and maintenance costs.
It has a marginal benefit over a vehicle in two wheel drive mode in some situations. In my opinion all of these situations are ones where the intelligent, safety conscious driver will already have shifted into 4wd (lock). Examples are bridges and ramps in marginal weather conditions. Full time 4wd tends to encourage people to think that they have full 4wd capabilities, and we all know that many people think they are immune to the road conditions in 4wd.
I don't care what dealer employees say, the centre differential in a full time system is open unless it is locked via the transfer case. Now someone tell me what advantage an open 4wd system has over a locked one in marginal (or bad) conditions, or what benefit 4wd offers on warm dry pavement and I will buy the hype. Until then - it is your money, but in my opinion it would be far better invested in a part time system with limited slip - spend the rest on something else.
robert
p.s. thanks for all that typing andy, makes less typing for me hahaha
Oh well, you can do it next time.
To quote Andy Jordan;
"Full time costs more
in initial cost, running costs (less fuel
efficient) and maintenance costs."
Adding my own summary;The FRONT tires will be the first to slip and you loose steering control too!!
Thanks again
Also does anybody know if there will be any changes made to the 2001 model year? It would be nice to see the third door option on the club cab.
wish me luck everyone,
robert
Thanks
Carl
That said many people feel that the tolerances on modern engines are such that there would be no problem, often quoting Corvettes as an example - they are shipped with Mobil 1 in them.
My personal view, and the course I have taken, is to switch to synthetic at the first oil change (regular maintenance schedule) or second oil change (accelerated maintenance schedule). This way the engine is fully run in and you have minimized the likelihood of anything going wrong.
First I must say that I bought the full time system with my wife in mind. She had problems with our 93 Ranger 4x4 and it's part time system in 'marginal' road conditions. Eventually I found that she was leaving the truck in locked 4x4 all the time in the winter, which really eats up the tires and causes wear on the system.
Our 97 Expedition had an 'all wheel drive' setting which she could leave on all the time and worked well on the patchy snow--dry--ice conditions we see in the North.
As for experiences with the new Quad, so far it has worked very well in dry and snow conditions. Once the snow gets as deep as the axles, you better be in 'locked' 4x4. If not, the tire with the least amount of traction will just spin. But, when going from dry to snow to dry again, the full time system works great. There is no 'fish tailing' or loss of control on an snowy curve in the road.
As for the extra cost and weight arguments, I agree that this system is not as 'cost effective' as the part time unit for those who want a 4x4. If I still lived in the South and only used 4x4 for back roads and sandy beaches, I would have gone with the part time unit.
For mileage, I've seen 15.5 mpg overall in 1500 miles of mixed driving. My latest (dry) road trip of 450 miles saw 17.3 mpg while averaging 72mph. So far, I don't regret the full time purchase at all. That's saying a lot for a 'Ford' guy who once swore he'd never be stupid enough to buy a Dodge. If the next 150,000 miles go as well as the first 1500, I'll end up a 'Dodge' guy....
Allen
I always change the oil and the filter together (I know some people prefer to change the filter mid way through the period as well - but I don't see the need).
I use Mobil 1 oil and Mobil 1 filters - I am told Wix filters are also good, but have no experience. All of the full synthetics are going to be more than adequate if you change on schedule, but take care with the filters. I would never, under any circumstances, use Fram filters.
I always keep a note of dates and odometer readings of changes and also a note of the oil and filter used - just in case I change. I also keep purchase receipts to prove to a prospective that I didn't just make the numbers up.
Incidentally, don't be surprised if you find that the oil appears to be overfilled if you use the Dodge capacity for the 4.7 (7 quarts I believe).
Bookitty
Johnboy has a 3.92 rear so his 2500 rpm at 75 is about right. That is the price one pays for a geared down rearend. Better towing / acceleration at the cost of cruising at higher rpm and worse mileage.
For only occasional heavier towing or only towing light utility trailers, etc., make mine a 3.55.
Chad
Good info on synth-oil, If you are in your Dak for the long-haul... synth oil may be econonomical.
There are some REALLY GOOD shareware software packages that can track all of your vehicles. They 'learn' your driving habits, produce graphs of MPG and FUEL COST... and , best of all, they remind you of EVERY upcoming maintenance event for your beloved Dakota. I know the TRUE operating cost-per-mile for all three of family vehicles.
BTW...The recommended oil capacty for the 4.7 (With recommended-size filter)is 6 Quarts. (Not 7)
I have read many appends about it appearing over-full at times on the 4.7L. Right from the factory (7miles on Odemeter) my rig appeared over-full when cold. (All oil in crankcase) But when checked several minutes after running, it has always been RIGHT ON THE MARK of the dipstick.
Perhaps you are thinking of that situation instead?
My dipstick registers 1/2 quart low at 5 quarts warm fill - adding 1/2 after quick start / run / then off - to bring to 6 quarts. May be 'some' deviation among many vehicles regarding the dipstick tube or the way people check, etc. But most likely the film & residual oil left in the engine when changing accounts for the 'little bit too much' refill issue - I worked in a gas station changing oil / washing cars / busting flats for 3 years in high school & my brother taught me to use 1/2 qt. less oil than normal upon refilling the crankcase until warmed up / then add whatever was needed to top off. So 5 1/2 to 5 3/4 qts. is a 'perfect' fill on mine. The leftover 1/4 to 1/2 qt. I use over the 3k interval between changes...
Aerohead - thanks for the input. Sounds like the full time transfer case would have done exactly what I wanted.
Think I'll head over to the Subaru forum now and see how boring 20+ mpg can be.
Jim
http://members.xoom.com/minimopar/oilfilterstudy.html
want to trade a 3:55 for a 3:92 ? I could live
with 2000 rpm`s at 75.I must admit it has alot of
power off the line but I`m more interested in
highway acceleration and gas mileage.I`m an old
~#*& !Thanks for the comparison .
Johnboy
Johnnyboy,The interesting thing is that w/ my 3.55 I still have "tire burning" ability. Your 3.92 must be made to tow a bridge,house,train.I'm still sure the 3.92 is a great truck,but what are "you" towing? I would be interested in the cost of changing it to a 3.55.You know aftermarket,or through Dodge? If you travel long distances at all I feel sorry for that 4.7L(beautiful) power plant. 2500 RPM'S at 75mph?The other option is to drive 50-55mph. I'm not trying to be a wiseguy.So don't get me wrong. Anyone with any thoughts?
Allen
I have actually gotten responses. I wouldn't quit even if I had to get a german translator to speak directly with Daimler and Herr Schremp(?) himself and I would politely want to know what DC is going to "throw in" for your patience.
Keep track of all contact attempts and responses, date-who etc.
Keep this group updated. I'm sure there is a lot of interest here on order fulfillment.
Ben
Not sure what the recommended maintenance intervals are for that but certainly wouldn't recommend against using a synthetic.
There are few situations where I would not use synthetic over natural. An older engine that has never had synthetic in ti would be one, as would an engine with a propensity to leak.
and
You're welcome
tpmiller1
I couldn't tell you forsure how the cars are painted. I would guess that they can change color from vehicle to vehicle. It depends on whether their system is automated or not. I've toured the Corvette assembly plant in Bowling Green, KY a couple times. Their painting system is automated, however the vehicles skin is pre-painted prior to being connected to the frame of the car so they do a number of one color then switch to a different color and so on....... If it is done one color at a time, that would sure slow down a few orders.
I am planning on ordering a 2001 Quad cab late summer. What I have learned after reading all of these comments and doing my own research on the quad cab, is that the best quad cab combination (for me) would be:
SLT Quad Cab
4.7L V8
Auto
Shift on the fly 4-wheel (NV231)
3.55 axle
wheel & tire package
Power/Overhead Convenience Group
4-wheel antilock
Skid plate
Power convenience group
Deluxe convenience group
rear sliding window
and the six way power seat
the only question I have is about the seats. I've driven two now (a 4.7 and a 5.9) however both had the split bench 40/20/40. Does anyone have the High-back buckets with the floor console?? How do you like that in comparison? Is it worth the extra $ ?
Other then that, my truck is complete. I think I'm going to get the two tone paint, Patriot blue with the gray bottom with mist gray interior. It's too bad they do not offer a sunroof as an option. However, I suppose that would omit the overhead console.
Any advise on some of the options I want? I basically want the thing loaded up, as you can see. Hopefully by 2001, ordering won't take as long and will not be such a pain.
Thanks
First and foremost: It bears out that YOUR FIRST IMPRESSIONS ARE USUALLY CORRECT. And mine (even as a dyed in the wool GM guy), plus 6k of driving is that the Dakota Quad Cab is the best new vehicle purchase (car, truck, bike) I've EVER made. I'll put it up $ for $ against ANYTHING MADE ANYWHERE.
And hey DODGE - anyone there listening to 'the few, the proud, the unpaid' selling the 'thousands' for you? Where's YOUR effort!
Semper Fi! osb (off soap box)...