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

Dodge Dakota - Club Cab

1235710

Comments

  • bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    (wetwillie) Were you looking at the ACTUAL STICKERS ON THE WINDOWS for each vehicle? I am not refering to the 'generic' EPA numbers as seen on TV....etc
  • greg116greg116 Member Posts: 116
    I think i've started a war... let's say economy varies from different sources, papers, transmissions and drivers and leave it at that. That said I can't wait for the new 353-hp 5.7 R/T Dakota in a few years. Hopefully with a stick shift?

    But back a ways, which option group gets you the bigger rear drums? The payload upgrade, 4x4, what? Also, does the box on the Club Cab have the same dimensions as the regular cab?
  • wetwilliewetwillie Member Posts: 129
    The key word here is ESTMATES. Like the boilerplate statement says "These estimates are for comparison only, your mileage may vary" The numbers I refer too are manufacturer figures the EPA has either tested or accepted the testing procedures supplied by the manufacturer. The mileage information is available at several sites, such as, Kelley Blue Book.The point is, given the limited parameters used to arrive at these numbers, the V-6, in every combination got better mileage than the 4.7. The manual tranny also got better mileage than the auto in every situation (of course, all these comparisons are with similarly equipped vehilcles). No matter the mileage penalty (1 - 2 mpg max.) I would choose the 4.7, the smile factor of the 4.7 trumps any (if any) mileage advantage the V-6 might have.
  • kwanderikwanderi Member Posts: 33
    I agree with greg116, my next vehical WILL be the Dakota with the 5.7 Hemi, and I don't care what the mileage will be. :)
  • ohc_babyohc_baby Member Posts: 116
    I don't know, if it's styled after the Maxxcab, I'll stick with what I have. If they put a 5.7 into the current bodystyle trucks, even for one year, I'm trading immediatedly and getting it while I can. I love the current truck and won't risk getting screwed into a MaxxCab.
  • triple_deke1triple_deke1 Member Posts: 60
    The payload upgrade will give you the bigger rear drums and I believe
    stronger leaf springs

    TD
  • cmacd3cmacd3 Member Posts: 2
    I have a 2000 Dakota Club Cab 4X4 with the 4.7 in it. It has 8000 miles, and I am getting an average of 10 to 12 mpg! I am driving it like an old lady, and not speeding on the highway. I have no idea what is going on? Any ideas.......
  • bcarter3bcarter3 Member Posts: 145
    I've got a 2001 CC, 2wd, 4.7 w/auto. Odometer is 2850. The overhead computer says I'm getting 18.9. I only measured once and found it to be 16.3. I don't drive much with my eye on the gas gage but your mileage seems to be a bit low. The 4wd will contribute some to that. Other owners here will have more accurate info regarding drive train drag. Some others have complained of poor gas mileage.
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    I have a stock '00 4WD QC, 4.7L, 31x10.5-15 (at 40 psi) tires, 3.55 LSD rear with the 5sp trans and have a tonneau covering the back. Purchased in May '00 and 62% of the time I get 15 to 16 mpg, with the average to date at 15.85 mpg. This is based on 58 fill-ups, 95% of the time on regular gas. Most driving is local, seldom tow and no off-roading. At the extremes are an 18.7 and a 12.7 (bad boy) mpg. I have noticed that driving at 65+ mph, even though comfortable, reduces the mpg. Another statistic is gas is costing me about $0.10 / mile at an average of $1.53 / gal in south central PA.
  • bikenutbikenut Member Posts: 19
    I now have 1200 miles on my 4X4 CC 4.7 Std trans. lsd Black Dak, sport plus and am very happy. Part of my joy stems from the fact that the owner of the dealership cut me a check for $200 after price of truck went up from when I ordered it on 12-4 to when it came in on 2-3. I refused to pay increase, natch'. The sales guys hate me, so I'm happy. The only prob is some small paint defects that svc mgr promised to fix. Went four wheeling, and "accidentally" jumped it- probably went 20 before hitting terry firma- didn't even bottom at 70MPH! My 9 year old step son kept saying that was really cool, but I plan no repeats. My only regret is not getting the tilt wheel, as it is an inch too high, but I didn't want cruise control. It does top out at 100MPH:(
    Any one know a way to lower the steering wheel an inch? Also, got Line-X put in and the guy did a great job. Later, Bikenut ( gotta do O/T to pay for this beast!)
  • greenogreeno Member Posts: 13
    I believe that's what I have when my shift lever for 4wd doesn't have a 2WD marking. It only has 4WD LOW, N, 4WD, and 4WD HIGH. Do a lot of 4.7's have this type of transfer case and 4WD? And how is this system really--the dealer says they have improved the full time 4WD in 2000 by using @#$#$%%(4WD jargon) in the front drive axles to reduce wear while in normal driving. Is this true? And last one, does the front wheels really pull when the back wheels start slipping on ice automatically? Thanks.
  • greg116greg116 Member Posts: 116
    I remember reading somewhere that the 4.7L with auto tranny does not come with part-time 4WD. I dont understand that, as I dont trust full-time 4x4. Too many alignment and service issues. Oh well.
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    Many of us have part-time 4WD with the 4.7L engines. Usually do most of our driving in 2WD and our floor shifters are marked: 4WD-Low, N, 2WD, 4WD-High. Better gas mileage but not as good as a straight 2WD truck.

    The Full-time 4WD units are no doubt more sophisticated but probably are not as high tech as a Jeep's Quadratrac, or any of the foreign systems on rally cars.
  • greg116greg116 Member Posts: 116
    I think full-time 4wd is a waste for trucks. All it does is jack up the price and causes more service headaches. Actually i think fulltime "4x4" is a waste for anything bigger than an S-10. The "4x4 auto" selection that was on an Explorer we rented worked just fine. It ran in 2wd untill it slipped, then locked itself in 4wd high untill it wasnt needed. Simple and functional.

    However, I still find myself trying to decide if i want a 4x4 CC. On the one hand, i'll have a higher ride height, better traction for the snow and muck, and the option of a little light 4wheeling now and then.

    On the other hand, a 2wd gets better economy, cheaper MSRP, cheaper to service (no differentials, axles, electronics etc...) better handling and acceleration. I plan on using it for lots of highway cruising, but running a high risk of some extremely crappy weather along the way and i'm afraid of getting stuck. Canadian winters being what they are, getting a 4x2 sounds like a bad idea, but I dont want to spend the extra money if i dont have to.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Greg, the arguments that you posed were indeed valid. However, you answered your own questions with the statement: "but running a high risk of some extremely crappy weather along the way and i'm afraid of getting stuck. Canadian winters being what they are, getting a 4x2 sounds like a bad idea, but I dont want to spend the extra money if i dont have to." Greg, you could get a 4X2, and perhaps reap a bit more mileage and save a few dollars. Then, when you are stuck in a snow drift alongside of the highway, you could play the radio, and count your money. But don't let the engine run to provide heat, because you might use up all or most of the fuel that was saved.

    Bookitty
  • greenogreeno Member Posts: 13
    To set the record straight, I have almost 10,000 miles on my full time 4 wheeler and have had no problems with it. I think it is how you drive the vehicle with the full time package. If you beat it, corner hard, etc, it will wear down the drive gears and tires a lot quicker than if you take care of it. Of course the full time 4 wheel will use tires more quickly than 2 wheel drive but keeping up with the tire rotations and alignment once a year will not make the 2 wheel drive have THAT MUCH MORE tire life. What are we talking about 5,000-10,000 more miles on the 2 wheel drive? Inconsequential. I got the 7 year bumper to bumper anyway just incase I had problems with it.
  • wetwilliewetwillie Member Posts: 129
    Your facing the same dilemma I was 2 years ago. I ended up with a 2WD(99 cc 5.2L, 5sp. LSD ect.) for the very reasons you point out. After 2 winters in Minnesnota, I've faired very well. More important than 4WD in dealing with "extremely crappy weather"(snow,ice), is a complete set of dedicated winter tires. This, together with LSD and contained weight over the rear axle (sand bags), will offer not only comparable get-a-goin traction but better tracking and braking than a stock 4WD. When spring comes (yeah....right!) you simply switch over to your street tires, throw out the extra weight and your ready to roll with a rig than handles better, is lighter, faster and more economical than a 4WD.
  • greg116greg116 Member Posts: 116
    Well, I've decided on the part-time 4x4. Sometimes in Calgary and over the prairies the snow just gets far too bad for a 2WD with snow tires. Remember Cool Runnings, the airport scene where they come out into -25 degree weather? Yeah, I thought it was an exaggeration too. It's not, trust me . Besides I like to have a true do-it-all vehicle, and the part-time 4WD on our Durango has come in extremely handy, including getting us out of a ditch in low range, something a 2WD could never do on its own.

    Aside from that I like a higher ride height (i'm 6'4" and dont like low vehicles). Now the only decision left is auto tranny or stick shift. Can you get the stick with bucket seats and floor console? Are there cupholders in the truck when you order the 40/20/40 bench seat?
  • limcolimco Member Posts: 1
    The company brought a 1998 Dodge Dakota Sport 4x4, 5.2 liter pick up in November 1998 and it has been in the service shop quite often for a new vehicle with less than 72,000 am on the clock.

    The pickup have been in the shop for the following failure:
    Fuel tank module replacement
    Rear wheel speed sensor replacement
    Front disc rotor
    Front stabilizer bar failure and replacement
    AS module replacement.

    Just two days ago the speedometer stop working and we suspect that the electronic speed sensor may have become defective. In addition, we have noticed that the transmission slams sometimes when it is shifted from park into drive.

    We are wondering if there is anybody out there that have encountered these problems

    Limco
  • yellowjeeptjyellowjeeptj Member Posts: 3
    It really sounds that you have a lemon on your hands. Trade it in & try again.
  • stvdmanstvdman Member Posts: 62
    If your Dakota came with the 255/65/15's and you changed just the tires to a different size which did you go with. Are they working ok? I am thinking of going with a 255/60 or a 275/60 if they fit, which I also need to know. Thanks
  • vietvet656667vietvet656667 Member Posts: 2
    I am going to buy a Dodge Dakota club cab with sports plus pkg,which engine is best? I like a v-8 but am concerned about mileage. (STANDARD TRANS IS MY CHOICE WITH THIS PKG.
  • vietvet656667vietvet656667 Member Posts: 2
    I forgot to mention that the club cab I am going to purchase is a 4/2 with a sports plus pkg. like I said in my previous msg , I like a v-8 but am concerned about mileage. my transmission will be a standard, any thoughts or suggestions?? THANKS
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Bill, we have been down this road so many times. The 3.9 engine is very marginal to say the least. It is old technology and is really undersized for a vehicle the size of a Dakota. The mileage for the two engines is roughly the same, and with an automatic transmission (you are getting a 5 speed)
    the V8 many times outperforms the V6. You did not mention wether you are considering a 2X4 or a 4X4.
    The price difference going in is not excessive, but I certainly don't want to sit here and spend your money, The majority of people on our forum and owners club will tell you the very same
    thing that I am spouting forth. You asked, and I answered. Good luck with whatever you choose.

    Bookitty
  • bobs5bobs5 Member Posts: 557
    http://www.4adodge.com/dakota/specs/feature4.html


    The dodge site has fuel economy ratings for engine size, transmission type, 4x4, 4x2.


    For the configuration you listed:

    16/22 for v6.

    15/20 for v8.


    If it were me....go V8, the difference in mileage is small.

  • ohc_babyohc_baby Member Posts: 116
    I usually get 22 hwy with my 2001 4.7 5-spd with 3.55 LSD rear-end. The new tranny is soft on the shifts and have been hit or miss (everyone loves them or hates them), but I've not heard anyone that wasn't thrilled with their 5-spd. Go for the 4.7!
  • ron35ron35 Member Posts: 134
    Bill - You definitely want the 4.7 over the 3.9. I am on the Dakota Mailing List and have read hundreds of posts comparing these 2 engines and the choice in over 90% of these posts is the 4.7. I have a 4.7 with 5 speed and get 16-18 mpg; friends who have the 3.9 are getting either the same or worse. You may have one other choice if you can afford to wait. In 2002 the Dakota will replace the 3.9 at 175 HP with a 3.7 (derivative of the 4.7) at 212 HP.
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    I wish DC had the OHC 3.7L V-6 when I bought. Although I have no problems with the 4.7L, it does make the truck more nose heavy. When I was test driving different models, the V-6's seemed more balanced. Went with the 4.7L because I couldn't bring myself to spend that amount of money for a truck and put a 1950/60 design engine in it. Also, according to the window stickers at the time, the 3.9L gas mileage was 1-2 mpg worst. I think that a OHC 3.7L could be just right for me and give me 2-3 mpg more than my avg 15.85 with the 4.7L, 4WD, 5sp, LSD, T/H Package.

    BTW, most of my vehicles in last 30 yrs have been Mopar.
  • greg116greg116 Member Posts: 116
    First off, in all logic the 3.7L OHC V6 is definitely Dakota-bound. It was designed as a truck motor, and a truck motor it shall be. It's already slated for the Grand Cherokee, Liberty and 2002 Ram, so most definitely the Dakota.

    Now heres something to discuss - Should the Club Cab come with a third or fourth door, a la Ranger and S-10? If so, three or four? Now, before you snap off an answer, keep in mind that with these doors comes the very real chance of reduced cab rigidity and, over time, squeaks and rattles and all matter of annoying noises.

    Personally, I think a 3rd door on the driver's side would help a lot, as long as it comes with heavy reinforcement so it makes no difference in structural strength. They could make a 3rd door standard, and a 4th door optional, again, with heavy reinforcement.

    Pickups are highly profitable vehicles for manufacturers, and it wouldn't be terribly hard on the bean counters to add a little door. Theyd probably make up the difference in increased sales anyway. The Dakota is a vehicle that people seem to have very few design-related complaints about, and this would solve one of the biggest ones. The 3.7L OHC would solve the other (bad fuel economy).
  • bobs5bobs5 Member Posts: 557
    I think the 4.7L V8 is the perfect match to a Quad Cab truck. The V6 would be ok for a regular or club cab model, but feel it would be underpowered for a quad. I am still curious as to how the new v6 will perform. If d/c actually goes through with the new v6.
  • bobs5bobs5 Member Posts: 557
    To me a 3'rd or 4'th door on a club cab would only reduce the structural strength of the cab. I prefer to have the B pillar and true doors as oppose to the "suicide doors"
  • spike50spike50 Member Posts: 481
    I guess I got used to 4 cylinder engines with 5 speeds because I now find myself a bit too much on testosterone with the 4.7L. Have to admit that there are a few times when I scared myself. For me, the smaller engine might be safer. No doubt about it though, the 4.7L can really haul butt.
  • namfflownamfflow Member Posts: 202
    There is a very simple reason why many people get better milage with the V8 as compared to the V6. With the V6 you have to push the engine to get it going and run it up toward maximum capacity while with the V8 you don't have to drive it as hard. It also tends to last longer.

    This isn't a new thing. Even back in the 60's with cars like the Coronet the 318 (5.2 for the modern masses) got better gas milage than the 225 slant six because of the same factors. That is why even if I wasn't a lead foot I would never take the base engine. Too weak in most cases. (yes I know the 4 is the base but not in the club cab so it don't count)
  • harleyartharleyart Member Posts: 9
    Picked up my truck about a month ago, have 500 miles on it now. On Sunday went for the first real highway ride to the jersey shore. This is the best riding and handling truck I have ever driven. At 65 with the cruse on gas mileage was 17.8, better than I expected for not being broken in. Love this truck!
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Ben,we recently discussed your problem. The Dodge Dakota with V8 gets MPG that compares favorably with other trucks given the same type drive line equipment. Next time you purchase a vehicle or any other major product I would suggest that you utilize the power of the Internet (which you obviously have at your fingertips) "prior" to purchasing. All of this information is and was available to assist in making an intelligent choice. The 3.9 engine is old technology, yet you chose to select it. "It is better to light one candle then to sit and curse the darkness."

    Bookitty
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Member Posts: 552
    ben221, I realize that you are unhappy with your mileage however I don't agree with your broad statement "mileage well below the other truck makers" I have a co-worker with a 2000 silverado 5.3 4x4. The absolute best he has gotten driving very conservitavely was in the low 17mpg range and when driven normally provides mid 15mpg. We have 2 Chevy suburbans 2500s with 5.7 4x4 auto that have never seen 14mpg. We also have a GMC3500 crew cab 5.7 4x4 auto that usually gets about 10mpg with a best in the mid 13s. I had a Ford F150 with a 300cu inch 6 cylinder and a 4 speed manual that seldom saw over 16 and was usually in the mid 13mpg range. I replaces it with a Dakota with a 5.2 V8 auto and saw my average mpg increase by 1 in both city and highway driving. Then at the other end of the spectrum I just got back from a trip to Arizona. We rented a 2001 Camaro convertible with a 3.8 v6 auto. We put almost 1000 miles on this car with highway speeds averaging 75 to 80 mph. The worse tank of gas was 31mpg and the best was 33.5mpg. The engine in this car is an antique by your definition but look at its mileage. A lot of it has to do with gearing, aerodynamics and weight. If you want mileage you go small and light. If you want a truck, no matter who builds it, you won't get super mileage. Rick
  • triple_deke1triple_deke1 Member Posts: 60
    I just got a set of front and rear splash guards for my 2001 dakota. It says that the front and rear guards are the same but the rear ones are about 1 1/2" off on the bottom mounting hole. They are the mopar molded guards with the rams head on them. does anyone know if this is correct?

    Thanks
    TD
  • tuvtesttuvtest Member Posts: 237
    According to my Accessories Catalog,
    Rear w/flares 82203619
    front w/flares 82203473
    front or rear w/o flares 82202719

    you didn't mention about flares, so I hope these #'s help
  • triple_deke1triple_deke1 Member Posts: 60
    I looked closely at the install sheet that they came with and it says for Dakota Front and Rear with Wheel Flares 82203473/82203619. I e-mailed they guy from Wyckoff Chrysler and he said that 82203473 is for both front and rear with flares...

    TD
  • ben221ben221 Member Posts: 8
    Lets see now,,,,,,A Silverado is atleast 1600lbs than a Dakota excab= 4150lbs. And the owner of this vehicle is able to get 17mpg???? 4mpg higher than I can get with my Dakota???? Thanks for proving my point iowabigguy. And you cant compare a Suburban 2500 and GMC 3500 because of there massive size although I bet the mileage they get isnt far from my Dakota. And yes this truck has been back to the dealer and yes I did call Dodge Corp. and yes I did take it to another dealer. And the answers were all the same,,,,,they cant find anything wrong with this truck and 13mpg is all that I'm going to get in the winter in the northeast.
  • bobs5bobs5 Member Posts: 557
    It could also be that the northeast uses that crummy oxygenated gas.
    My last car would drop by 4 mpg using it.
    I also found that trying different brands of gas has an impact on mileage as well.
    A heavy foot and prolonged engine warm up times will have a negative effect on mileage too.

    My truck with 4.7L V8, standard tranny, 3.55 axles gets typically 16 mpg.
    Low was 14 mpg, high was 16.5 mpg. Mostly local driving.
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    Ben, I don't want to argue with you or attempt to change your opinion. I also cannot buy into the fact that all of the trucks made by Dodge, miss so severely, the EPA estimates (accent on estimates). My particular truck (2000 Dakota Quad with 4X4, 4.7 V8, 5 speed 3.55 differential(s) delivers as much or more than the posted estimates and may be attributed to the following. Garage kept where the temperature never falls below 38 degrees, driving for the most part in cruise control on relatively flat highway @ 60 MPH. The use of an A.R.E. tonneau cover reduces somewhat the wind resistance. Selection of a drive train combination with sufficient power to keep lugging at a minimum. Good driving habits as related to acceleration and braking (anticipating traffic conditions to keep lower gears at a minimum). Perhaps as bobs5 mentioned, it is the formulation and/or quality of the fuel, although the majority of my fuel is purchased in South NJ and some in Eastern PA. I continue to think that if your MPG is correctly calculated, that there is a problem with your particular vehicle. If you really think that Dodge is trying to rip off consumers, then I feel that you should pursue that issue with a consumer agency. I feel, as do others on this forum, that the Dakota is a good truck, and I am very satisfied by mine. I also can see your frustration with your truck's performance and feel that you should seek satisfaction. The tenure of my previous posts were not to anger and upset you Ben, but to imply the importance of researching "prior" to any major purchase decision to assess whether the product will suit your particular needs. Good luck, and I hope that you find a viable solution to your problem.

    Bookitty
  • blakdakblakdak Member Posts: 19
    Ben, I usualy do not post on this forum; however, I must take exception to your characterization of the Dodge engines. I have a 2000 club cab with the 4.7L V8, 3.55 rear, towing package and all the other stuff including 400 pounds of sand in the bed. During the winter we have that good oxygenated petrol and semi-foul weather. I commute 120-130 mile per day between Annapolis Md. and Dulles Va. If you are familiar with the area, you know it is virtually all highway, on a good day, and a rolling parking lot the rest of the time. I currently have 48,000 miles and counting. The worst mileage I've gotten is 14-15 mpg, right after I bought the truck. I am currently getting 20.5-21 mpg on winter gas and extra weight in the bed. The mpg has been 23.5-24 on my midnight runs to Virginia Beach. My computer is within 2/10 of mile of my calculator. I am also on the OEM good-fer-a-year tires (I don't undestand how anyone could wear them out with less the 20,000 miles); on the other hand, it's been quite some time since I was younger than 30 years old (maybe that explains it). I've been trying to kill the OEM tires. I haven't rotated in 25,000 miles, I've never had an alignment and still the tires have a good 10K left in them. I guess I'll put on my new wheels and tires before the old wear out. Sorry to be so long winded, but as you can see, my Dak has been as much and probably more than anyone has expected.

    The Dak is Blak!
  • steve234steve234 Member Posts: 460
    I have the 4.7 w/auto and 3.92. While I won't say my mileage is spectacular, I am getting a steady 16 mpg on average(just for the heck of it, I made a spread sheet program that tracks mpg and cost/mile). I just took a 1200 trip and got 17.5-18.5 doing 75 mph and going up and down Arkansas hills with occasional full throttle passing. On the negative side, with a lot of stop and go in town, I have gotten as low as 12 mpg on one occasion. The factors involved are many. Fill your tank and then take a long non-stop (300+) drive and then check your gas use. If it is still below 15-16 mpg, then you need to hassle your dealer.
  • tuvtesttuvtest Member Posts: 237
    I could be mistaken, but it was my understanding that the mileage numbers reported to the EPA are taken from specific regulations and standards set forth by the EPA. The car makers cannot just set the numbers where they want. I also believe that the EPA in some way audits or follows up on these ratings (at least in theory). If this was not the case, we'd all be driving trucks rated at 100mpg city/ 200 hwy. wouldn't we?
  • ihsalwaysihsalways Member Posts: 16
    1. Any definite word about 5.9 V-8, or any engine w/ more torque than 4.7, coming to SLT or Sport (not just R/T) ClubCabs?

    2. Anyone know when K&N, or other similar, high quality, induction enhancements will be available "off-the-shelf," w/o any modification for 4.7? My local Dodge guy, says, "Not yet, should be soon," but he's been saying that for awhile...

    3. Anyone know of a quality, goodlooking, across-the-bed,'tuff tool box especially sized to Dakota?
  • archiebunkarchiebunk Member Posts: 1
    got a '99 dakota club cab V-6 with 3.92 rear end, auto trans, trailer pkg--supposed to be good for 5,200 lbs--considering a trailer weighing about 3,200 lbs empty--does anyone have any experience with these weights--would appreicate any comments via email to archiebunk@yahoo.com
  • triple_deke1triple_deke1 Member Posts: 60
    Does anyone know where I can get the service manual for 2001 4.7 auto??

    TD
  • bcarter3bcarter3 Member Posts: 145
    For a Service Manual for the 2001 Dakota try Dyment Distribution Services at 1-800-890-4038. This is the official DaimlerChrysler manual. Mine was $105.44 delivered. Very detailed book.
  • steve234steve234 Member Posts: 460
    The last time I checked, the EPA numbers are done by the EPA with vehicles provided by the manufacturers. The testing was done on a dyno, and was programed to mimic certain operating parameters. The catch is a dyno does not get affected by wind, weather or other factors. Plus, the manufacturers have been known to help the results a little, as allowed, like no A/C, higest available rearend, minimal weight, etc. Its is like a sport. You play within the rules, but you take as much edge as you can get away with.

    A V6 CC may be rated to tow 5200 lbs, but the engine is not going to be happy. Don't forget that the tow rating is not the only factor. You have to look at the total vehicle weight. At maximum tow rate, you are allowed almost no weight in the vehile itself. The GCWR is only 9200 lbs. So the truck and passengers and gear can only weigh 4000 lbs. It ain't going to happen.
This discussion has been closed.