Dodge Dakota??

Kejtar

Kejtar

PostMaster General
NAXJA Member
Location
Westminster, SoCal
Good? bad?? so so??
Ok.... I'm at the point again where I have to start thinking rather hard about a new set of wheels for a new DD..... I drive a fair amount around town (60 miles to work at the moment) and my XJ is getting up there (130K+ miles and I want it to become more of a trail rig). In any case, I started to do some research and at this point I think I like the dakota quab cab 4x4 with the 4.7 engine: does anyone have any comments on that??? What about the np233 tcase? If I understand right, it's the electrically shifted one.

Also... towing, it says that properly equipped I would be able to tow up to 6000lbs+ (I assume they are talking about the auto model) but what do you guys think about the stick with 3.92's ? Could I get a small trailer with electrical brakes and load up the XJ on it?? Beez.... didn't you tow your rig with a durango that had a 4.7 in it?? IIRC the durango's tow capacity is smaller then that of the dakota....

Thanks,
Kejtar
 
I briefly had a '99 WJ with the 4.7L engine. It's a passenger car engine, not a truck engine. Has nothing for low-end grunt, and doesn't start to wake up until over 65 MPH.

In the WJ it was rated to tow 6000 pounds, IIRC. I towed a small utility flatbed with it -- one of those Harbor Freight kit trailers. I doubt the trailer and payload weighed more than 1200 pounds, and it felt like I was towing the Queen Mary.

I like the Dakota quad cab as a light duty PU and daily driver, but I wouldn't pick it to tow an XJ. Get a real truck with a diesel.
 
Seriously man, if you're thinking of towing the XJ get something real, maybe a Dodge 2500 with a Cummin's diesel. You know what I've always said about the DD gig, something small and all, but do you remember driving to Moab with that trailer? Well, try driving to Moab with an even heavier trailer and XJ!

Plus, you can always get a long bed (is there any other alternative?) and a simple shell camper, something that doesn't give much wind resistance but will still give you a shelter, done properly you can have some pretty nice camping even in a simple shell (no toilets though :))

Sequoia
 
i sold my dakota a few months ago. i had a '02 Quad Cab 4x4 with the 4.7 v8. i loved the truck. it was a lot of truck. if you're looking for a non-full size truck, you won't be able to beat the 4.7l 'kota. however, they aren't perfect.

they have some ball joint issues. but that problem is hitting the news and will probably be recalled to fix soon.

there are a lack of greasable parts under it.

changing the oil filter in the 4.7 is a bear. it has a plastic splash guard under there that gets in the way.

gas mileage sucks. i was getting around 14 mpg around town.

lack of lifts. the only good ones are a 3" body lift and a 3" rancho lift.

that being said, it was a great truck. the only reason why i got rid of it was because i wanted a truck that i didn't care about abusing. i didn't think a 24 year old offroading a $28,000 truck was a smart idea.

as for low end grunt, i had 3.55's under there and could pull the east end out of west hell if i could get a tow strap around it. you get those 3.92's and you won't be dissapointed.

head on over to Dakota USA and DakotaTrucks and parooze the boards there and ask questions. they're a great bunch of guys and it's free registration. just tell 'em Fitch sent ya. heck, i am still a regular over there and i don't have the kota any more.
 
IMHO, DO NOT tow with a manual transmission. I used to tow a 2500 lb. enclosed trailer with a 2500 lb race car in it with a '89 Ford F-150 4x4 with 302 and 5 spd. It would pull just fine but getting started and maneuvering the rig were really tough to do and tough on the clutch. An auto box makes life much better.

My $0.02 - Dave.
 
A four door F-150 will make a much better tow rig than a Dakota.

1/2 ton trucks these days tow as much as 3/4 ton trucks of the 70's and 80's.

My dad's F-150 with 5.4 V-8 gets 18 mpg day in and day out (extra cab, 4 wheel drive, stock tire size), and tows 5,000 lbs like a champ. The brakes are very impressive, even with a load on.

The rear axle is also very stout. 9.75" ring gear, 34 spline axles, 12 inch disks. Yummy.

CRASH
 
WOW... talk about number of replies :)

To start of, Eagle, my folks have an '03 Durango with the 4.7, and it definately doesn't feel underpowered. It seems to have both the low end grunt and then some :). My folks towed a camping trailer (that I borrowed from them to Moab) all the way up to Alaska and back and had no power complaints.

In regards to something bigger.. hmmm well, yeah, it'd be nice, but..... I still want it to be rather usable around town: findng parking at CSUF is a enough of a pain with the XJ, I don't want to think about having to try and squeeze in a full size truck in those tiny spaces. Also, those things cost and arm and a leg :)

Changing an oil filter on the 4.7.... yeah.... my folks ask me to change their oil preriodically and I know what you mean. Whoever designed that, should be shot.

Towing with manual tranny..... it's not as bad as someone might think :) I towed the camper trailer with my XJ that has a manual tranny, and I had no complaints :).

Fords.... oh..... don't get me started on fords..... I only like the old old fords, the new stuff... well... no matter what everyone says, I won't touch them with a 10 foot pole LLL

Kejtar
 
Bronco638 said:
IMHO, DO NOT tow with a manual transmission. I used to tow a 2500 lb. enclosed trailer with a 2500 lb race car in it with a '89 Ford F-150 4x4 with 302 and 5 spd. It would pull just fine but getting started and maneuvering the rig were really tough to do and tough on the clutch. An auto box makes life much better.

My $0.02 - Dave.
Click to expand...

No offense intended, but that's just plain wrong. Dad tore up a TH400 trans in his 78 Chevy TWICE and that was with a heavy duty trans cooler. The second time, even the case halves were trashed. Okay, we did tow a 4,000 lb. flat bed with a 16,000 lb. bulldozer on it. I don't trust the fluid operation in an auto to stand up over the long haul.

If you're tearing up clutches, you either don't know how to drive a stick, or you're geared wrong. I'll do a clutch replacement before I'll even consider getting an auto worked on.

Back to Dad, he's got a 99 Dodge 1 ton dually gasser with a 5 speed. It works hard for 3 weeks in the summer, 5 trips a day with a gross weight of 32,000 lbs. Still has the original clutch in it. And the 72 Chevy stake rack got it's first clutch replacement at almost 100,000 miles and it's life isn't easy on the farm either.

ChiXJeff
 
Kejtar said:
To start of, Eagle, my folks have an '03 Durango with the 4.7, and it definately doesn't feel underpowered. It seems to have both the low end grunt and then some :). My folks towed a camping trailer (that I borrowed from them to Moab) all the way up to Alaska and back and had no power complaints.
Click to expand...

All I know is what I know. At one point the dealer gave me a '97 5.2L ZJ as a loaner while my WJ was in the shop. The seat-of-pants dyno tells me that even with less gear, the 5.2L had significantly more grunt off the line. Maybe they've changed the cam in the 4.7L since '99, but mine was dead below 3500 RPM. Oh, yeah, it was nice and quiet and smooth -- it just didn't have any power where it counted. If I had wanted a race engine, I would have bought a sports car instead of a Jeep.
 
the 5.2 is a dog compared to the 4.7. trust me, i owned both. the 4.7 wins hands down. one 98 dakota single cab 2wd with the 5.2 in it. then in '01 i got an '02 quad cab 4x4 with the 4.7. i would race the guy i sold my old 5.2L to and i'd eat him up all day and all night long. with the extra weight of the 4x4 crap and the quad cab the 4.7 could pull away from the lighter 5.2


but i will agree, the 5.2 was much smother. the 4.7 had a rough idle. but damn it sounded good with just an aftermarket cold air intake
 
The 5.2 and 5.9 are relics, museum pieces, and all around boat anchors. Can you say 1950's technology?

Let me say this one more time to make it clear. CAMSHAFTS DO NOT BELONG IN THE CYLINDER BLOCK.

I really respect Ford for making all their engines overhead cam units. Hopefully, sometime in the 21st century, Chevy and DC will see the light as well.

CRASH
 
CRASH said:
The 5.2 and 5.9 are relics, museum pieces, and all around boat anchors. Can you say 1950's technology?

Let me say this one more time to make it clear. CAMSHAFTS DO NOT BELONG IN THE CYLINDER BLOCK.

I really respect Ford for making all their engines overhead cam units. Hopefully, sometime in the 21st century, Chevy and DC will see the light as well.

CRASH
Click to expand...

might not be too long, looks like daimler is trying to unload chrysler. talk about an ex-GE executive footing the bill for a new corporation to take over chrysler, nothing like another transition period. im interested to see the new technology in the next 5-10yrs coming from something like this...

Hunter
 
I disagree with crash, my 93 dakota 4x4,club cab, 5.2 is a strong motor, Have towed a 25' travel trailer up to 8000 foot mountains no problem. 160,000 miles on it and nothing has gone out. Does not burn oil,or leak. I've taken this truck for some hard wheelinf before getting the xj.
 
editPhotos.fcgi
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
AW4 losing 4th gear mid trip
Replies
0
Views
156
ljobbins
L
B
'98 XJ - AW4 torque converter won't lock up when hot
Replies
2
Views
174
Bryn Jones
B
XJ_ranger
Street legal day trip - Olympics near Brown Creek Sunday 5/4/25
Replies
2
Views
215
Einulfr
Einulfr
bradleyheathhays
Batt showing 12.48V
Replies
1
Views
111
JohnX
JohnX
T
Overheating bad temp gauge ?
Replies
6
Views
331
mewz99
mewz99
Back
Top