| From | Message |
03qc4.74x4
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/22/2005
09:57:43
|
 Subject: RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
Luke ur wrong my truck wieghs near 5000 pound and thats way to much. MY GRANDPA HA AN 04 QC 4X2 4.7L DAKOTA AND HIS TRUCK STILL CANT KEEP UP WITH THE TOY. I dont like the toyota but the fact is that a simular size truck with 700cc and two cylanders less can kill a v8 truck thats pathetic
|
Old Fool
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/22/2005
15:39:57
|  RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
Send one of those Beer can Toy trucks around here to San Antonio Tx and let's see which one is faster. It should be a 2x4 blown at least. And it will not beat a 4.7L 2x4 Club Cab. Aint happenin'
LAter,
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
 
2/23/2005
21:00:51
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
I can see a lighter truck with a smaller engine be fairly the same in acceleration from a stop light.
But throw a few thousand extra lbs in the bed or on a trailer and THAT's where the REAL power difference will be noticed and why people who need to be able to pull a load say the Dakota has MORE power still.
The Ranger/Tacoma/Frontier still isn't going to do nearly as good with an extra load.
So if you want to use the small truck to do bigger truck jobs, it isn't going to happen. i don't care if nissan stamps a 280HP rating on their V6!
|
dmould
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/28/2005
16:56:35
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
Guys, Edmunds.com has a test posted of all the new midsize/compact trucks. The Tacoma, Frontier and Ranger are all quicker in the quarter mile than the V8 Dakota even with 1000 pounds of payload. Go check it out yourself. The only truck slower is the Chevy 5 cylinder, and not by much.
|
midnightmagic
GenIII
3/01/2005
02:49:54
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
ok this race took me a month to set up, i had to find 2 rangers that had same mods as me( intake and magnaflow exhaust) 2000 dodge dakota slt 4.7L CC Auto VS. #1 04 supercab 4.0L auto Ranger Edge 4x2, #2 04 RC 4.0L 5 speed Ranger Edge 4x2. I offered to pay their gas for this. we did 4 runs for each truck. 2 from a stop for each and 2 from a 20- 100 roll for each. distance was 1/4 mile ( trying to recreate the original post) the results: from a stop wasnt even close i beat the auto by 4 truck lengths and the 5 speed by 3. from a roll i beat the auto easily and the 5 speed at 100 i was about 1 1/2 trucks ahead and pulling away slowly. i do give the 5 speed props for somewhat keepin up, not bad for a ranger. I see no way stock for stock a ranger beat or keep up with a cc dak much less a RC 5 speed and the 3.92 rear other than dumping some serious money into the motor, ie nitrous, bama chip, gears, throttle bodies and other sorts. ( these races were conducted on a closed PRIVATE farm road)
You gotta ask yourself one question...That Thing Got A HEMI???
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
3/01/2005
22:05:16
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
Edmunds must have got confused. maybe the race was the trucks being dropped from a plane???
Weird how some get their information.
I can see a NEW V6 beinge able to do what an older emissions killed V8 from the 80's could do.
But the 4.7 and even the recent magnum 5.2 engines were pretty efficient themselves. To say a smaller V6 can be better at pulling a load is just a load of BullSh*t, nothing more.
That 4.0 Frontier engine would have to be like their 3.3 V6 with a major shot of Nitrous or something to be what people are claiming!
I mean, my truck being a QC 4X4 and all could pretty much pull a trailer as fast up a big hill as my friends 2000+ Frontier CC 2WD could unloaded!
|
DMOULD
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/02/2005
12:09:23
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
It is pretty easy to figure out why the new Toyota and Nissan 4.0 V6 engines will out pull the Dodge 4.7 V8. Look at the torque figures - 282 ft/lb for Toyota, 284ft/lb for Nissan, 290ft/lb for the Dodge. All within 3% of each other, yet the new V6s have more horsepower (15 more for Toyota, 35 more for Nissan), and the trucks are a bit lighter. I bought my 2004 Dakota 4x4 4.7 manual a year ago, and while I like my truck, I am not afraid to admit that it is not the fastest out there. My previous 4.0L Ranger would beat the Dodge unloaded. Now I hope to install the HO Cams to make up some of the horsepower deficit compared to the new V6 competition! I still won't be able to make up for the better fuel economy those V6s can get though!
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
3/02/2005
20:49:06
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
To make MORE power like they rate them they must be making them engines PEAK at a higher RPM.
Guaranteed they wont pull a trailer at 2200 ~ 3000 doing 80 MPH RPM's like a V8. Especially a fairly good V8 like the 4.7
It just isn't happeneing.
Time to find someone with a Ranger/Tacoma/Frontier
|
03qc4.74x4
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/03/2005
11:43:19
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
nope the toy that my girlfriend has shifts at 5500 rpms just like my 4.7. The difference is that the japaness manufactures take pride in there work and made it a DOHC engine they took the time to make an engine that will haul ass and still get good fuel millage. will dodge just put a SOHC engine since there lazy. Look at dodges Viper while it is my favorite car in the world and i would kill to have one. An 8.3 litter V10 should be making over 700hp. But theyr lazy and keep an old pushrod motor in there. The 4.7 is not a good engine at all its an over rated POS.
AUDI HAS A 4.2L V8 THAT MAKES 330HP AND AND 310IBFT IT MAKES TONS MORE HORSE POWER AND MORE TOURQUE FROM A MUCH SMALLER MOTER.
|
Huh
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/03/2005
21:12:25
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
And the Audi has a Turbo. And by the Way, Ferrari Designed the Viper Motor. And the 4.7L was covertly designed by Mercedes. Get over it, if you don't like MOPAR stuff, just go away. We will not miss you. We don't even miss you and you are still trolling around. If you dislike your 4.7L, I'm sure a toyota dealer will take it in trade, then you can go hang out with those toyoto goober smoochers. And then you will have absolutely no reason to come troll here.
|
rgathright
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2005
08:22:53
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
I agree with 03qc4.74x4. They were making SOHC engines during WW II for the P51 Mustangs! It's taken this long for a SOHC engine to make it into Amerian V8's.
What is really annoying is the lack of coverage in popular magazines of SOHC / DOHC engines. Without these forums, I would have never known that you could get an American made engine without pushrods.
I also do not like the VIPER. I had a 2000 Viper, horrible ride, with poor handling, especially at 35 MPH and dodging pot holes. A well built FORD DOHC 5.4L for $35,000 could replaced the V-10 pushrod anyday.
|
Trevor
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2005
10:46:46
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
The last place to get oil in an OHC engine is the cam, which doesn't work too good when it is -30. I bought my dakota for the pushrods. They are a simple reliable motor.
|
dmould
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2005
11:09:17
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
The new 4.0L V6 from Toyota and Nissan actually have very similar torque curves to the 4.7L Dodge engine - their torque peaks are only 2-400 rpm higher. The variable valve timing allows them to make power down low, with a flat torque curve, as well as making horsepower at a higher RPM. A 4.0L V6 is not that much smaller than a 4.7L, and technology can make up for the smaller displacement. Look at the Mustang GT, 300hp/320ft-lb from a 4.6L. I just wish Dodge upped the tuning on the 4.7L. Base model should be 250hp, H.O. version 275hp.
The power figures (330hp from 4.2L) for the Audi motor above are not for a turbo model. The turbo model in the RS6 makes 450hp.
|
03qc4.74x4
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2005
11:49:13
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
HUH u are retarted the viper motor was not made by ferreri it was derived from a big block truck motor they used in the ram
The audi is normally asperated
And mercedes did not design the 4.7 v8 the motor came out like three months after they bought crysler so unless they designed a built a motor in 3 months u r right
Guys i have a 1986 125cc four wheeler and it even has an OHC
|
dak287
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/04/2005
23:19:04
|  RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
let me tell you guys something!! american cars performance really started goin down hill when ''foreign'' parts started getting used!! to say a push rod engine isnt as good as a overhead cam is silly!! look at nascar "i know, but it's not a production car but it is a 100% american car it puts out over 1000 horses with a pushrod motor with only 348ci all motor!! no other country can make a motor better than americans the rest of the world thier top fuels only run 200mph and thats the best they got!!!! i say do away with foreign parts and go back when it was 100% american!!!!!!!! last time i cheaked the 4.7l was a dual over head cam.. i would like to see some dyno from these so called 6cly powerhouses that cost much more than the 4.7l and see how much gets to the rear wheels? owe and i would smoke a ranger but it is not a pos so watch your back i think chevy 4.3 would give a better run.
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
3/05/2005
02:39:51
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
The 4.7 IS a SOHC. Already changed my cams (SINGLE cam per cyclinder) last year. I SHOULD have gone more agressive though.
But the 4.7 has said to be under rated by quite a bit. They've even used BETTER intake, Throttlebody, etc since the first 4.7 and never re rated the power either. Probably because they want to push the sh*t out of the HEMI name.
KRC does sell 4.7 engine performance parts. You could build an all motor 500HP 4.7 but bet you it would not suit as well for towing as a stocker on a regular basis.
I'm going to the dunes next weekend (Leaving Friday the 11th)
I'll be towing a trailer with at least 3 full size ATV's on it, 4 guys in the truck, and all the camping gear.
I'll be sure to pass any of them new V6 trucks who try to tow up the hills with me :-)
|
Max
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/05/2005
07:37:03
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
TO piss you off one cam per bank (or side) like on the 4.7 is a DOHC. A single cam is centerd in the engine block and uses push rods and rocker arms. A 4.7 uses no rods.
|
dak287
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/05/2005
10:25:22
|  RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
so a dual over head cam would be 1 cam for the intake and one for the exhoust valves? your right my bad!
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
3/05/2005
18:54:20
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
No. The 4.7 is still a SOHC
It only uses ONE cam per head. (Two cams total)
The Toyota 4.7, for instance, has a DOHC setup (4 cams total)
They have one cam for intake valves and one for exhaust valves. They use a belt drive to the first cam gear and then it has a short chain connecting to the second cam in each head.
While not using variable valve timing there really isn't any advantage using DOHC vs SOHC
But the 4.7 IS a SOHC engine.
And OHC vs pushrod cam engines doesn't really make more power either (aside from using variable valve timing). It's just BETTER in not having pushrods to bend and what not plus it's easier to change cams (I think).
I still don't think their is enough "magic" in a smaller V6 engine that will make it tow as good as a V8. The VVT will make it more agressive for the high RPM power (and responsable for it's higher HP rating I'm sure) it wont make any magical power down low. it just gives the ability to get the high end power of a needed agressive cam profile to breath at high RPM's without KILLING it's power down low like just a cam swap in a non VVT engine would do if the cam was agressive for the higher RPM's.
We will just have to see we actually see any of them trucks towing some trailers on the grades :-)
|
Steviek
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
3/07/2005
21:33:27
| RE: 4.7 vs. Ranger 4.0
IP: Logged
Message:
I have a 95 ext cab Dakota 318 3.55 gears and a grand pappy cap. My roommate from college had a 94 ranger ext cab 4x4 4.0. Both trucks were totally stock and automatics. Both trucks with around 80,000 miles. So you could say everything was pretty even for a ranger vs Dakota race. We raced twice. From a stand still to about 80 MPH. I pulled him by a half a truck length from 0 mph to about 25 to 30 mph. My Dakota really takes off from about 25 to 50 mph until it shifts into 2nd gear. That is right my auto shifts from 1st to 2nd at 45 or 50 mph depending if I run the column or not. During this time his ranger shifted from 1st to 2nd about 30. My Dakota pulled him big time and I was one and a half past him by 50 mph and continued to pull. Same results the second time. Now same kid only mom’s 02 explorer sport. On the highway, we slowed to 50 and jumped it. I easily pulled him to 80 by at least 2 lengths. But as we approached triple digits the explorer was catching up. Around 105 the explorer’s front was at the back of my drivers door and closing. But he hit his limiter. Buddy of mine bought a new 04 ranger, 5 speed, ext cab, 4x4, 4.0, 4.10 gears. We never raced but I’ve followed him passing cars on back roads and I have to say I’m a little afraid to race him. That truck seems to run well. But we are now talking about a new truck and a 100+K mile truck, but you better believe I’d never back down. just what i've come across.
|
| | <<Previous Page P 4 Next Page>> |
