'97 5.2 what else can I do? - Dodge Dakota Forum

From	Message
dakuda Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 12/01/2003 12:14:16	Subject: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: I already have 98,400 miles on my engine but it still holds all compresion. I already have Gibson headers, Stage 2 Jet Chip, Throttle spacer, .484 lift cam, K&N intake and a shift kit the engine cam stock with 230 hp and 3:55 rear end. My question is what other mods can I make to get more power without spending a fortune at one time? My truck is also lowered with a 4"x6" drop and a cowl hood. Any suggestions would be appreciated
Matt Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 12/01/2003 13:00:06	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: Get soem new roller rockers they add like 10-15 hp spacially with a cam already and they are moderatly cheap. Also might wanna think about an M-1 intake manifold (they run about $300-$400). Do something with the rest of the exhaust if you already havent, possibly a true dual setup? Just my opinion.
gen1dak Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 12/01/2003 19:10:59	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: When considering the roller rockers, do you feel a need for a bit more on top? If so, go for the 1.7:1's. Get the M1. Ditch the TB spacer. Get your TB reworked, or get a bigger one. The beer keg intake is really holding back the upper rpm power. Are you still using stock pushrods? If so, you're losing some lift with pushrod flex. Get the MP HD rods. Bargain pricing is less than $40 for the set. Matching springs? Hope you upgraded those with the cam. And like Matt said, open up that exhaust.
sean farley Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/18/2007 20:33:11	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: get smaller tires. drop down a size or two and the 3.55 will be like a 3.73
ScojoDak Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/18/2007 20:51:42	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: dakuda, a 5.2 motor properly set up can produce nearly 400 hp with stock heads and bottom end. Performance cost $$$. So stop being a cheap @$$ and get some performance parts. Need I say more?
rumplestiltsk Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/19/2007 15:08:00	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: why wake up this 4 year old post ?
ScojoDak Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/19/2007 23:51:57	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: Hmmm... I didn't even see that. DOH!
clint282cc Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/30/2007 15:06:53	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: dont do the 1.7s. i have a 455 lift cam and i tried it thinking i had a 435 cam. bent every valve and somehow blew out a piston. sooo i would highly not recomend it. also if you still want to or if anyone want the 1.7s i got them still lol.
gen1dak Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/30/2007 21:18:40	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: Math doesn't add up. Even at 1.7, a .455" lift (at stock 1.6 ratio) wouldn't be enough to make contact with a piston, but if you didn't use appropriate valvesprings, that would explain it, or maybe the cam is even bigger than what you're thinking.
clint282cc Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/31/2007 13:51:59	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: well i looked up that part number and it is 455. and im just telling you what happened. every piston had marks on it from the valve and every valve was bent. not alot but they were bent. it also lost all compression and the #6 piston thats why i had to rebuild it. 400 hp on stock heads and bottom end? maybe with a blower. not natural asperated.
Shoe GenIII 7/31/2007 14:00:53	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: Even with a stock bottom end, 400hp. That thing is not going to be reliable. Finally... a V8. '01 Dodge Dakota RC, 4.7, 5-speed, 3.92 LSD. = R/T Killer. well at least a stock one
clint282cc Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/31/2007 15:14:19	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: x2
2002R/T Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/31/2007 19:20:21	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: ditch the jet stage 2 chip and do a B&G M1 flash. i hear that the computer goes back to stock calibration with the JET.
gen1dak Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/31/2007 20:17:32	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: Cam makers often rate a cam against various rocker ratios, so I'm thinking it was .455" with 1.5:1 ratio rocker, or, the springs were wrong. Something wasn't right because there's enough room for over .500" gross valve lift on those engines. Yes, 400hp on stock heads, normally aspirated, and at 6,000rpm, it will be quite reliable. The 318 will pull 400hp at 6,000 rpm with cleaned up 360LA heads or the Magnum heads. It is easier to hip 400hp with a carbureted setup, but the MPI can do it too.
Jeremy Barnes Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/31/2007 20:51:22	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: I have a 1997 dakota, 5.2 5 speed.(currently trying to sell my 98) It is stock except for the K&N filter charger kit that I swapped off of my other truck and a cheapy duals from last owner(should probably go. I have about 3 to 5K that I will put in this to get performance. Luckily I can do most myself. I read in this post that the 318 is capable of 400 horses and still be reliable. Is this true? This truck has 90,000 miles and is insanily nice. About 3 parking lot dings in entire truck. What I'm looking for is a list of Mods for the Knowledgable guys in the site. Thanks.
clint282cc Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 7/31/2007 21:45:08	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: your ganna tell me you can get 400hp by port and polishing the heads? i bet if i bought some r/t heads with all the mods i have i still wouldnt have 400 hp
Shoe GenIII 8/01/2007 00:40:31	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: You just keep on believing. Man, I have drove 3.9s, 318s, 360s. On a stock motor you can just hear the motor not wanting to rev at 5500 RPM, let alone 6000 RPM. I want to see you keep revving that thing to 6000 RPMs on a stock motor and watch how quick it blows. Finally... a V8. '01 Dodge Dakota RC, 4.7, 5-speed, 3.92 LSD. = R/T Killer. well at least a stock one
gen1dak Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 8/01/2007 01:52:51	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: I believe in my own experience. My first car was a '69 Charger, 318-powered. Carter 625 AFB, Edelbrock SP2-P, CompCams 260 High Energy, stock rebuilt oil pump. Headers and duals. 727 tranny with B&M kit. Kickdown tweaked for 5,800 rpm shifts at WOT. The engine was a 126,000 mile rebuild with all stock hardware. Crank turned .010". Being a '69, it had the light-duty rods which are still stronger than Chevy "pink" rods. The B&M kit also allowed full manual control, so on a run I'd shift manually at 6,000rpm (monitored with a Sun tach...back then they were the thing). Now, with stock 318LA heads and the SP2-P intake, top-end power was limited, but low and midrange were great, and it still pulled well enough that it'd hit redline and the next shift planted it right where it wanted to be in the midrange....it had 2.76 gears. Hey, I was lucky to scrounge those parts together...it was 1987 and I was a starving student. Anyway, I ran the pee-ice out of that engine and it NEVER broke. Three years I ran that engine, broke a sprag in the tranny once, but never the engine. And no, it didn't kick out 400hp. If it had, I wouldn't have had to run it so hard. Note, I said stock hardware. The stock bottom-end has nothing to do with a willingness to rev. You can't hear it not wanting to rev. That has to do with cam/springs/induction/exhaust. If bottom-end hardware fails, you hear it when it blows through the oil pan, and the stock LA/Magnum bottom-end has always been good for 6 grand minimum (the old 340 Magnum was safe through 6400 where valve float usually intervened). It would rev higher with minimal upgrades, in the form of better rod and crank bolts, and oil pump. Add a solid lifter cam and you could pull over 7 grand without failure. Now, are you gonna do that with a stock 318/360 crank? No (the original 340 Magnum cam was the best), but it'll handle 6 grand, no problem. At one point I went for more HP and did the 360 topside swap. While the engine would take off around 4 grand, that heavy car with the gearing it had, convinced me to go back to the 318 heads and SP2-P. It just felt better that way, and given that setup, I had to rev it to get it to move. Given all the new cam profiles and intakes available now, it's easy, given my experience, to build and drive a 400hp 318. Clint. No, a simple port and polish will not get it. It's a complete package, not just one thing. For a carb setup, a 318, Edelbrock Performer RPM AIrGap intake, Magnum heads, or cleaned up 360LA heads, 750-800cfm carb, and a cam often used is the CampCams Xtreme Energy XE268H. Don't take my word for it, read all about it. 349 lbs at 3,000, 408lbs peak torque at 4,700 and 406hp at 5,900rpm. http://www.hotrod.com/howto/113_0304_318_small_block_build/index.html If you actually read the article, you will see it's not magic, just good solid hot-rodding upgrades. With MPI, you may have to get into computer mods, and computer-friendly cams aren't as easy to pull high-rpm HP, but it can be done.
Shoe GenIII 8/01/2007 02:50:55	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: I am in disbelief. Either way, the guy already had MPI, unless you are a hardcore drag racer you are not going to go to carb. Also, I do not care what you say, I would never feel comfortable hanging around 6100 RPM on a stock bottom end. Finally... a V8. '01 Dodge Dakota RC, 4.7, 5-speed, 3.92 LSD. = R/T Killer. well at least a stock one
clint282cc Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 8/01/2007 12:22:21	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: im comfortable at my 6k revlimiter but the motor is not. i understand that the bottom end has nothign to do with the the rpms but i have the mopar MP1 intake with magnum heads. i plan on getting bigger injectors and doing somthing with the pcm but i hear its not reprogramable. but even if i did do that id dont see it making power past 6k. right now it drops at about 5200. not saying i dont believe you but if you did make that power that is pretty sweet. it would be even sweeter if you helpped all us other guys out on here how to do it. because if you told us all how to get 400 hp with a stock bottom end im sure we would all listen very well lol.
gen1dak Dodge Dakota JOIN HERE 8/01/2007 15:21:50	RE: '97 5.2 what else can I do? IP: Logged Message: What the bottom-end can tolerate, and what should be done are two different things. At the very least, if I were building an engine now to be run like that, I would feel much better with some ARP bolts in place of the stock pieces. It's relatively sheap insurance to maintain a bullet-proof setup. Like I said, when that engine was built, it was on a very tight budget, and I didn't even know how to spell ARP back then. I also said MPI would require more effort in the form of electronics at least to hit a given HP number. Perhaps I should've said it'd need more cam? I thought that was a given. Are you guys even reading what I've already posted? I said, my old engine DID NOT make 400hp. Back then, Mopar had performance recipes for upwards of 330hp in a 318, but that required good 360 heads, more cam, better intake.....more $$$ I didn't have. My '69 couldn't possibly do that with the parts it had, but the link I posted shows how easy it is with modern parts on a carb setup. MPI is capable of this as well. It's all about getting enough air into the thing without a blower. The Hot Rod team used 318 heads (to save money since they came with the engine), then hogged them out to 360-size ports. READ THE ARTICLE. You can do the same thing with a Magnum head swap or to stay LA, the 360LA heads. One thing not in the electronic version of the article is a sidebar where the fellows wondered how much power they'd have made with a fresh bottom-end. I have the published copy. They pulled this engine from a junkyard. They didn't touch the rings, or anything else for that matter, and that includes the crank and rod bolts. It was basically a top-end improvement with a cam swap to show what can be done with minimal cash. Look, it isn't just there. It's also in any decent performance writing about the Mopar smallblock, as well as the official books (you've heard of them, right? You know, books?), from Mopar on the subject. It isn't nearly the mystery you guys are making it out to be....but you do have to read it from the books. Most of that detailed info has not made the transfer to the web, just the highlights. I won't try to make any of you believe it. Also, keep in mind that the difference between a redline of 6K vs 6,400 rpm is much greater than you'd think since the forces increase geometrically as the speeds increase. Had I pushed it beyond 6K, it probably would have thrown a rod. No illusions. It wasn't the quickest or the fastest, but it had a rep that was respected. It was a combination of picking my races, and it sounded like it'd rip your teeth out. The last night I was out cruising in it, I had a very close run against a late 70's 'Vette with a lumpity-lump cam...but an obviously stock tranny (I learned that as soon as he hot redline and was stuck while the tranny tried to find second). I pulled to a higher redline, second gear slammed and I went from a fender behind to half a fender ahead. Turns out it was a pretty good match, but I had the better tranny and that made all the difference. Race won, turn around for my victory lap and a very freshly restored late 60's Ford pulls up. I just looked over and acted insulted. No race there. I had a feeling he was packing, and later found out he had a dual quad 427 under the hood. So, I didn't go down in flames. People thought I was always holding out on the true performance, but in reality, they were seeing all it had. The rumor mill had many quicker cars not wanting to race me. All told, I beat a lot of cars that, on paper, I really shouldn't have, but I was on my game and they usually weren't.
	P 1 Next Page>>

Home | Forums | Members | Pictures | Contact Us

This site is in no way affiliated with Chrysler or any of its subsidiaries.