| From | Message |
WTF
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/04/2004
13:47:20
|
 Subject: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
Here's a trucktrend article comparing the r/t to the lightning and the tacoma trd.
http://trucktrend.com/roadtests/pickup/163_0208_fun/index4.html
They put all 3 trucks on the dyno and the r/t only put down 154 hp and 200 lbs/ft of torque. The tacoma put down 180hp and the lightning put down over 300. Read it for yourself. That's terrible, has anybody else dynoed their 5.9? Maybe that one was just a dog.
|
stumpy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/04/2004
14:34:36
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
this is such bull$hit, my R/T stock has well a good amount of HP at the Rear wheels (more than 200)stock , they must have had a bad truck or they are lying or they had a different v8 then the r/t has entirely, they could have used a regular dakota with the r/t package (probly a v6) and not the Dakota R/T, mainly that ad is a cock and bull story.
They need a new dyno machine, i bet ford payed them off just so they could have dodge look terrible, and defeat the compition,
But explain to me this that a lightly moded R/T can keep up with a SVT.
Whatever, don't believe anything you read though from sites like that.
Stumpy
01 R/T CC...
|
Andrew Kern
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/04/2004
21:13:36
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
I read that article when it first came out and thought the same thing. I forgot about it and when the next issue came out, in the Q and A section an angry dakota fan wrote them with the same complaint. The answer was that the R/T that dodge gave them had trany problems right from the factory. Truck Tend requested a different R/T but got denied. They had to run the tests with the trany opperating poorly, not allowing the all the HP to the pavement.
|
Andrew Kern
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/04/2004
21:18:00
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
Calm down stumpy, all R/Ts have the 5.9 V8. Theres no such thing as a V6 with the R/T package. I would expect a R/T owner to know this.
|
R/T Rick
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/04/2004
22:33:45
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
that's an old @ss artical. not only did the R/T guys write into it the Lightning guys did as well. both truck dynoed low and Truck Trend eventually omitted that they dynoed the L and the R/T impoperly. On top of the mustang dyno which isn't good for giving accurate base numbes. They're better for tuning you truck up with because they are better able to simulate road & track condtions.
|
Pittdawg
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/05/2004
00:22:46
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
here's a k&n dyno on a 5.9 dodge ram, they seem to be the most reliable and accurate on their dyno numnbers.
http://www.kandn.com/dynocharts/57-1530.jpg
it shows the stock 5.9 dyno at 202rwhp, that's about dead on from what others have reported
|
TexasTodd
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/05/2004
16:35:48
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
And right about what a bone stock, 4.7, non HO, puts down!!
|
metalgreendak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/05/2004
22:12:56
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
4.7 more like about 180 at the rear wheels stock
|
ZenDak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/06/2004
11:22:28
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
My '01 4.7 put down over 200hp stock about two years ago,,,well I had a flowmaster muffler installed,,but that's it.
Going again after I get my emmissions problems fixed,,,,,
|
Pittdawg
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/06/2004
11:57:16
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
More interesting to me is the fact that the 4.7 puts down nearly as much torque. The two engines are supposed to be only about 10hp difference at the crank, and with a more efficient tranny its no wonder the 4.7 is so close to the 5.9 on hp, however the 5.9 is supposed to have like 50lbs more torque at the crank yet 4.7's have nearly the same rwtq numbers, either the 5.9's torque is overrated or the 4.7's is underrated.
|
dkota_rt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/06/2004
12:39:10
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
The funniest thing about this article is that they give the Ford a "9" in the "appearance category, while the Dakota receives a "5". The article forgot to mention that the testers were all smoking dope that day and that they ran the dakota in reverse on the dyno. What retards. The Ford is a "2" at best in the "appearance" category. My dogs hairy a$$ looks better than a Ford Lightening.
|
Joey
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/06/2004
13:11:14
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
the 5.9 gets around 290 ft-lbs to the rear stock. id like to see a 4.7 do that. if u dont have an r/t, thats fine we all have dakotas here but stop tryin to say ur faster when ur really not. and dont forget the r/t comes with heavier wheels and tires than the 4.7.
|
dkota_rt
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/06/2004
14:27:19
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
Take it from someone who has owned both the 4.7 and the R/T. The R/T 5.9 is faster and has noticeably much more torque. The 4.7 is a great motor and has great potential, but stick with the tried and true 5.9 for building a go fast motor.
"There is no replacemnet for displacement"
|
FDdakotaRT
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/13/2004
17:15:00
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
Yes way low just like everyone had been saying.
On both sides...R/T and SVT
I've owned both....3 R/Ts...On my 3rd as of now
and 2 SVT Lightnings. Missed my R/T sooo...much I traded my 03 Lightning in on one.
So to those thinking about trading "UP" to a Lightning......Don't!!!!
My Lightning put down around 350rwhp
and Dakota was 207rwhp...both were stock.
|
Rockn blk dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/14/2004
11:41:58
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
"They need a new dyno machine, i bet ford payed them off just so they could have dodge look terrible, and defeat the compition,"
You are very very sad.
|
Rockn blk dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/14/2004
11:46:12
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
"The funniest thing about this article is that they give the Ford a "9" in the "appearance category, while the Dakota receives a "5"."
Well maybe because they havent changed the design since 1997, crap gets a little old.
|
DSW
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/14/2004
14:47:06
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
Guess these writers are impressed by "ricer" add-on's. WOW lookie here, it's got an air dam, skirts and cooool rims, that's a 9-10 in my book. Well, let's just forget about the crappy body lines the truck has, it's got a spoiler He He! :(
I can't beleive they reported the RT having such low Dyno numbers, if they knew their truck had problems they shouldn't have run tests on the defective truck. Like they didn't have a clue to why the dyno numbers were off so bad and there was alot of drivetrain loss with this truck.
With reporting like this can you honestly trust them?
|
JC
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/14/2004
15:00:20
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
In regards to the article, you are truely pathetic if you believe Ford paid the mag off to report low dyno numbers on the R/T. Truely pathetic are you! As far as the objections on the looks, it is just an opinion. Everyone has one. It is not a right opinion nor is it a wrong opinion! If your so blinded that you can not admit the Lightning is a good looking truck purely because it is a Ford, you need to open your eyes. Both of these trucks look good and perform well in their respective segments of the industry.
Would I buy a Lightning? Hmmmm, that is a tough one. I would not buy it brand new but it is not primarily of it being a Ford. I will not buy any brand new vehicle. This includes Dodge, Ford, GM, etc.., Ford makes some good trucks but they are lacking in the customer support area and in standing behind their products! As I was searching for my R/T, I found a few ford trucks that were quite nice. One was a s/c'd HD and one was a 01 Lightning. Both of these were in the mid 20's. I also saw a 99 Lightning for 20K. They were all nice trucks but they cost more than double the $9K I spent on my 99 R/T! What it all boiled down to was how much I wanted to pay, the looks of the vehicle and the best bang for the buck.
|
GVdP
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/14/2004
15:08:31
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
I agree that if they knew of the problems they were having with the trucks, they shouldn't have reported the numbers like that, they should have put some notice at least.
I like the look of the new Fords, but, like the new Chevys, you can't get them with a manual transmission. I'm sure that modern automatic transmissions are wonderful, but I like to drive a stick, even in Nashville traffic (I'm there way too often..). A question of tastes, I guess.
I don't like how prices on truck are going up and up, but there's nothing one can do about it.
|
Rockn blk dak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/14/2004
17:51:10
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
Yes but if its true and they ran those trucks on a mustang dyno, then theres ur answer.Pretty much means u can add 20hp to what ever it reads.
|
RTArnie
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/14/2004
21:37:35
| RE: 5.9 R/T dyno #'s: these are low!
IP: Logged
Message:
I had my 2003 R/T dyno'd with an intake and exhaust cut-out.. go here for a picture of the sheet..
http://images.cardomain.com/member_images/5/web/509000-509999/509443_29_full.jpg
http://images.cardomain.com/member_images/5/web/509000-509999/509443_28_full.jpg
|
| | P 1 Next Page>> |
