Got to drive my GF's Dad's Dodge Dakota yesterday thing has a V6 and yet it drives like a dog. My parents have dodge minivans that drive EXACTLY like that thing... WEAK.

Ironicly he borrowed my truck to move his boat because his wifes GMC van crapped out, and the dodge didn't even come with a trailer hitch or anywhere to put one (does that mean it's not a truck? I think so)

 

Damn to hell those crappy vehicles! Nothing more frustrating and down right pathetic than trucks that are half the size of a real truck and then on top of that look like a car with a bed slapped on!


1994 Ford F150
300-6
Highly Modified and more to come!

 

Does that thing have the Mitsu 3.0? That engine's meant for LeBaron's!

 

it's a 3.0L V6, but I'm not sure if it's a mistubishi.

 

Yeah, it is. They put "Chrysler 3.0 Litre" on top, but it's a Mitsubishi. We've got one in a 93 LeBaron. Peppy for that car, but it shouldn't be in anything bigger.

 

If it's the V6 for the Dakota, it should be the 3.9, which is just a shortened 318.

Just my 2 cents.

Since my dad had a 91 dakota, and they still used the 3.9 the last I read.

You want to talk about a six cylinder in a full sized truck? My dad's 91 Dodge has the 3.9 V6 in it.

1988 F-150, SWB, 5.0 EFI (formerly 4.9 EFI), M5OD 5 speed, 3.08 gears, Summit shorty truck headers, Custom built Flowmaster exhaust system. Force 4 LP6000 lightbar, Federal signal PA-300 100 watt siren, Icom IC-V100 50 watt mobile radio.
=======================================
1965 F-100 (just purchased 1/18/01), SWB, 390, C-6 auto. Dual exhaust, Not much else to do to it.

Can see both below.

[link:www.geocities.com/hotrodford_88/|Hotrodford_88's Webpage]

 

I don't mind a 6 cylinder in a full size truck, but 3.0 is a little small. The Ford 300 I6 was one of the best torquein engines ever. The best GM engines of all time were V6's in 60's GMCS. The V6 305, 351 and 478. I've got a 4.3 V6 in my '88 Chevy and I wouldn't replace it with a 305 if you paid me.
I was just commenting that if it is the Mitsu 3.0 (and it wouldn't surprise me one bit because Chrysler seems to put that engine in everything else) then it isn't enough engine for that truck. Granted, S-10s have 2.2 4 bangers and 2.8 V6's, but the Dakotas are beefier than S-10's.

 

Wife had a 4.3 in her S10. Nice motor but the truck....well thats another story.....

 

only v-6 in a 90's dakota is a 3.9, now talk abouy half a fullsized truck with a choice of not one but 2 v-8s a 318 or 360 whats witht that ? ford or gm cant even compare to that, what suprises me even more is that ford or gm havent followed suit and offered a v-8 in either the ranger or s-10, i hate dodges but that 5.9 r/t dakota is a good lil runner, i have a 4.3 in my Xtreme too and its pretty decent but i will be happier with my own LS-1 v-8 option then i can hunt lightnings

 

One thing you got to hand Dodge is that they have straight front axles on 4x4's like Ford heavy duty trucks have. Even on half ton models which is much better build than the independent front suspension crap that GM uses and also the '97 up F-150's

 

Say goodbye to Dodge's solid front axle in the half-ton. IFS for 2002.

 

My dad has a dakota w/ a 3.9 and a 5sp in it and I was impressed w/ the peppiness of that truck. I think your looking for V-8 acceleration from a V-6 truck. Overall that Dakata has been a great little truck and I'd buy one tomorrow if I had the money (w/ a 4.7 and a 5sp of course). Go drive an S-10 and you'll appreciate that Dodge.
Oh and the IFS thing- Dodge had one outstanding characteristic that would have made me want one of their 1/2 tons; the soild front axle. Now I wouldn't buy a 1/2 ton Dodge if they gave it to me. I think the switch to IFS might actually hurt sales. The soild axle was pretty much the only advantage Dodge had over the competition. Their engines are kinda weak, their auto trannies SUCK, and their fuel economy is terrible. Now they have nothing over the compitition except unique style. Only true pantie wastes buy a truck based soley on a style advantage.

"Like a Rock"; on the sides of roads everywhere.

 

I thought this was a forum about competition. I don't think Mopar actually fits in that catagory.

Of course if we keep the forum that tight, There would not be a whole lot to talk about!

MattN

70 F100 2wd
302 3-spd man

Sweetest little blue truck I own!!!

 

A thought on their fullsize trucks. The 1/2 tons suck. My wife and I bought a new 2001 Ram Quad Cab 1500 with the 318/Auto 4x4. It was a polished turd. The transmission downshifted on every hill on the interstates. It got no better than 11 mpg (my wife insisted on the Dodge, and I insisted on the 318 for gas mileage)
I even pulled my Mustang to the dragstrip with it. Mistake. I had it in second going up the hills on the interstate. Just too little of a motor for the truck. They are bulletproof otherwise. I put Flowmaster exhaust and a K&N filter to improve the mileage. Zero help. The new Chevys run. My buddy has an extended cab Z71 with the 5.3 auto. Handed me my butt in a race. Badly. I know he should have, but oh my. Badly. Anyway, we traded in the turd. Couldnt afford the gas. Got her an SUV and bought myself a 2001 F150 4X4 with the 4.2 V6. The sad thing is, my V6 has tons more get up and go over the Slopar.




89 F150 4x4 300/4 speed 33.12.50 w/Rancho lift 3.55 gears
82 Mustang GT 302 C4 + nitrous=FAST
91 Mustang GT basic bolt ons- GM Eater

 

Though I'd rather have a Ford lightning, I'd be hard pressed to turn down a Dakota with the 360 V8 (at least for a few kicks then trade it in for a Lighting), but I'd still have to keep my trusty F150. Why doesn't Ford upsize the Ranger a tad and stick a V8 in it?????