truck-trans-dodge
truck-logo-dodge
Search Messages :  

2005 Dodge Truck Changes?

From : oneshot scot

Q: i think the 05 trucks from every manufacturer except dodge are absolute crap. the dodge on the other hand with all their models still make a truck. they look like trucks. they drive like trucks and they work like trucks. steve rear drum brakes are not all that bad for all cases. ever drive on a rainy day on those days i prefer drums. i also never have had warped drums which is all too common with disc rotors. its a matter of preference and for me it just doesnt matter as there are pros and cons to both. dodge went with 17 rims as well because of the larger rotors. thing is stopping distance didnt increase and is on par with other manufactures braking even though they have smaller rotors and 16 rims. one-shot scot wrote i dont know about dodge but gm has taken a few steps backward with its 2005 silverado and sierra 1500-series trucks there are 3 differences in standard equipment for 2005 2004 2005 4-wheel disk brakes front disc/rear drum brakes p235/75r16 tires p245/70r17 tires max rating 2271 lbs. max rating 2205 lbs. rear axle 3.42 ratio rear axle 3.23 ratio the other difference is the epa rating of the 2005 truck with the following equipment 4-spd automatic transmission vortec 4800 v8 sfi gas engine 2004 2005 city 17/highway 20 city 16/highway 21 after 6 years of using rear disc brakes gm made the decision to go back to antiquated drum brakes on the rear of its 2005 1500-series trucks to save money. even though drum brakes have more parts than disc brakes and are harder to service they are less expensive to manufacture. in a feeble attempt to give some credibility to its decision to reinstate the old fashioned rear drum brake system gm has made the brake drums bigger. this improvement was undoubtedly done to increase stopping power and heat dissipation. now gm would like us to believe that its rear drum brakes are superior to its earlier rear disk brakes. however gm has stopped short of putting drum brakes on the front of its trucks -- at least for the 2005 model year. unfortunately the newly-designed rear drum brake system of the 2005 1500-series trucks has a drum which is now so large that it requires the use of a 17-inch rim in order to give it adequate clearance. the use of this larger rim necessitates the use of lower profile tires so the load capacity of the 4 standard-equipment tires of the 2005 truck is reduced by 264 pounds when compared to the standard tires which were on the 1999-2004 1500-series trucks with 16-inch rims. it appears that gm has used the new 3.23 rear axle ratio to obtain higher highway mileage in the 2005 truck. there will now be a decrease of 4th-gear power of around 6% and the lower city rating indicates that there will also be an increase in down-shifting. in my opinion this is another big step backward. heres what the gmc website has to say in regard to technological advances what is professional grade its a commitment to a higher standard of innovative engineering design and performance. as of the 2005 model year this statement became total bullshit. so what does gms backward technology and product degradation have to do with dodge plenty! dodge may have followed suite and downgraded its trucks as well. watch out! http//www.gmc.com/index.jspversion=flash .

Replies:

From : jeff mayner

the point is tom you dont like it when it happens to you but think its just hunky dory for you to do it . . .a classic liberal double standard. no different than your conservative one. sit on it and spin. lol you really need to get out of the sixtys dude -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : ramworker

crybaby crap from budd snipped sorry for the piggyback response on budds reply but rrs worthless servers really suck and i never saw this one from you. sure you probably could buy a few stock short blocks for less and save money but you really wouldnt be any better off than you were to begin with. then you forgot to add the time and fun of yanking the dead engine out swapping parts putting the new one back in and hoping that you didnt miss or break something in the process and having no vehicle in the mean time. if you flog anything long enough and hard enough youll break it. the mods i gave are minor and are well within the capability of the engine to withstand. possibly but just because the mods are easy doesnt make them minor. changing the waste gate pressure on a turbocharged engine is easy too but the results are far from minor. im not completely sure how much more hp that engine can reliably deal with but from your link you are probably right. either way i doubt that the drive train will put up with it for long if you make it tow with this extra hp. any way you look at it there is no free lunch. how the heck do you liken a increase in boost on a supercharged engine to a waste gate change on a turbo charged engine iirc that engine was designed to put out around 260 hp stock without the blower and ford already added 100+ hp to it and i doubt that they made any significant changes internally or they simply wouldnt be able to sell that truck so cheap. you really dont know what the hell your talking about when it comes to high performance do ya when you say things like that it sounds more like you dont. from what i can find on the web it is the same 5.4 short block that the regular truck uses and ford hopped it up with a supercharger and some other mods. how much more hp do you think that this engine can take if they were using the gt block this truck would cost much more than it does now. bottom line on this is you made a number of stupid uniformed statement about a truck actually two trucks you knew jack about and were proven wrong. now you are grasping at straws and spinning. id suggest you spend some time both behind the wheel and under the hood before you make a total ass of yourself although i think it might be too late. dont depend on the web for all your info. .

From : steve lusardi

hi - im just a weekend mechanic - nothing too technical - but a couple of things come to mind. the first fix is the easiest make sure your coolant level is filled to the proper level. if not - the heater/defroster will run cool. the second idea the thermostat may have been defective from the beginning. every once in a while one comes off the assembly line that just doesnt work properly. and last - but least likely is there any way in the world the thermostat could be installed backwards from the ones ive replaced it would be hard to do - but thats why manufacturers try and make things fool-proof. if it can be done incorrectly - ill get er done !! robert i have a 95 b2500 van 318ci which hasnt been putting out proper heat since i had the radiator flushed and thermostat changed in the spring. this morning it was in the low 50s and i put on the defroster. it put out cool iar instead of hot then it started blowing cold air and i noticed the temp gauge head up to the high end toward very hot. i switched to heat and the temp began to drop towards cold and the it began to climb again to midrange which is way beyond where it normally resides. it usually stays at the 1/4 hash mark when all is running well. i turned off the controls for heat and it ran well. what can it be what needs to be chaned thanks barry .

From : miles

steve lusardi wrote i think the 05 trucks from every manufacturer except dodge are absolute crap. the dodge on the other hand with all their models still make a truck. they look like trucks. they drive like trucks and they work like trucks. steve i agree with you for the most part. i think chevy and other manufacturers may follow suit has realized that a big portion of the truck buying public dont use their trucks as they have been historically. im thinking that the move to drums on the rear may be because of all those unladen trucks running around out there not needing the extra stopping power and cost of rear discs. we use our truck in my wifes business and to pull our boat. 85% of the time it isnt towing or lugging anything around. looks good though. ;- jeff rear drum brakes are not all that bad for all cases. ever drive on a rainy day on those days i prefer drums. i also never have had warped drums which is all too common with disc rotors. its a matter of preference and for me it just doesnt matter as there are pros and cons to both. dodge went with 17 rims as well because of the larger rotors. thing is stopping distance didnt increase and is on par with other manufactures braking even though they have smaller rotors and 16 rims. one-shot scot wrote i dont know about dodge but gm has taken a few steps backward with its 2005 silverado and sierra 1500-series trucks there are 3 differences in standard equipment for 2005 2004 2005 4-wheel disk brakes front disc/rear drum brakes p235/75r16 tires p245/70r17 tires max rating 2271 lbs. max rating 2205 lbs. rear axle 3.42 ratio rear axle 3.23 ratio the other difference is the epa rating of the 2005 truck with the following equipment 4-spd automatic transmission vortec 4800 v8 sfi gas engine 2004 2005 city 17/highway 20 city 16/highway 21 after 6 years of using rear disc brakes gm made the decision to go back to antiquated drum brakes on the rear of its 2005 1500-series trucks to save money. even though drum brakes have more parts than disc brakes and are harder to service they are less expensive to manufacture. in a feeble attempt to give some credibility to its decision to reinstate the old fashioned rear drum brake system gm has made the brake drums bigger. this improvement was undoubtedly done to increase stopping power and heat dissipation. now gm would like us to believe that its rear drum brakes are superior to its earlier rear disk brakes. however gm has stopped short of putting drum brakes on the front of its trucks -- at least for the 2005 model year. unfortunately the newly-designed rear drum brake system of the 2005 1500-series trucks has a drum which is now so large that it requires the use of a 17-inch rim in order to give it adequate clearance. the use of this larger rim necessitates the use of lower profile tires so the load capacity of the 4 standard-equipment tires of the 2005 truck is reduced by 264 pounds when compared to the standard tires which were on the 1999-2004 1500-series trucks with 16-inch rims. it appears that gm has used the new 3.23 rear axle ratio to obtain higher highway mileage in the 2005 truck. there will now be a decrease of 4th-gear power of around 6% and the lower city rating indicates that there will also be an increase in down-shifting. in my opinion this is another big step backward. heres what the gmc website has to say in regard to technological advances what is professional grade its a commitment to a higher standard of innovative engineering design and performance. as of the 2005 model year this statement became total bullshit. so what does gms backward technology and product degradation have to do with dodge plenty! dodge may have followed suite and downgraded its trucks as well. watch out! http//www.gmc.com/index.jspversion=flash .

From : jwp

well he keeps saying he wants to fix them then he doesnt then he has his own plan then someone elses plan then we shouldnt fix them for the wrong reason then . . . . . . -- budd pres. bush john kerry has changed his position on the iraq war so many times he could debate himself. b.c. and lose. john z kerry wrote bush is responsible for all the pot holes in the new jersey turnpike and i am really pissed about it! a special pot hole patcher is available from north carolina but bush will not order its use. john z kerry president t-bone steak houses hes about to wrap up a four year vacation--maybe he can help then. nahhhh hes still trying to locate the pot hole patcher. rumor is it is located in a no. carolina steak house. kerry has a plan for patching pot holes but no one can figure out what it is. john z kerry presiden t-bone steak houses .