Question about older Dakotas
From : oldtimer
Q: i dont have the knowledge of small pickups that many of the posters here display so maybe i can get a question answered. i had an old 1990 dakota ext cab sport v6 for about 8 years. i bought it used and it already had a lot of miles on it then. i do not use my truck on a daily basis but i do work as a volunteer for a needy veterans food bank and do use it to haul foodstuffs for the food bank. i drive the truck no more than 500 miles a month. recently the old 90 dakota reached the 200000 mile mark so i went searching for a newer one with less miles. the old 90 was showing low oil pressure and the trannie with that many miles worried me. i found a 1996 v6 dakota ext cab slt that seemed to be in good condition. i was immediatley taken with its excellent condtition cosmetically. none of the dodge peeling paint and it appeared to have always been garaged. i was well satisfied with the 1990 dak because it rode and drove more like a large car than a truck. i figured that the 1996 would be newer version of the same. both dakotas both ext cab both v6s both automatic. it appeared to me that the major redesign in dakotas did not occur unitl the 1997 model. i was badly surprised after i bought the 96. it does not ride and handle like the 90. the suspension is much stiffer. the body is 3 to 4 inches higher off the ground. it rides and handles like a truck rather than a large car and it acutally feels like a heavier vehicle. it also gets poorer gas mileage even though both trucks are v6s it even seems to be geared lower than the 90. the old 1990 was a pleasure to drive the 1996 is less pleasurable to drive. did they really change this much from the 1990 model to the 1996 model oldtimer .
Replies:
From : denny
there was a slight change in 94 but it is a truck. its suppose to drive like one. i have a 94 and love it. i changed the rear gears to 4.10 to get a little extra pickup and it made all the difference. the gears i can believe made a big difference. i run a catback exhaust maybe just a little bit throttle body riser no. not even close. maybe on an engine with a single or dual plain manifold but not on a magnum engine. k&n dont start i wont! bg and modified computer chip on a 3.9l. what kind of chip ive heard that some work good and others dont do much. i can blow off the 1500 hemis at the light. not even on your best day!! maybe if the driver of the hemi was playing with the ole lady when the light turned...sorry i know how a 3.9 runs and how a 5.7 runs. denny .
From : Annonymous
there was a slight change in 94 but it is a truck. its suppose to drive like one. i have a 94 and love it. i changed the rear gears to 4.10 to get a little extra pickup and it made all the difference. i run a catback exhaust throttle body riser k&n dont start and modified computer chip on a 3.9l. i can blow off the 1500 hemis at the light. my mpg is around 17 with most stop and go driving so the mileage is not bad. if you want to feel a really hard ride try the s-10. if you like the soft ride car like go with a nissan. i love my dak and wont change even for a newer model. on fri 23 apr 2004 220631 -0700 oldtimer wrote i dont have the knowledge of small pickups that many of the posters here display so maybe i can get a question answered. i had an old 1990 dakota ext cab sport v6 for about 8 years. i bought it used and it already had a lot of miles on it then. i do not use my truck on a daily basis but i do work as a volunteer for a needy veterans food bank and do use it to haul foodstuffs for the food bank. i drive the truck no more than 500 miles a month. recently the old 90 dakota reached the 200000 mile mark so i went searching for a newer one with less miles. the old 90 was showing low oil pressure and the trannie with that many miles worried me. i found a 1996 v6 dakota ext cab slt that seemed to be in good condition. i was immediatley taken with its excellent condtition cosmetically. none of the dodge peeling paint and it appeared to have always been garaged. i was well satisfied with the 1990 dak because it rode and drove more like a large car than a truck. i figured that the 1996 would be newer version of the same. both dakotas both ext cab both v6s both automatic. it appeared to me that the major redesign in dakotas did not occur unitl the 1997 model. i was badly surprised after i bought the 96. it does not ride and handle like the 90. the suspension is much stiffer. the body is 3 to 4 inches higher off the ground. it rides and handles like a truck rather than a large car and it acutally feels like a heavier vehicle. it also gets poorer gas mileage even though both trucks are v6s it even seems to be geared lower than the 90. the old 1990 was a pleasure to drive the 1996 is less pleasurable to drive. did they really change this much from the 1990 model to the 1996 model oldtimer .
From : Annonymous
oldtimer wrote i had an old 1990 dakota ext cab sport v6 for about 8 years. i found a 1996 v6 dakota ext cab slt that seemed to be in good condition. i was well satisfied with the 1990 dak because it rode and drove more like a large car than a truck. i figured that the 1996 would be newer version of the same. both dakotas both ext cab both v6s both automatic. it appeared to me that the major redesign in dakotas did not occur unitl the 1997 model. i was badly surprised after i bought the 96. it does not ride and handle like the 90. the suspension is much stiffer. the body is 3 to 4 inches higher off the ground. it rides and handles like a truck rather than a large car and it acutally feels like a heavier vehicle. it also gets poorer gas mileage even though both trucks are v6s it even seems to be geared lower than the 90. the old 1990 was a pleasure to drive the 1996 is less pleasurable to drive. did they really change this much from the 1990 model to the 1996 model i have a 95 which is identical to the 96s. i got mine with the 2000 pound payload package and i thought it rode like a marshmellow. i had to replace the front shocks at 3000 miles with kybs to keep it from bouncing around so badly it was dangerous. i still have to be careful not to bottom out the front end on rough roads. my 62 f-100 rode like a truck. leaf springs all around - 9 leafs in back 5 leafs in front. i could jump up and down in the back and the only thing that moved was the tires. the 90 v6 was the old motor the 96 v6 is the magnum motor. about 140hp vs. 175hp so im not surprised if the milage is less. 4wd models have a 3 body lift and the milage is 2mpg less the front axle is always engaged. did you get a 4wd model when they changed body styles in 93 it probably did get heavier. they lengthened the engine compartment to fit the v8. they also went to the 6 bolt wheels. the standard cabs are also available with a 2800 pound payload package. if you have that it might ride a bit stiffer. the standard springs are 1400 pounds. there were 3 rear end ratios available. so your gearing may well be lower than before. 3.90 3.55 and 3.23. i have the 3.55 and it seems about right. as for handling in addition to the kyb shocks i put on an addco rear anti-sway bar and adjusted the toe-in out of the front end alignment and this combination handles pretty well. -- frank ball frankb@sonic.net .
From : Annonymous
i have blown off a 1500 hemi. it couldnt get its power to the road where i could. from 0-50 left him in the rearview and he had a half truck head start. @50 i backed off and he blew on by. kind of pissed at how bad i had taken him so he ran it up to 70 or so until he hit the next light. then he tried again. same result. if you have one and are in the bay area fl try me. i love to stop light race. on sat 01 may 2004 191904 gmt denny wddodge@woh.rr.com wrote there was a slight change in 94 but it is a truck. its suppose to drive like one. i have a 94 and love it. i changed the rear gears to 4.10 to get a little extra pickup and it made all the difference. the gears i can believe made a big difference. i run a catback exhaust maybe just a little bit throttle body riser no. not even close. maybe on an engine with a single or dual plain manifold but not on a magnum engine. k&n dont start i wont! bg and modified computer chip on a 3.9l. what kind of chip ive heard that some work good and others dont do much. i can blow off the 1500 hemis at the light. not even on your best day!! maybe if the driver of the hemi was playing with the ole lady when the light turned...sorry i know how a 3.9 runs and how a 5.7 runs. denny .
From : ken marsh
#oldtimer wrote # did they really change this much from the 1990 model to the 1996 # model a lot of stuff changed mostly for the good but im thinking you may have gotten a higher payload option on the 96 that you didnt have on the 90. do they have the same size tires same fender flares rear stabilizer bar if each of these is different you got a stiffer ride because you have a heavier payload carrier. if so throw a couple hundred pounds of something in the bed. as for peeling paint that was a problem with most us makes around 1990 because of a change in paint processes to meet new epa pollution standards. ken. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- mail kmarsh at charm dot net | cia linked to iraqi pow mistreatment www http//www.charm.net/kmarsh | and national shame-no one surprised ------------------------------------------------------------------------- .