For some reason, I was thinking yours was 2wd. My mistake!! FWIW as the advancements of the automotive industry continues, the Hemi may be obsolete!!!
But since you have already freshened up your existing diff, then I agree, I would stick with the drums for now.

 

My friend a hemi will never be obsolete. That's why it got redesigned and brought back. It's one of the most efficient engines out there.
there was a group of guys that did an engine masters style build off with each other.
One built a Ford 351w, one a small block 350, and one a hemi. The rules were all 3 engines had to be built with everything matching. Heads have to have same spring pressures, valve sizes as close as possible, same size combustion Chambers, as close to the same cam specs as possible, the c.i. of each engines we're the same, pistons rods and cranks all weight matched, compression ratios the same, they went all out to match the engines as closely as possible. Down to building the headers the same. Same Holley 750 cfm carbs, same ignition coils, plugs and wires. They Dyno tested them and tuned them. In the end the hemi had all the best numbers, the only downfall was it was externally wider than the other engines and weighed a bit more. The parts for it also cost a bit more.
I'll see if I still have the write up on it. It was a super in depth build

 

I would absolutely love to see a hemi swap, even though the only one on my horizon is potentially a 360 swap if my 318 swapped motor goes belly up.

As far as your predicament, I think 10" drums in the rear are MORE than sufficient for any amount of towing the Dakota is even remotely suited for. And a rear brake upgrade is kind of pointless because the fronts can't be upgraded worth a damn really. But do what you wish; if you got the money and want the project then more power to ya!

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azboyinmi

My friend a hemi will never be obsolete. That's why it got redesigned and brought back. It's one of the most efficient engines out there.
there was a group of guys that did an engine masters style build off with each other.
One built a Ford 351w, one a small block 350, and one a hemi. The rules were all 3 engines had to be built with everything matching. Heads have to have same spring pressures, valve sizes as close as possible, same size combustion Chambers, as close to the same cam specs as possible, the c.i. of each engines we're the same, pistons rods and cranks all weight matched, compression ratios the same, they went all out to match the engines as closely as possible. Down to building the headers the same. Same Holley 750 cfm carbs, same ignition coils, plugs and wires. They Dyno tested them and tuned them. In the end the hemi had all the best numbers, the only downfall was it was externally wider than the other engines and weighed a bit more. The parts for it also cost a bit more.
I'll see if I still have the write up on it. It was a super in depth build

That was just a tongue in cheek remark I made !!

Do you have a link to above test? I am assuming a few things here. 1. This test was run on a 426 hemi and not the new design? If so, its hardly fair to compare a hemi to a 351w or sbc. Those 2 engines were both designed around a much smaller CID......
IMO compare a 426 hemi to a 427 SOHC or a BBC L88 and that would be a more fair comparison.....

2. The new Hemi's have very little in common with the old hemi's. My "tongue in cheek" remark was based on looking how far the automotive technology has advanced in the past 10 to 20 years.... What are we going to see in the next 10 years?

 

No the hemi they used was an older smaller hemi.. I don't have a link, it was in a mag just can't find the one it was in. I'm pretty sure I saved it. This was a few years ago so I don't remember all the details but I am trying to find it so I can show people

 

I believe they used the original 392 hemi on the build. Even though, if I remember correctly, that was before they actually called it a hemi. It was still a hemi which gets it's name from the hemispherical combustion chamber. They called it a firepower or firedome back then buts it's the same thing.
Ive got a few large boxes of magazines to go through to find the write up

 

Minor correction - the 392 was the 2nd Gen hemi, and yes, they called them hemis back then.

The original Dodge hemi ( the "Red Ram" baby Hemi) was 241cid(!!!)

The first Chrysler hemi was 331cid in 1951. The first Firedome hemi was in the 1952 Desoto, at 276 CID. The Dodge Baby Hemi was 241 CID in 1953. See http://www.hothemiheads.com/hemi_inf...engine_id.html

(Chrysler also made a 350cid polyhead engine in the late 50's. It, and its sister 361cid, were the first B block engines.)

RwP

 

Thanks Ralph. I knew something was off when I was typing that. I forgot the 392 was 2nd gen and got the hemi name.
i am pretty sure that's what they used for the build up. Really hope I can find that mag

 

Considering the front brakes do the lion's share of the braking I guess I would not be too concerned about rear drums. Mine have always stopped my truck.

 

In short, the answer, at least from my experience, would be a flat out no, since i have done the following to different first gen Dakotas. 1991, auto 4X4-swapped 1994 rear axle with 10" drums, used that truck to tow FWD cars with a tow dolly, and to plow in the northern N.Y. snowbelt in the Syracuse area, 1995 auto 4X4-5.9 swap, along with later model 9.25 with disks, used mostly for daily driving, hauling an 8x10 trailer loaded with firewood in the winter, and towing a 6x12 trailer with a small tractor, 1994 3.9 5 speed 4X4, mainly stock, including 9" drums, used to tow small cars and plow and as a daily driver for 7 years, 1993 5.9 swap, auto 4X4, did a rear disk upgrade using a wilwood sourced kit. My observations, after driving all of these trucks in multiple conditions for many years, the best options, in order, are, the 9.25/disk brake swap, then, the 9" stock rear drums, then the 10" stock rear drums, and last, the conversion to wilwood disks. Some wont like my order, but, i actually found that, especially with light towing, the 9" inch ran cooler overall, and didnt wear as fast as the 10" brakes did, but, the 9.25 with disks worked very well, had very little brake fade, even with heavier loads, but wore the pads and rotors faster for some reason, than the drum brake setups did. As for the wilwood based disk brake conversion, i experienced tons of brake fade on long trips, issues with premature wear, excessive heat, and, after the second set of warped rotors in 3 years, i actually swapped it back to the original 10" drums. Now, what i consider light towing, some might call moderate. It is all a matter of opinion, but, some examples of the cars i towed and the distances, a 1998 Subaru Outback on a tow dolly, driveshaft removed, 325 miles one way, a 2004 Subaru Impreza Outback Sport, driveshaft removed, tow dolly, roughly 375 miles one way, 1991 Dakota, in pieces, on an aluminum 16 foot trailer for the frame and cab (towed with the 94 v-6), and the rest on a 6x12 trailer behind the 95, about 450 miles. In the last 15 years, i have had multiple first gen Dakotas (FYI, im not a fan of the second gen or later models), as well as built and modified several others, and, most of the time, all the trucks end up with stock brakes. The one upgrade, i guess you could call it, that i do do though, is drilled and slotted front rotors and good pads. They seem to help a lot with braking, especially under load.