HO performance
Thread Starter
|
Record Breaker
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
From: Palm Bay, FL
RE: HO performance
Might have to do with Fiat being their parent company. It's ashame it used to be a contender in reliability, fit & finish. I wish DCX would up the warranty to at least 70k 5 year. GM is at 100k that's righteous!
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
From:
RE: HO performance
I have the HO and its well worth it over all the other options.
The AWD is fine if youdon't mindless MPG and are not into performance.
AWDis nice thoughfor taking off at tight corners as my wifes Durango has it and it never spins even with the 360...
Withmy 4.7 HO Dak she spins the rearstaking off at allthe same corners.
The HO is not an option with AWD because it's a performance option and the the AWD is not a performance benefit....
It's one of those personal preference deals where you have to decide what you want!
As for gas... Mine runs ok on 87 but best on 89-93 and you can feel the difference in the power. Even with the 87 the HO was better than the stock 4.7 I drove!
I don't see why we even discuss the other truck manufacturers as most people would likely have looked at them prior to buying a Dak, but the dak stands out in my opinion.
Is the Dak the best at everything? No but it is good at everything a truck should be good at!
It has plenty of room and makes good use of it...etc...
The AWD is fine if youdon't mindless MPG and are not into performance.
AWDis nice thoughfor taking off at tight corners as my wifes Durango has it and it never spins even with the 360...
Withmy 4.7 HO Dak she spins the rearstaking off at allthe same corners.
The HO is not an option with AWD because it's a performance option and the the AWD is not a performance benefit....
It's one of those personal preference deals where you have to decide what you want!
As for gas... Mine runs ok on 87 but best on 89-93 and you can feel the difference in the power. Even with the 87 the HO was better than the stock 4.7 I drove!
I don't see why we even discuss the other truck manufacturers as most people would likely have looked at them prior to buying a Dak, but the dak stands out in my opinion.
Is the Dak the best at everything? No but it is good at everything a truck should be good at!
It has plenty of room and makes good use of it...etc...
Thread Starter
|
Record Breaker
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
From: Palm Bay, FL
RE: HO performance
The 07 will again have the AWD option with the HO as it did in 05 & 06 but won't be available until late winter or spring. Why,who knows! The total make up is the same on the HO as the regular 4.7 so there should be no reason that it is not offered now. According to a phone call to DCX, they told me it’s notyet in the production planning stage whatever that means. The 07 AWD box is a new part number and is considered Gen II. As far as performance, 30hp is significant to be higher performance than the 4.7 non-HO. But!!!! not high performance enough in any way, shape or form. 260HP in today’s market is light duty and the only saving grace is the 310-torque rating. Almost anyone will admit that the Dak needs a complete HP upgrade from the 3.7 to the 4.7. It has lost its performance king of the hill status.
The Dodge.com web site still touting options that don’t exist any longer and still does not express that certain features won’t be available until sometime in the model year. Even the dealers don’t have the information straight. No more U-connect optionas it was available in 05-06 even thought the current website info. for 07 shows it as an option.The remote start is said to be standard on the Laramie but the dealer said he hasno indication this is true. Strange way to run a business.
Rookie
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
RE: HO performance
If you haven't heard, DCX stupidly has thousandsof '06 and '07 models sitting in lots around Detroit and at a dealer near you... so, since all those trucks are sitting around, they have cut way back on production - so much so they may not make Dakotas until March! 
So, since they only make so many, that's why some of the lower-selling option combinations (like HO AWD or V8 6spd) get pushed off into the distant future. Every car company runs lots of 30-60 mostly identical cars or trucks to make it economical to build them, so if you're looking for an odd combo (like a TRX ST V8 manual QC or something) you'll be waiting a L-O-N-G time. But, waiting is better than not getting what you want like at other companies!
So, since they only make so many, that's why some of the lower-selling option combinations (like HO AWD or V8 6spd) get pushed off into the distant future. Every car company runs lots of 30-60 mostly identical cars or trucks to make it economical to build them, so if you're looking for an odd combo (like a TRX ST V8 manual QC or something) you'll be waiting a L-O-N-G time. But, waiting is better than not getting what you want like at other companies!
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
From:
RE: HO performance
Hmmmm... When I looked into getting the AWD (in 05) and I added the HO packageit would remove the AWD as though not available together.... Does anyone actually have this combo?
As for the 260hp HO being low on the performance king status... Well I actually think the HO power should be the standard and a performance upgrade option should have a bit more snot...
I can't imagine the standard 4.7 holds up to any stock offering of the competition except in towing maybe.
The one I test drove was notably weaker than the HO and that was with 87 octane in both trucks. The HO came alive even more with the 93 octane.
The HOdoes havedecent power, but it is more of an upgrade to what it should be standard! (IMO) Mine also likes at least 89 octane to run its best.
It does run ok on 87 but I bet they list it as a performance engine just because it needs higher octane toget its numbers!
As for AWD and gas mileage... It will be at least a 2mpg hit and only worth it if you reallllly need it. I wish my wife's Durango didn't have it!
Although with BFG ATs on it you don't even need 4 lock and it does keep you from fish-tailing so for my wife it might be a good thing.
My HO with the limited slip is a bit touchy on slippery roads and I told my wife to "just put it into 4x4 if it's the least bit slippery".
The gas pedal is snappy and I have had to be careful myself on corners and inintersections. Light bed, crappy GoodYears, and the LSD are not a good combo on slippery roads!
Anyway, I love my truck but I do wish the performance upgrade was more of a standout like it used to be... Later...
As for the 260hp HO being low on the performance king status... Well I actually think the HO power should be the standard and a performance upgrade option should have a bit more snot...
I can't imagine the standard 4.7 holds up to any stock offering of the competition except in towing maybe.
The one I test drove was notably weaker than the HO and that was with 87 octane in both trucks. The HO came alive even more with the 93 octane.
The HOdoes havedecent power, but it is more of an upgrade to what it should be standard! (IMO) Mine also likes at least 89 octane to run its best.
It does run ok on 87 but I bet they list it as a performance engine just because it needs higher octane toget its numbers!
As for AWD and gas mileage... It will be at least a 2mpg hit and only worth it if you reallllly need it. I wish my wife's Durango didn't have it!
Although with BFG ATs on it you don't even need 4 lock and it does keep you from fish-tailing so for my wife it might be a good thing.
My HO with the limited slip is a bit touchy on slippery roads and I told my wife to "just put it into 4x4 if it's the least bit slippery".
The gas pedal is snappy and I have had to be careful myself on corners and inintersections. Light bed, crappy GoodYears, and the LSD are not a good combo on slippery roads!
Anyway, I love my truck but I do wish the performance upgrade was more of a standout like it used to be... Later...
Rookie
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
RE: HO performance
I agree. before I bought my qc ho I test drove a regular v8 qc, with 355 gears. It felt slow to me, no passing power on the freeway at all. [:'(]The HO seems to run way better. A lot of that might have to do with it only coming with 392 gears though. So I think this should be the base v8,& the ho should have 300 hp![sm=goodidea.gif]
RE: HO performance
Well, funny how this thread as gone to different topic's. I'm a newbie so take it the way you like..
I had 4 different Dakota before this new 2006 TRX 4 AWD 4.7 HO. and a Dakota R/T. So decided that before I would get anything else, I would try other brand of vehicle.
The closest from Dakota (Mid Size) to my taste was the Toyota Tacoma and even out perform the Dakota on many aspect but....
What made the difference in my book was, North American Product, Price and overall power of the HO performance...
The price difference here in Canada on a straight sale is about $5500 less for a Dakota TRX4 loaded than what it would be for the Toyota Tacoma TR5 Off road. and the 0% for 60 month financing that North American company offers is the way to go![sm=badbadbad.gif]
I had 4 different Dakota before this new 2006 TRX 4 AWD 4.7 HO. and a Dakota R/T. So decided that before I would get anything else, I would try other brand of vehicle.
The closest from Dakota (Mid Size) to my taste was the Toyota Tacoma and even out perform the Dakota on many aspect but....
What made the difference in my book was, North American Product, Price and overall power of the HO performance...
The price difference here in Canada on a straight sale is about $5500 less for a Dakota TRX4 loaded than what it would be for the Toyota Tacoma TR5 Off road. and the 0% for 60 month financing that North American company offers is the way to go![sm=badbadbad.gif]