I don't think anyone is being uptight, we just have conflicting information which makes things confusing. One would think dodge would put the right chart on their website.

I bought a 4.7 and have no regrets about it. That was the point of this thread. The power is great in my opinion and I believe my mpg are much better in the 4.7. On highway when mds kicks in there may not be much difference but with my short trips I do not think my mpg would be close.

I also feel there are less things to break or go wrong on 4.7 because no mds. I am sure the 5.7 is terrifi my point is only that I am happy with my 4.7.

 

Well, judging by my forum name, I'd guess I bought a Hemi. Not really uptight, just don't like being challenged for posting published information vs a bunch of guesses and theories. I love the Hemi, but there are a lot of engines that have some great low RPM torque, including the 4.7. There are a lot of variables in engine design such as the grind on the cam that can help make torque down low.

More power to all that bought the 4.7. I'll stick with the Hemi, though I'm quite disappointed that it doesn't have the low-end grunt to make it up the smallest inclines without down-shifting. Cruising at 75 MPH on the other hand...

 

I think both engines are great. It just depends on needs. I agree that the 4.7 is probably more economical. The Hemi is really thirsty if you allow it to run RPMs

My experience with torque is that it can be deceiving, you don't know it's there until you need it.

My first truck was a 67 chevy with the 292 CI 6 cylinder engine. It had a granny low 4 speed and a single barrel carburator with an oil bath filter and a 4.10 posi rear end. The truck was pretty lame on the open road because of the RPMs it had to turn at speed. I took off the 4.10 and put on a 3.31 rear end on it because all I used it for was to put my dirt bike on the back ( an old Husquavarna 360). My Friend had brand new 83 blazer 4WD with the 350 CI 4 barrel and would blow me away off the line and on flat stretches.

One time though, we were driving from Las Cruces NM to Elephant Butte reservoir for the weekend. There is a big stretch of a big grade 6% is my guess, well he couldn't keep up. My truck was like a diesel, it kept up speed up the grade while his kept downshifting and basically fell way back. I remember the feeling on the accelerator of my truck feeling like there was nothing there when I stepped on it - it just kept climbing.

 

Like I said in my previous post I owned both models with 3.55's and from a stand still the 4.7 was quicker off the start. In my opinion the 5.7 is a bit sluggish until about mid range.

 

That has been my experience also. Very disappointing; especially compared to my Dak 4.7.

However, that may be the PCM software. I'll see how the Superchips Cortex Tow Tune works after they release the update with all of the tranny parameters.

 

Like I said in my previous post I owned both models with 3.55's and from a stand still the 4.7 was quicker off the start. In my opinion the 5.7 is a bit sluggish until about mid range.

So you've owned '09 Rams with identical drive trains? or are you comparing earlier Engines?

Very disappointing; especially compared to my Dak 4.7.

A dakota is not as heavy as a '09 CC

 

True. However, not by much.

Cat Scale Weights for my trucks:

05 Dakota 4x4 CC = 5138 lbs

09 Ram 4x2 CC = 5580 lbs

Difference = 442 lbs

All I'm attempting to convey is that my hemi Ram doesn't have the constant MPH (55-65MPH and 1500-2000RPM) part throttle grunt in low end that I was expecting as compared to the 05 Dak 4.7 HO 275HP when towing 4200 lbs.

2600RPM and above and WOT acceleration is a whole nuther story.

 

I believe you. The torque curve for the 4.7 is much flatter and peaks earlier so they feel different in that RPM range. What I am saying is that if you put 442 lbs in the bed of the dakota and tow the same trailer you may get different results.

I think Dodge played around the low end grunt for the hemi to improve gas milage.

 

Good Idea. If I fill the water tanks on the trailer that will add about 450 lbs. I'll do a comparison with that load.

 

Yes, I owned two 09 models a 4.7 quad cab with 3.55 and now a 5.7 with the 3.55. The 4.7 was quicker off the line but it had a long linear torque curve which would end at the midrange point, the 5.7 has to build up power before you feel the kick and has a great mid to top end. I guess you can't have them both, you sacrifice one for the other, meaning you can have a great top end but you lose out on the bottom end and vise-versa.