[RXT]

It's doesn't seem to be an idle issue. It seems to be a running issue because we can run full throttle and the problem is still there. A pressure check revealed that two injectors aren't getting fuel at all, two are getting full fuel, and two are just spitting. I've got an Air Dog electric fuel pump (which is used in place of the lift pump) delivering 17 PSI. The injector pump only needs 9 psi, so theres plenty of fuel getting to the IP. From the IP to the injectors, is a different story. Pressure isn't equal to all the injectors and there are no leaks. (All of the injectors are new and have been pop tested.) The shut off solenoid is working fine and getting power.
Everything seems to point to a bad injector pump. What we suspect is, the engine had sat unused for more than a decade and thats not good on an injector pump. The seals age and dry out, etc. Fortunately the IP isn't too expensive to rebuild and when it's done it will be as fresh as a new IP (which gives me additional piece of mind)

I "think" this site doesn't allow links to other forums. I may post it later, but I think I'll wait till theres more to post about

Yeah, an Atlas is damn expensive. And at least you have other options. One idea I kinda like is if you can find a Rubicon NV241OR (4:1 low) t-case for your build. Unfortunately they aren't very common and can get a bit pricey. But it would be "factory"-like and unique at the same time.

Ed

 

[Mad-Max]

bummer - I was hoping it would only be an idle setting (I sure was happy to discover that with mine) - but yah a fresh IP is never a bad thing

I hadn't considered using a Rubicon t-case. One of the things I learned with Bud is that having both the normal 2.72-1 and the additional doubler range box is really useful, especially on the steep decents. Right now I'm leaning towards a factory HD t-case with an ORD Magnum Box between it and the 46RE.

...then again...I'm used to the rpm range of a Cummins - with double the 'available' rpms I'd likely be very content with a 4.3 Atlas....hmmmmm

 

[RXT]

Bummer, for sure. I was hoping not to need it, but it's probably better to catch it now instead of out in the middle of a swamp….
When I discovered I needed to rebuild the IP, I thought of buying a 14mm rotor head, so I can push more hp… But in the end, supporting mods would need to be made, and I didn't want to spend an additional few thousand $$$. So I've come to my senses and I'm gonna keep everything the same which has always been the plan anyway. It should still be pretty fun.

I'm wondering if you're going to be happy with a gas engine after enjoying the torque of a Cummins?

Ed

 

[Mad-Max]

I'm wondering if you're going to be happy with a gas engine after enjoying the torque of a Cummins?

Ed

yah the 360 will be just fine.......

.............and I can always supercharge it :devil:

 

[Mad-Max]

okay - so there are obviously a LOT more 00-04 Daks with the 4.7 vs the 5.9, and I'm wondering what the general consensus is on how many miles is too many for a 4.7, not to mention how many years, and, what are the common problems they are known for? If there aren't too many valid real-world problems then we might look for a 4.7 in an 02-04 so there's at least a couple years on the new engine platform. Thoughts?

 

[RXT]

I recall there were teething problems when the 4.7 when it first came out in the Grand Cherokee, in 99. There are also reported mystery cooling issues, head cracking and other issues. My guess is Chrysler made improvements in later years, but I don't believe that will apply to the years you are looking….

As I mentioned before, even if you got a "good" engine, there's less aftermarket support for the 4.7 I would always suggest another engine first, if you don't mind a swap. I'd choose the 318, 360, 5.7 Hemi or a 4BT over the 4.7

You might also look into another similar vehicle where you'll have greater chance of finding the engine you want. The Durango usually came with 318s and 360s, and later (The ugly years) had a Hemi. After 2000, the 4.7 could be found in the Durangos, but it seemed to me that the 360 was more available. As mentioned, the later '07+ Dak had a 4.7, but those seemed to be better built as I don't recall reading anything about continual issues……and besides, no one yet, as far as I know has ever built a huge SAS rock crawler on the 07+ Dak

Ed

 

[Mad-Max]

yah the 5.9's are out there, just gotta be patient. When the mad money is funded we'll find a good one even if it's several states away - it'll just be another fun road trip

 

[Mad-Max]

...so been looking through 4WP and Summit etc, and I'm not finding the 'lunch box' locker(s) from places like Lokka, Powertrax, etc - the kind that replace the spider gears, for a stock-chassis Dakota...or am I missing something obvious?

 

[RXT]

???

Stock chassis Dakota? You wanna run lockers in factory diffs?

Ed

 

[Mad-Max]

well...I don't know yet, but I'm just trying to figure out if they are available in case I do. A lot of the milder trails around here are doable with a stock chassis vehicle, but there is so much less 'drama' if all 4 tires are always spinning at the same speed, and I'll only put the automatic lockers in it...which is very likely what I'll do to help out the truck for the year or two we have it before going BIG.

 

[RXT]

Typically the quad cabs will come with a Corporate 8.0" front differential. It's not very big or all that strong. The rear is likely to be a 8.25" Summit shows that they have a "Powertrax" lockright drop in locker w/ 27 spline shafts. I can't tell you what the spline count is, and i haven't searched deeply enough for other spline counts (just in case.)

The front I don't think I'd recommend. These front diffs are really light and the housing is made out of aluminum. It was well known that the previous Dana 35 that was used before, would grenade under huge torque loads. …What typically happens is when the load on the ring and pinion builds up (i.e rock crawling) the gears naturally want to separate. The aluminum housing wasn't strong enough to prevent gear separation forces and result in a huge crack with an associated bang noise. The Corp 8.0 has a slightly larger ring gear, but the housing is still made out of aluminum. I would probably recommend you leave the front diff open and max tire size I'd suggest is 33"s

Ed

 

[Mad-Max]

that's exactly the kind of info I'm after Ed - much appreciated! If we find a good Dak this year then we'll likely wheel the milder trails for a while - probably a couple seasons while I'm collecting the big hardware etc, and during that time I'm just pondering ways to increase the stock potential without dropping a lot of coinage, especially considering it's all going to be replaced with the 1-ton hardware.

I would still like to find out of there is a front locker - just as an 'option', but everything I'm seeing indicates 'no'. So for now it's all fact-finding'.

I really appreciate the info - when we ever meet, you drink for free :wink:

 

[Mad-Max]

so I'm researching ways to increase overall belly clearance, and that naturally led to looking at body lifts, and I've got a question: Presuming I'm working on a 2002 Dakota QC - if a 3" body lift is installed will there then be room to raise up the fuel tank with the body, or are there frame cross members that would also have to be 'relocated' in order to raise up the tank? Again I'm looking at ways to increase belly clearance - any and all ways no matter how silly or whatever - hence the question about raising the tank. Thanks

 

[RXT]

I'm pretty sure the tank is pretty well tucked up in the frame. But I can only guess. As you know, I didn't start with a quad cab. I swapped cabs later. When it came to the gas tank, I kept the original tank, but I had to lower it a couple of inches, because there was a hump on the top of it that would't clear the bottom of the new cab, and that included a 3" body lift. Even then, it doesn't stick down much past the frame rails. My guess is the quad cab has a tank that is tucked up in the frame, and it doesn't have the same clearance issue as they fit without a body lift or dropping the tank.

Ed

 

[Mad-Max]

so I found what looks to be a pretty nice truck...but it has AWD - not part time - I'm guessing that isn't really that bad of a driver in stock form?, or are those something to avoid? Any less strong off-road, or same-same as a the part-time trucks when in 4wd?

I'm of course replacing all of that down the road, but if it's got AWD now I'm wondering if I should hold out for a 2wd truck...or is AWD 'fine' for a stock Dakota?

 

[RXT]

IMO, the AWD is fine. The only difference is in the t-case. Everything else is the same, and the 4wd mode works the same too.
I guess you're now considering 2wd as an option? Best thing about that idea is, more available trucks (especially with the 360), and you'll be ripping out everything under it anyway

Ed

 

[Mad-Max]

excellent - those were my thoughts as well.

No 2wd - just discovered the one I'm looking at is AWD, and I wanted a bit of reassurance that wasn't a time bomb etc, and from what I've read they are no better or worse than the normal part-time units.

Glad to have some confirmation nethumb:

 

[Mad-Max]

...so as the dealership was inspecting the truck they lifted it up with a two-post lift...and when the rear suspension extended to 'max' the left rear shackle 'snapped'....and now I'm wondering if the truck is full of bad frame/suspension rot. I've seen what happens to a vehicle chassis in Pennsylvania - they rust 'thin' - I'm wondering if Nebraska has the same 'problem'...?

Edit: passing on the truck - apparently it's full of rust...

 

[RXT]

Damn, that sucks… There will be others though

Ed

 

[Mad-Max]

what would have really sucked is if we'd made the 8-hr trip there only to find out then that it's full of rot - I would have been very mucho unhappy - the dealership owner definitely earned the 'integrity' award nethumb:


already eyeballing another...