I'm A Traitor!

[ranger_mclaren]

I would agree they do feel alot bigger than the rangers from inside the cab it looks and feels like a full size truck. my buddys got the 318 strong motor and fast. But i would admit i've never driven in a 302 powerd ranger so i cant say its better, compared to my buddies 302 powerd mustang the mustang would win hands down.

 

[Hahnsb2]

I'm with ya on the newer style grill. I think the first grill is butt ugly... the small rectangle head lights remind me too much of an early Jeep Cherokee, which is also very ugly.

If I were to get a truck other than a Ranger, it would have to be a Dakota in the body style/ grill you got (92-96?).

Do you need a midsize to pull your B2 or something? Or is it just for the ability to haul more in the bed/ on a trailer?

Don't plan on pulling my B2 but I want the bed space for my motorcycle, axles, ect without using my dads ranger. And I could do some decent towing if need be. I really like the 4.7 but the second gens are a lot more expensive.

 

[Totalled]

I've always kinda wanted one of those.. especially with a 5 speed. You must let me drive it sometime... I promise to drive nice.

 

[Hahnsb2]

Maybe once I put a good tranny in it
Here she is home. Thing rides like a caddy, I'm thinking I'll ditch the explorer after I get a good tranny in it. The canopy is going as well as the shitty DIY tint.

 

[Z3CHYD]

Looks like a beast man, keep us posted, trucks are trucks i like em all

 

[WNY964x4]

i have to say that is a nice looking truck , nut i will stick to my ranger , unless i could find one of the late 80's convertible dakotas , those are just badass , or , i know where there is a nice red one in amazing shape , early body style , 318 , reg cab long bed , moon visor , ladder rack , manual trans and t-case , and it has a plow , and bushwacker fender flares i think.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

I've owned 1 and driven 4 dakotas.

The first was a 1990 2wd auto reg cab with the 3.9 125 hp (non-magnum) V6. That thing was so slow a 2.3 ranger would have blown the doors off it. The tranny went out at 180,000.

The second was an 88 2.2L? carbed 4 banger 2wd regular cab. My 1st dakota would have blown the doors off this thing.

The third was a 92 2wd auto reg cab with the 3.9 175 hp (magnum) V6. It was pretty quick and would burnout for as long as you held the gas pedal down. That truck ran forever.

The 4th was a 92 4x4 ext. cab 3.9 magnum 5-spd. It always ground gears but other than that the tranny never did have any problems. That truck was adequately powered. Very much like my current explorer in terms of what it would pull and accelerate.

The 5th was a 94 2wd 5.2L auto. That thing was really just a burnout machine as a smallblock V8 produces way too much low end torque for the traction a 2wd dakota offers. Even driving gently the best it ever did was 12 mpg. Something about those dodge V8s. Every one I've had experience with had big-block grade thirst.

Nice truck but I bet a 5.8L F-150 would get better mileage. Only time will tell.

 

[Hahnsb2]

I'm hoping I can manage 14MPG doing the same driving I'm doing with the sploder getting 17MPG. I've read they were rated for 15-19MPG and heard reports of 21MPG highway. The thing just moves, you don't have to get on it hardly at all to go. I guess I'll find out, I found a lead on a tranny for cheap

 

[Ozwynn]

I thought for sure my 89 4x4 5spd had a 3.9 magnum. it had V6 magnum badges on the fenders and had an emissions sticker that said 3.9L magnum non catalyst under the hood? What ever it wasis would out run 4.0L cherokees but it got 15 mpg downhill with a tailwind

 

[oldjohnny]

HANG HIM!!!!!!!!!, naw, just kidding, nice dakota, but i'll stick to mah Ranger

 

[MAranger]

318 is one hell of a motor! Had a 94 jeep Grand and that thing had sack.

My buddies dad has a 98? 3.9 5spd. Blew a motor at 50k, must have got one of them trucks rolling off the line friday afternoon when all the grizzly mopar slaves were tearin ass to leave for the weekend.

Your trucks not a friday truck is it?

 

[silveranger93]

I'm hoping I can manage 14MPG doing the same driving I'm doing with the sploder getting 17MPG. I've read they were rated for 15-19MPG and heard reports of 21MPG highway. The thing just moves, you don't have to get on it hardly at all to go. I guess I'll find out, I found a lead on a tranny for cheap

I'd be surprised if you can't get 14 mpg out of it. I've got a '97 Ram on 35's and I'm getting about 12-13 mpg consistently. You've got a lot less truck to move. I always loved those Dakotas.

 

[93Ranger4x4]

a friend of mine had one similar to that one there. he cranked the bars and threw a block in the rear and that thing got almost 4 inches of lift, i couldnt believe it!!

 

[Hahnsb2]

I'd be surprised if you can't get 14 mpg out of it. I've got a '97 Ram on 35's and I'm getting about 12-13 mpg consistently. You've got a lot less truck to move. I always loved those Dakotas.

Well by judging just by the odo+gas gauge I'm around 14MPG right now and thats without OD (5th gear is VERY loud) and cruising 55-60 a lot.

 

[silveranger93]

Well by judging just by the odo+gas gauge I'm around 14MPG right now and thats without OD (5th gear is VERY loud) and cruising 55-60 a lot.

Is your speedometer correct? I'm not sure if 31's are a stock size for those trucks. Mine is off, if I forget to add the correction in for the tires, it looks like I'm only getting about 9 mpg.