Ram quad cab 4x4 vs dakota quad cab 4x4

[jaymegriffiths]

If your going to buy a dodge...buy the cummins.

fixed it for ya

I was more or less talking brand new though, and the pointer here is in the front end of the truck. but hey if your running a solid front axle, than congrats to ya! The newer hemi's run right around 20 highway, so your only calculating about 1mpg difference. The older 360's do suck the gas though if thats what you are talking about! my buddy has 4.10's on his 1500 and he only pulls about 11 with his 360. The whole MPG thing rely heavily on the era trucks that are in consideration.

I think the key word here is if your going to WORK it, then go fullsize, if the towing is only something that you do from time to time...then you can probably squeak by with a mid size.


And hey! on the mid-size part i agree with ya! where i live, all the trails are real narrow and a pain to get a larger truck through (if you care anything about your paint job) When i go cut down trees, i take the ranger because it gets through the woods the best, the only time i wish i had my bro's full-size is when i have to load up the logs, or hook onto a trailer...[/QUOT\s E]
i gotta call u there is no new dodges (in 4wd auto) getting 20 mpgs. i know 3 people with 09-10's and none of em get more the 18 anywhere.
mostly around 16 highway and thats hemi. i've heard the 4.7's are worse, but i know dakota owners getting 20-21 highway driving mild...

The hemis are hard on gas too. not as bad as the 360 or 318, but still bad unless you get the ones that shut 4 cylinders down on the high way.


If the truck will only be towing a flat bed with a car on it I would get the dakota, but if you are going to be geting a enclosed trailer I would go with the ram.



and as far as a dakota bed not being big enugh to bother over a ranger. I have a 01' dakota now and went from a short box ranger, and I can put my fathers big bear in my dakota and shut the tail gate. I can load my 250R in the dakota with out going over the wheel wells unlike my old ranger. dont get me wrong I like the ranger dollar for dollar I dont think you can find a mini truck that will take a beating like the ranger. I like my dakota but i will get another ranger some day.

the only reason i'd buy a dakota over ranger is the v8 towing ability and the crew cab option.
besides that the box is nothing special.

 

[EERNGER]

Yesss...on the cummins thing! lol! Great powerplant.

Yes on the work thing, Having that extra grunt on tap is a good idea if you ever want it, plus its nice to know it has the extra ability so your not abusing it.

Yep, your on the right track. I guess i didn't explain myself enough on the towing thing though. What i was trying to say is that the major thing with the ram is the extra vehicle weight. That extra weight, and added dimension size adds to the stability of the truck (and especially when you have no trailer assist brakes) that added weight and girth Makes the truck more stable under load. This makes it easier to be in control of the load than with a smaller truck. I have no doubt a Dakota can tow, i have been around them towing and they do just fine. The only thing i am pointing at is if you decide to pull a bigger load, and you pull that load for any distance, the ram will be the better choice.

With the gas mileage thing, i agree with ya, i have heard of them getting anywhere from 17-20 on the highway and not a heck of a lot on the 20 mark. So you can take that glass half empty/full.

 

[jaymegriffiths]

Yes on the work thing, Having that extra grunt on tap is a good idea if you ever want it, plus its nice to know it has the extra ability so your not abusing it.

Yep, your on the right track. I guess i didn't explain myself enough on the towing thing though. What i was trying to say is that the major thing with the ram is the extra vehicle weight. That extra weight, and added dimension size adds to the stability of the truck (and especially when you have no trailer assist brakes) that added weight and girth Makes the truck more stable under load. This makes it easier to be in control of the load than with a smaller truck. I have no doubt a Dakota can tow, i have been around them towing and they do just fine. The only thing i am pointing at is if you decide to pull a bigger load, and you pull that load for any distance, the ram will be the better choice.

With the gas mileage thing, i agree with ya, i have heard of them getting anywhere from 17-20 on the highway and not a heck of a lot on the 20 mark. So you can take that glass half empty/full.

from what i've just been reading the dakota v8 has a higher towing capacity than the ram (4.7) due to lower vehicle wieght...
however i do agree with you that a fullsize might be better than a dakota, but if your going to a fullsize why not a ford?
the fullsize ram 4.7 is not a truck i would buy ever.
if i was planning on doing lots of towing i'd buy a diesel or at least a ford (possibly even a gm, im a ford guy but they do have some nice trucks and at a very competitive price)
the reason i like my ranger is small, easy to park, and damn tough. i mean reallly tough. probably one of the most important qualities on a truck is just that. quality.
the same reason i wouldn't touch a jap or china truck, and the same reason any chev pre-2004 has yet to attract me.
now. if ford realeased a crew cab (not explorer sport they are ugly as troll babies) 6 cylinder twin turbo 6 speed(auto) diesel, that had identicle towing numbers and a 6.5x5.5' bed (assuming 8 inch tubs for the wheels, so a 4x8 could fit width wise and u can just open the tailgate...)
i would def start saving my penny`s and forget every other truck i`ve ever looked at. however if dodge waved a tt diesel 6 speed auto cc in my face i`d probably start selling off my ford clothing, posters etc and start collecting dodge stuff cause SOMEONE NEEDS TO DO IT ALREADY!!!
anywho, we`re getting off topic. as far as answering the title,
for regular use, buy a dakota, as for a fullsize ram 4.7, stop making unfunny jokes thats a waste of time.
thats my 4 billion cents!

 

[bcost882]

this seems like a silly arguement. fords are great dakotas are great.too each their own.
the crewcab dakotas have tonnes of interior room and bigger engine then ranger. also cheaper than f150
and i know a few guys with 4.7 dakotas touching 18 city 19 highway when driven realistically soo

whoa why would you compare a quad cab v8 dakota to a ranger that makes no sense if we had the quad cab diesel ranger here in the staes you would prolly be eating your words right there. and an f-150 is full size of course it will be more than a dakota

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

whoa why would you compare a quad cab v8 dakota to a ranger that makes no sense if we had the quad cab diesel ranger here in the staes you would prolly be eating your words right there. and an f-150 is full size of course it will be more than a dakota

Well, if you are looking buying a truck you are comparing them. You buy the one that has the most of what you need. If you need a smallish truck with a crew cab the Ranger doesn't compare at all. Even with a std or extended cab, the extra width in the Dakota would give it a lot more room than a Ranger.

Personally when I was shopping, the Ranger didn't have enough +'s vs -'s against the F-150. For a couple grand more I got twice the truck that gets the same if not better milage.

My cousin has a late 90's Dakota with a 318, he gets about the same milage as my dad's 5.4 F-250 with a service body... 13 with a stiff tailwind.

 

[Hahnsb2]

My cousin has a late 90's Dakota with a 318, he gets about the same milage as my dad's 5.4 F-250 with a service body... 13 with a stiff tailwind.

Automatic?

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Automatic?

Yup. Pretty sad my F-150 with an auto can get 18-19 with a bigger engine and a lot more bulk... it is a much quicker and a more capable truck too.

Dad's F-250 is an automatic too for that matter, and probably weighs close to twice as much.

 

[Hahnsb2]

Yup.

Behold my surprise

I routinely drove a 5.4 F150, it wasn't quicker than my Dakota.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Behold my surprise

I routinely drove a 5.4 F150, it wasn't quicker than my Dakota.

I dd one, it would rip his inside out, so would my brother's '97 4.6 F-150 (also a 4x4 automatic) By all means it should be the other way around. (.2 liters smaller than a 5.4 or .6 liters bigger than a 4.6 in a much smaller truck)

My point was that like the Ranger vs F-150, the Dakota vs 1500 Ram IMO is pretty lopsided. You either get a little truck that can't do much, or you can get a bigger truck with more interior room, can tow something, and gets the same if not better milage.

If I had to pick between a Ram and a Dakota, Ram all the way.

 

[Hahnsb2]

I dd one, it would rip his inside out, so would my brother's '97 4.6 F-150 (also a 4x4 automatic) By all means it should be the other way around. (.2 liters smaller than a 5.4 or .6 liters bigger than a 4.6 in a much smaller truck)

I looked up the 1/4 mile time for a 5.4 F150 like the one I drove, ranged from the High 16s to mid 17s, my Dakota is in the low 16s...

Once again the automatic sucks power and fuel mileage. Don't get one if you want either. I stand by my claim that there still isn't any V8 Ram other than the new MDS hemis and possibly a 6 speed 4.7, that will touch the mileage of my Dakota.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I looked up the 1/4 mile time for a 5.4 F150 like the one I drove, ranged from the High 16s to mid 17s, my Dakota is in the low 16s...

Once again the automatic sucks power and fuel mileage. Don't get one if you want either. I stand by my claim that there still isn't any V8 Ram other than the new MDS hemis and possibly a 6 speed 4.7, that will touch the mileage of my Dakota.

Yeah, put a stick in that 5.4 F-150 and compare apples to different sized apples then. Is that "low 16's" what it is rated or what you have ran? For an fair comparison (since they never put an manual behind a 5.4 in a F-150 from the factory) what is a automatic Dakota rated?

Either way it is within a second automatic vs a stick... and the F-150 is also a heavier truck. The 5.4 isn't much bigger of an engine and it has a lot more truck to move.

The average 1500 gets similar milage to the average Dakota... low to mid teens. It is pretty sad that the compact truck has to have a stick to be more effecient than a fullsize with the with the same engine. And have fun tracking down a Dakota with a manual, the vast majority are automatic... which more than likely your wife will prefer even if you don't.

 

[jaymegriffiths]

whoa why would you compare a quad cab v8 dakota to a ranger that makes no sense if we had the quad cab diesel ranger here in the staes you would prolly be eating your words right there. and an f-150 is full size of course it will be more than a dakota

first off we're not comparing "if" trucks we r comparing trucks that are available. "if" the dakota and the ranger were offered with identicle power rated and effeciency rated diesels id still choose dakota thanks to the crew cab.
and i've made it clear the ranger has benifits too. like, when i was in high school and all i wanted was a small v6 high efficiency truck the ranger looked great. but brand new sitting next to an f150 it becomes apperant how much ford has disregarded the necessary upgrades the ranger begs for and has puffed up the oh holier then though f150. personally the prices they are asking they really dont seem to be catering to the peoples needs anymore more just what makes them look good on tv.
like for one, the 5.4 has gone relatively unchanged for what, 13 years?
cmon, ford needs to give us the damn 4.4 twin turbo 6 speed diesel we want and drop the price 15-20,000.
since when is 45 grand a reasonable price for a decent equipped half ton. 5 years ago that was a damn well equipped 3/4 ton diesel!!!
what the heck have they done to earn a 10-15,000 dollar jump in price?
plastic'ed it up and filled the interior with cheap "metal foam" crap?
04-08 were nice looking trucks just wish for woulda put more money into the functionality rather then trying to keep up with chevs looks changes.
but i think i've said enough.
regardless of the small novel i could write about thecurrent automakers issues, but what do i know right? haha

Yeah, put a stick in that 5.4 F-150 and compare apples to different sized apples then. Is that "low 16's" what it is rated or what you have ran? For an fair comparison (since they never put an manual behind a 5.4 in a F-150 from the factory) what is a automatic Dakota rated?

Either way it is within a second automatic vs a stick... and the F-150 is also a heavier truck. The 5.4 isn't much bigger of an engine and it has a lot more truck to move.

The average 1500 gets similar milage to the average Dakota... low to mid teens. It is pretty sad that the compact truck has to have a stick to be more effecient than a fullsize with the with the same engine. And have fun tracking down a Dakota with a manual, the vast majority are automatic... which more than likely your wife will prefer even if you don't.

everyone says 5 speed f150 is so necessary but if u look at prices of standard vehicles nowwadays, they are significantly lower due to lazy americans (including candians)
and good auto trannys.
also, the newer dakotas have balls bigtime, but if u get into it at all ur milage plummets.
and i'd like to see you line up with a 4.7 dakota feel free to do it and video tape it as proof.
although the f150 eats dakota milage for breakfast.
still, gms are better, wtf ford cmon you cant even get better milage, power, or price of the company that cant even keep its head above water???
em-freaking-barrassing

 

[Crawford]

plain and simple, for towing another vehicle while getting there quickly and economically your stuck with: Cummins, duramax, and powerstroke.

For towing another vehicle and getting there slower, less economically, with less power: V8...

Middle ground: V10

The whole dodge transmission thing has been blown way out of proportion.... If your that worried about it, get a manual. Your still getting a great truck either way.

regardless of what motor is in what truck, the best option is still a diesel for towing anything more than a utility trailer.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

plain and simple, for towing another vehicle while getting there quickly and economically your stuck with: Cummins, duramax, and powerstroke.

For towing another vehicle and getting there slower, less economically, with less power: V8...

Middle ground: V10

For towing another vehicle (or two) and getting there slower than molasses, but being able to get there even if the engine has 400,000 miles on it and has no oil and is only firing on 2 or 3 cylinders, all while getting great gas mileage.... 4.9L I6 Ford with a granny-first manual

Finished the statement for you!

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

first off we're not comparing "if" trucks we r comparing trucks that are available. "if" the dakota and the ranger were offered with identicle power rated and effeciency rated diesels id still choose dakota thanks to the crew cab.
and i've made it clear the ranger has benifits too. like, when i was in high school and all i wanted was a small v6 high efficiency truck the ranger looked great. but brand new sitting next to an f150 it becomes apperant how much ford has disregarded the necessary upgrades the ranger begs for and has puffed up the oh holier then though f150. personally the prices they are asking they really dont seem to be catering to the peoples needs anymore more just what makes them look good on tv.
like for one, the 5.4 has gone relatively unchanged for what, 13 years?
cmon, ford needs to give us the damn 4.4 twin turbo 6 speed diesel we want and drop the price 15-20,000.
since when is 45 grand a reasonable price for a decent equipped half ton. 5 years ago that was a damn well equipped 3/4 ton diesel!!!
what the heck have they done to earn a 10-15,000 dollar jump in price?
plastic'ed it up and filled the interior with cheap "metal foam" crap?
04-08 were nice looking trucks just wish for woulda put more money into the functionality rather then trying to keep up with chevs looks changes.
but i think i've said enough.
regardless of the small novel i could write about thecurrent automakers issues, but what do i know right? haha




everyone says 5 speed f150 is so necessary but if u look at prices of standard vehicles nowwadays, they are significantly lower due to lazy americans (including candians)
and good auto trannys.
also, the newer dakotas have balls bigtime, but if u get into it at all ur milage plummets.
and i'd like to see you line up with a 4.7 dakota feel free to do it and video tape it as proof.
although the f150 eats dakota milage for breakfast.
still, gms are better, wtf ford cmon you cant even get better milage, power, or price of the company that cant even keep its head above water???
em-freaking-barrassing

The 5.4 was drastically changed for '04, completely different heads, vavletrain and intake. It is being fased out by the 6.2 in the Super Duty, I imagine the F-150 will follow in a couple years.

GM has Ford beat by one measly MPG, big deal.

Dunno what you consider a decent truck, but $45k would almost get you a Platnum F-150.

I didn't buy my truck to drag race, I bought to haul my tractor. It has more than enough power for normal driving. Suppose the 4.7 will keep up with 7k in tow? At any rate a V-8 in a smaller truck SHOULD outrun a bigger heavier truck.

plain and simple, for towing another vehicle while getting there quickly and economically your stuck with: Cummins, duramax, and powerstroke.

For towing another vehicle and getting there slower, less economically, with less power: V8...

Middle ground: V10

The whole dodge transmission thing has been blown way out of proportion.... If your that worried about it, get a manual. Your still getting a great truck either way.

regardless of what motor is in what truck, the best option is still a diesel for towing anything more than a utility trailer.

I tow what my truck is rated or slightly above at the speed limit just fine. It does burn a little fuel doing it (lower teens) but I get about the same milage as a diesel empty while it burns cheaper fuel day to day (upper teens hwy). I don't tow my tractor all day every day, so for me it is by far cheaper to run a gas truck.

A diesel is overkill for a 5k trailer, a 4.0 Ranger can be rated for more than that.