You are here: Forums SUVs Dodge Durango Dodge Durango

Dodge Durango

1696 messages,  Last post on Nov 05, 2009 at 9:50 PM

You are in the Dodge Durango Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Dodge Durango, SUV

Messages Page 8 of 170 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 170 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#71 of 1696 Other comments... by rcarboni May 31, 2000 (3:01 pm)
terry43, You DON'T want 2wd unless you live where there is no chance of precipitation, and even then I would recommend FT4WD for handling. The D is a heavy truck with the weight distributed to the front. As explained in the fishtailing post, these engines produce lots of torque, and don't handle very well with just the rear wheels driven. Rear disc brakes are always better when they are quality brakes, but most American manufacturers use low quality rotors and pads. If you want rear discs, have the drums converted with quality upgrades. It will cost you more, but consider that Dodge would only raise the vehicle price to give you rear disc, and you'd still have low quality brakes. Don't worry about crash tests - worry about what your insurance co. charges. That's the real safety indicator.
#72 of 1696 '01 Durango by phantom00 May 31, 2000 (7:09 pm)
Does anyone know when will the '01 Durango will be available for purchase? I am interested in buying a '00 Durango but if the '01 is going to be available soon then I don't mind waiting for another month or so. Thanks.
#73 of 1696 Many thanks by terry43 Jun 01, 2000 (3:43 pm)
Thanks for helping me through some of my questions. Jeeps and Explorers both have rear disc brakes. I know that drum brakes work fine but are more difficult to work on. The '97 F150 had drum brakes but were upgraded to discs in '98 or '99. I was just hoping that Durango would do the same. Do you really think that the Durango would have a traction problem with the 4.7 with rear wheel drive? I thought you could get the 5.9 in rear wheel drive. Wouldn't fishtailing be even worse with the 5.9 than the 4.7?
#74 of 1696 terry43 by rcarboni Jun 01, 2000 (4:42 pm)
I would really like to see rear disc brakes on the Durango, but if they are going to use the cheap rotors and pads that they are using now on the fronts, you're better off with the drums. The fronts squeal, groan, and grunt, and leave a coating of dust so thick it looks like the front rims are painted black. I bought high-performance, cross-drilled replacement rotors with better pads to fix the problem. Yes, I do think that you will have less handling in 2wd, even with the 4.7. However, I would suggest that you try a test drive with a 2wd 4.7 when the roads are slick, and make your own decision. Also, the tires make a big difference. As I said, I have eliminated much of the fishtailing problem by going to another brand.
#75 of 1696 by dwh6 Jun 01, 2000 (7:30 pm)
rcarboni: While I can't speak of how much better FT4WD handling is, I can definitely say that I have had absolutely no handling issues when my PT4WD 5.9L is in 2WD mode. Even on rain-soaked streets. In fact, the only time I've even heard the back tires slip in 2WD mode was when I was on some sort of loose surface, like rocks. I would imagine FT4WD would help somewhat in this situation, but not sure how much.
#76 of 1696 by dwh6 Jun 01, 2000 (7:35 pm)
justin40 (#62): I too had poor gas mileage early in my ownership experience. I was LUCKY to get 10 mpg average. After a few weeks I checked the tire pressure and found that the dealership must not have raised pressure to spec before delivering the truck to me. Each tire was set at a uniform 25 psi! As soon as I raised my pressure to 35 psi all around, the mileage jumped a full 4 mpg. About 7 months later now and I can get 16 mpg on the highway if lucky. Not great, but expected. BTW, I have a 2000 5.9, PT4WD.
#77 of 1696 dwh6, by rcarboni Jun 01, 2000 (8:45 pm)
The biggest problem I had with the D and the stock Goodyears was accelerating from a stand-still on wet roads. I spun the tires and fishtailed nearly every time. I will admit that I tend to have a heavy foot, but interestingly enough, I was behind another Durango at a light not that long ago, and he too spun the tires on the wet pavement with what appeared to be not heavy acceleration (I was in my Buick, so I don't know if my D would have spun or not). I don't think the problem is the vehicle more than it is the tires. As I've mentioned, once I swapped to BFG All-Terrains, the spinning has been almost completely eliminated. This problem is also not exclusively inherent to the Durango. I had the same problem with my Bronco in 2wd, and to a lesser extent, both my Jeep Wranglers. All these vehicles, like pickups, are very light in the rear, and have low-revving, high-torque engines. That's the reason all the farmers around here load up their pickups with sand, stone, etc. in the winter. I definitely think the FT4WD option will give you much better accelerating traction. Other than the added wear to the front drive components, I don't really see the advantage of not getting this.
#78 of 1696 Up the same creek by lasley Jun 02, 2000 (5:12 am)
I came to this site for basically the same question. I own a 2000 5.9L SLT+ DD. I purchased it 3 months ago & already have 10K miles on it (way past the break in period in my opinion). The last 2K miles, it has burned 1 quart of oil. When I asked my dealer about it, he replied "some engines burn a quart every 1K miles". This is not very reassuring for a 35K vehicle. I own an '87 Jeep Wrangler that leaks like a sive & burns less oil. All & all, I have not been very pleased with my decision & wish I had looked into it further. Yes, the towing capacity is awesome, but I think it gets better gas mileage when towing, then driving down the highway. I also re-ended a Toyota Camary at about 15 mph & did $2,500 worth of damage (I did less is my accident in my Geo). As for off-roading, maybe I am just spoiled by my Jeep, but the ground clearance bites, it rarely stays in 4 wheel, the limited slip is a joke & the only thing that has pleasantly surprised me is my $130 plastic skid plates... All & all, the only thing that saves me is the V8. If I could get what I owed out of it, I would probably sell it... But oh well... Please let me know if any one else has a problem w/ the oil & the fact that Dodge is saying it's "normal". Thanks for the input...
#79 of 1696 lasley by terry43 Jun 02, 2000 (12:07 pm)
With all the changes that the car companies are making to reduce pollution it doesn't sound right that burning 1 guart per 1000 miles is normal. It sounds like something to get you off their back. Believe it or not my 1988 Mercury has 191,000 and still only uses 1 guart per 5,000 miles. I would trade it in, sell it, or give it away but I want to know just how far it will go.
#80 of 1696 DD gas mileage by sandydee Jun 04, 2000 (2:37 am)
Friends I bought a new Durango, wanted a 4.7L V8 but got a 5.9L V8 I know the MPG is poor, but this is ridiculous. I've done 2000 miles and get 13 mpg on the road (at 75 mph). My question, many passenger cars are tuned to get the best mileage at 70-80 mph, where is the optimum for my Durango? signed, gassed

Messages Page 8 of 170 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 170 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums SUVs Dodge Durango Dodge Durango