« Caption Contest: This Week’s Winner! CarDomain Blog Home How Will Toyota’s Recall Affect Your Rental-Car Plans? »

February 4, 2010

CarDomain Obscure Muscle Car Parking Lot: The Dodge Dakota 5.9 R/T

UDMan

The new year is upon us, and it’s time for a brand new season of the CarDomain Obscure Muscle Car Parking Lot, where I profile a car (or in this case, a truck) that you might not consider a muscle car, and try and change your thinking on what a muscle car can or should be. It’s been a while, and I’m glad to be back at CarDomain, writing about obscure muscle, like this entry on the Dodge Dakota 5.9 R/T.

Continue reading after the jump!

Dodge’s R/T performance history dates back to the late 1960s, a time when Mopar powered Hemi, Big and Small Block muscle cars ruled the street and the drag strip. The first R/T which stands for “Road and Track” was a Hi-performance version of the 1967 Dodge Coronet equipped with a 440 Cubic Inch V-8, heavy-duty suspension, beefier brakes, larger tires, and R/T badging. If that wasn’t enough you could order the legendary 426-cubic inch (7.0L) Hemi engine rated at 425 horsepower. Over the year’s many different models had an R/T edition including, Aspen, Charger, Challenger, Neon, Viper and more. In 1998 Dodge added the Dakota to the list, the first truck to wear the R/T badge.

The Dakota 5.9 R/T was offered in both the standard cab and the club cab configuration. The Dakota R/T comes equipped with a 5.9-liter Magnum V-8 and large-bore, free-flow exhaust that delivers increased engine performance and an exhaust note that is backed up by its performance capabilities. A four-speed transmission connects the 250 horsepower and 345 lb.-ft. of torque from the 5.9-liter Magnum V-8 to the limited-slip rear axle which turns 255/55×17-inch tires. The Dakota R/T’s suspension tuning also includes front and rear stabilizer bars for added control. It’s lowered one full inch and offered in only two-wheel drive configuration.

The Dodge Dakota R/T went on sale in the spring of 1998 and was produced thru 2003. The 5.9-liter (360) Magnum V-8 engine packing 250 horsepower and 345 lb.-ft. of torque. Wearing oversized 17-inch wheels gives the Dakota R/T a solid, stable footprint, which further enhances handling. The suspension, which was built with a focus on road handling as opposed to load hauling, is lowered to give the R/T a racing look and feel. The Dakota R/T has front and rear stabilizer bars to control handling, but the rear bar is a beefier 19 mm to minimize body roll in turns during cornering and a limited-slip differential for improved traction. The one downside is the fact that there is only a 2,000 pound towing capacity.

Feeding power through a 46RE four-speed automatic, the R/T posted a 0-60 time of 7.08 sec, passing through the quarter mile in 15.50 at 88.72 mph. Fitted with 11.3-in. vented discs front and 9.0-in. drums out back (with rear-only anti-lock), the Dakota stopped from 60 mph in a decent 136 ft. These numbers were achieved only achieved by sports cars nearly almost a decade earlier. To get these performance numbers from a truck was almost unheard of.

CarDomain Members Rides:

There are quite a number of CarDomain Members who roll a 5.9 R/T, and here’s two of my favorites. First up, take a look at Andrew’s R/T Club Cab. His ride page takes us on a journey from the day he bought, and chronicled every modification he did to the truck. You have to check it out!

Here is a hot red 5.9 R/T Club Cab, which belongs to Chris, from Rochester, NH. Chris added some modifications that are subtle, but pay tribute to the Mopar Muscle Cars of the past. Well done.

So there you have it, the first installment of the new year of the CarDomain Obscure Muscle Car Parking Lot. Does the Dakota 5.9 R/T belong on the lot, or should it be kicked to the ground as a pretender. Express your opinion below, and keep on suggesting what other Obscure Muscle you want me to write about.

Permalink:

Posted at 9:16 am in CarDomain Feature, CarDomain Obscure Muscle Car Parking Lot, Dakota 5.9 R/T, Dodge, Dodge Dakota, udman

Comments

GSRGuy18
Apr 4, 2010 at 5:18 pm

They look nice, but they really aren’t that quick. I made a couple owners feel pretty dumb in my stock ’05 Frontier V6/6spd. And FWIW retroman, in ’98 Mustangs had 225hp, and Z28s and Trans Ams were rated at 305hp but actually had ~350hp.

04NEONSE
Feb 8, 2010 at 1:05 pm

Too bad the R/T WASN’T the fastest of the dakotas. The 4.7L v8 option w/ the 5-speed trans. was faster b/c the r/t only came in pussy auto. sorry, if you’re a MAN, you shut the fuck up and drive STICK!

SporTruckRT
Feb 7, 2010 at 9:06 pm

Sorry, but how do you figure? a first generation, standard cab short box weighs slightly over 500 pounds more than a stan. cab, short box R/T.http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Dodge-Dakota and if you would do nothing but drop a 5.9 in a first gen, you still wouldn’t be able to handle as well as the R/T is a full in lower stock, and try to keep it on the road with 7.5 in tires, compared to 10/ 10.5 with an R/T. Don’t mean to get technical, but i dont think so

dodgeracer27
Feb 7, 2010 at 4:00 pm

i like the r/t’s alot but if you put a 5.9 (360) in a first generation dakota it will be quicker than the r/ts

SporTruckRT
Feb 7, 2010 at 3:28 pm

AND, dont for all of those that like the RTs, check the ultra super rare Dodge Dakota Motorsports edition dakotas. they had minor performance and styling upgrades but from the sport platform. i think it came with track bars too

hodzic
Feb 7, 2010 at 7:18 am

CLEAN

DODGE-ALL-DAY
Feb 6, 2010 at 7:28 am

these arew my favorite trucks

Cavalier2200sfi
Feb 6, 2010 at 6:15 am

In ’98, and only ’98, Mopar also released a Grand Cherokee with the 5.9, they were 4×4 and even sounded crazy from stock, though it didn’t come with any fancy badges to specify that it has the 5.9, visually the only differance was it had hood louvers whereas the regular 4.0 or 5.3 didn’t.

derkc
Feb 5, 2010 at 8:21 pm

drove one, well not a r/t, and wow, it runs pretty good for a truck, drives, and rides nice..

SporTruckRT
Feb 5, 2010 at 4:25 pm

OOOOO YEAH! Muscle Car/Truck for sure, i drive one, lol.

KrashingV8
Feb 5, 2010 at 3:17 pm

hearing one of these things go by was a thing of beauty. not a big fan of 11 mpg but thats apples to oranges as i get 14.5 in my ford. plus i have heard of worse. has anyone doubled the horsepower in one of these and what is the story behind the weak tranny?

retroman
Feb 5, 2010 at 1:27 pm

Although 245 hp isn’t much by todays standards, in 1998, it was plenty. We must remember not to measure past legends of performance with the bench marks of today. In 1998, the Mustang GT had approx. 245 hp while a Camaro of the same year had 275 hp. As a matter of fact, few affordable performance vehicles that year broke the 300 mark and exotic performers were straining to get just above 400 while just a handful broke 500. Lambos of the period were only getting 512 ponies in stock configuration so 245 hp for mid sized pickup truck is quite impressive, especially since both Ford and GM were running weaker V6s in thier midsized trucks.

bpark8824
Feb 5, 2010 at 12:36 pm

Although I really like Dakota r/t’s, they aren’t fast at all stock. A well built 360 or 408 can be fast. But a stock r/t is slow.

Someone said underweight and overpowered truck… thats pretty far from the truth. 245hp isn’t exaclty “over powered” Although it makes good torque all that goes down the drain with the worlds worst transmission.

Don’t get me wrong, I love well built r/t but they aren’t all that special from the factory…

SouthernGuy8503
Feb 4, 2010 at 3:59 pm

sorry, VV wrong blog VV, last one was supposed to go in the rental car blog

SouthernGuy8503
Feb 4, 2010 at 3:58 pm

and also be from the “Big 3″, preferably a GM but i’d take a Ford or Dodge to

SouthernGuy8503
Feb 4, 2010 at 3:55 pm

i remember back when i was in high school it was a girl with a black Dakota R/T, it was nice until she lowered it, im not the lowering type but the truck wouldn’t have been so abd if she didn’t do it the cheap way, just cut the springs shorter so it gave a horrible ride, you’d literally feel just going over a small rock, not sure where it is now

artie99
Feb 4, 2010 at 3:49 pm

And now you know where my screen name came from. I had a 99 that I LOVED. I sold it because of some issues I didn’t want to invest in and felt miserable.
Last year I bought my second Artie. A red 2000 which is bone stock.
If you can keep the transmission under it, it is a great truck. MPG average: 11.

Klassic_1
Feb 4, 2010 at 3:48 pm

Don’t forget about the Jeep Grand Cherokee 5.9 Limited.

retroman
Feb 4, 2010 at 3:08 pm

Definitely a muscle truck!! Even a V6 Dakota is a blast to drive, so a V8 (albeit the only truck in its class with a V8) would definitely equal more fun in my book. I’ve always liked the R/T nameplate, no matter what Dodge stuck it to, well except for the Neon… I’m still asking “Why, Dodge, why???” on that one. but typically, anything with an R/T nameplate hauls.. HARD!!! From the biggest baddest Charger right down to my four banger turbo Spirit R/T, Dodge has had some pretty fast cars and trucks and this is most certainly one of them.

troutster52
Feb 4, 2010 at 1:15 pm

I just found out about these because my buddy got a 5.2 Jeep and it got me thinking. The only sad thing about these is they were only offered in an automatic. Pounding through the gears in a underweight overpowered 5.9 truck would be a blast. I wish that Dodge was making a pony car then because the 5.9 would be a great swap into a RWD car. This was before the reiteration of the Charger so all they had in a RWD platform was a truck. Makes for a cool truck.

dodahman
Feb 4, 2010 at 12:02 pm

Don’t forget the Durango R/T. It added full-time 4WD to the package.

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2575944/1

bigfazolie
Feb 4, 2010 at 11:24 am

i actually didn’t know how quick it was… then it kicked my ass

snowboarding125
Feb 4, 2010 at 11:08 am

I miss my R/T Dakota, still regret selling it to this day. They are amazing trucks thats for sure.

SouthernGuy8503
Feb 4, 2010 at 10:20 am

definition****… sorry i was typing kind of fast and forgot to proof read it again, so i meant definition not difinition lol

wsbob
Feb 4, 2010 at 10:11 am

Yeah I do believe the Dakota can be parked in the lot, because its an R/T and because its actually less of a towing vehicle as a performance vehicle. You should do a piece on the Northstar powered Cadillac Eldorado. A 300 hp V8 in an American 2 door? FWD or not I think that car should get some consideration.

SouthernGuy8503
Feb 4, 2010 at 9:53 am

i think it is, my general difinition of muscle car/truck is 2 door RWD with a V8, and thats 2 door RWD and a V8 so it passes in my opinion, i thought the Chevy Silverado SS and the Ford Lightning are so why wouldn’t this one be, only real difference is that its a midsize truck instead of full size
–
and actually im thinking about newer midsize or compact trucks and i know the Chevy Colorado/GMC Canyon even though most people get the 4 or 5 cylinder you can get it with the 5.3L Vortec V8 and that could be one to, if i got a Colorado or Canyon i’d damn sure get the 5.3L V8