Dodge Ram 5.9 1995

[Nando Vallart]

Hello guys!!

I'm thinking in change my car for a pickup, as it suit my size better... There is these cheap Dodge Ram V8 1995 I found, basically they look in good shape and they're cheap because gasoline isn't as cheap as it is there in USA, (yes US$2 per gallon is freaking cheap comparing with us) so few people are willing to pay gasoline for a 3~4 km/l car... I may be, as I don't use the car to work, etc... At most I ride once a week my car...

My doubt are:
* On Wikipedia, they're saying it's not a really safe car, that has "high head and neck forces caused by a late-deploying airbag"...

* Automatic Transmission. I'm and am not a fan of AT at the same time... Good AT as Audi Tiptronic I find amazing, but most of them I think are very slow... Any guy has experience with the Auto transmission of the Dodge Ram? May I expect a decent change of gear or may I expect the usual slow-retired-old-man-drive stuff??? I don't speed, but we have lots of trouble with truck drivers on the all lines of highway and I need sometime to do fast recovery of speed...
* Performance: So, does it need long time to increase speed or the BIG engine can make it move more alike a car??

* and last but not least: how trustfull is the pickup??? I've and old Audi and thinking in change for this old pickup, as I only use it in highways and to go out on weekends, I'm beliving I'm not going to have much trouble as it's made to heavy work on farms, etc... What that means? Beside my car has low milleage, I know soon it will need to have parts changed, as it was made to be driven in Germany, not in Brazil (with much poor streets conditions)... My idea is to have a car of my size, that I will need to go few times to mechanic in the middle-term future (5 years)

Cheers and thanks for the help!

 

[AutoBat]

My family was a big Chrysler fam (my grandparents worked at a factory).

Although I own one (bought it from my parents for $8 (yes eight dollars)), I wouldn't buy one.
For the most part the transmissions are iffy, and the build quality isn't as good as other brands.

If you have access to a similar yeared Toyota Hilux that would be the better option.

 

[DocNrock]

I cannot comment on a '95, but I have a '98 Dodge Ram 5.9L.  I've owned it since it was new and decided to keep it when I bought a new car as a daily driver back in 2004.  It has been very reliable.  What is the mileage on the '95 you are considering?  I have about 65,000 miles on my truck and it has always run well.  It has never been in the shop with a failed anything, just routine maintenance and replacement of the typical wear items, like tires and brakes.  I did have to replace the shocks about 15,000 miles ago. 

I've never been much for automatic transmissions, either, but I find I actually prefer it for a truck.  Hope that helps and good luck with your decision.

 

[Graffiti62]

Hey Fernando--

Truth be told, I'd avoid going with the Dodge. I'm not exactly sure of what kind of factor the environment has on vehicles in your part of Brazil, but one thing I know about Dodges of that era is how prone the doors can be to rust. I don't know if they just don't drain properly, or if its road splash-up that causes it (in the northern part of the United States, rock salt is used to keep ice from freezing onto the road, and can have a bad effect on a car's exterior). I own a '97 Ram with the 3.9 V6, and while its not a bad truck, I know that better stuff can be had.

Safety wise, I honestly wouldn't worry--trucks of that size normally "win" car crashes. In regards to the airbag, too many factors can combine in with a situation like that to solely blame the airbag, unless its such a late delay, like several seconds after an accident. If you've never been hit with an airbag, its honestly not fun.

Regarding the transmission, Chrysler has been using nearly the same automatic transmission design for decades. Dodges used to be horribly prone to having transmission overheat in situations where it had to frequently shift in and out of overdrive, such as if you were going up and down a lot of hills in a short distance, or if you were towing something. The engineers alleviated the problem by installing a manual overdrive cut-off switch on the dashboard. This helped a lot, but Chrysler's automatics are just like many other automatic transmissions you'll find in American trucks:  they are designed to work with and around a heavy, torquey engine that is designed to pull a loaded truck around. Don't expect it to be snappy through the gears like a small car's gearbox--its going to lumber its way through various gears to put torque down to the road in order to move itself and its load wherever it has to go. American muscle cars had the same thing going on. It was all about the lay of the land:  America and Canada are known for their long expanses of road that were blazed and paved quite recently in world history, which meant the cars didn't have to snap around corners like a British or German car because so much of the road infrastructure is simply straight, with gentle curves. European roads had to, many times, follow paths that were almost thousands of years old, many times going through trails that may have been cut through forests or were moreso affected by geography. To maximize their effectiveness on paths such as these, the vehicles from Europe are very well known for being quick through the gears, and are lauded for their handling abilities.

Next comes reliability and required mechanical aptitude. The thing that you will have success with is the fact that everything will be easy, for the most part, to get to. Replacing the distributor cap may be an issue (at least it is on my truck--right up against the firewall and behind a tall intake manifold). Dodge's bread and butter for a lot of years was truck sales to commercial fleets. This meant that their trucks were simple enough to be manufactured for the long run. However, the design of things may throw you for a loop--this is a Chrysler trademark. Whenever I've worked on one, I always get the feeling that the vehicle's mechanics were designed by several independant engineers, who then pooled their plans together in the end, hammered out a vehicle from the ideas, and then trimmed the fat (sometimes REALLY trimming the fat) in order to bring the car's engineering cost down enough to afford the fact that the design department put together an attractive package to wrap the mess in. Chrysler has always had a knack for making really good-looking vehicles (the 300 is everywhere these days--Obama even had one), but in order to afford such a nice-looking package, things had to be trimmed down, such as build quality of the interior and outsourced parts that had adaptations built around them to bring costs down. This issue has been really addressed by the Italians, and the Dodges and Chryslers that are really re-badged Fiats and Lancias are repairing the damage that this has caused over several years.

One other person on here recommended going with something like a Hilux, and I heartily agree with that. Toyota engineers their trucks to an almost bulletproff reputation. You'd also do well with a Ranger or a Nissan Hardbody or Frontier (I know Nissans are sold in Brazil, but I don't know if they had a truck line availible in the country or not--forgive me if I'm incorrect). When it comes to a good truck that'll be as dependable as a pack mule, cost next to nothing to run and be as handy as a good set of wrenches, I'd go with a small guy with a five-speed and a tough  little four-cylinder power plant under the hood--having four wheel drive is entirely up to you.

I hate to really sound like I'm complaining, bashing or buzzkilling, but where I live, Chrysler is a domestic brand, and I've skinned my knuckles on them as often as I've skinned my knuckles on stuff made by General Motors and Ford, as well as many imports. Chrysler has always had great luck bringing people into their showrooms for the first time, but have always had poorer luck with bring people back for a second time. The best way I can ever summarize it is by quoting a gentleman named Bill Mitchell, who was General Motor's VP of design from '59 to '77 when he talked about how people would take to small cars in the early seventies:  "Its like vodka--people will try it, but not many stick with it."

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

I would ask how much and how far would you drive it, and how handy you are.  I had a'98 with the 318 (5.2L).  I bought it used and it was decent.  The 5.2L is basically the same motor with a smaller bore.  Both of those were phased out because they were gas hogs.  A good 16 year old truck is still a 16 year old truck, and will require more maintenance just to keep it on the road.  If you're handy under the hood, go for it, as it is a proven motor.  Oh, and gas ain't $2 a gallon in the States either.

 

[mayfly]

A buddy of mine is a freelance mechanical engineer doing stress analysis of drivetrains for motor vehicles.  According to him, Dodge makes the weakest drivetrains in the business, especially on the trucks.

I would not buy it.

 

[B3Guy]

Ford Ranger. I have one, and it has over 225,000 miles on it, still runs smooth. the body will go before anything else, that's for sure. my friend has one as well, same story. over 200,000 miles and running great. all I have to do is buy a thingy of freon every spring to charge up the aircon. it hauls like a much bigger truck. unless you need to pull a semi trailer, this truck will do great.

 

[Graffiti62]

Ford Ranger. I have one, and it has over 225,000 miles on it, still runs smooth. the body will go before anything else, that's for sure. my friend has one as well, same story. over 200,000 miles and running great. all I have to do is buy a thingy of freon every spring to charge up the aircon. it hauls like a much bigger truck. unless you need to pull a semi trailer, this truck will do great.

My little brother had an '85 with a four-cylinder engine--thing ran like an absolute top. I wanted to buy it off of him and use it in college, but my parents had the fear that with as much snow as the Upper Peninsula gets, and with it being only 2WD, it'd be too light and not powerful enough to get through the rough roads. He sold that one, and he recently bought an '87 Ranger with an automatic and a V6. He bought it off of an older gentleman who bought it new and maintained it til he had to enter nursing care, and it is in phenomenal shape for being 23 years old. I don't know if he has the 2.8 or the 2.9 in it--I hope its not the 2.9--those have a reputation for an overheating issue. I know he needs to do some work on one or two of the lifters--he gets a tick when the engine is running at about 2500-3000 rpm. He wants to use it for his work truck to keep from having to pile miles onto his '98 Sierra.

 

[B3Guy]

Ford Ranger. I have one, and it has over 225,000 miles on it, still runs smooth. the body will go before anything else, that's for sure. my friend has one as well, same story. over 200,000 miles and running great. all I have to do is buy a thingy of freon every spring to charge up the aircon. it hauls like a much bigger truck. unless you need to pull a semi trailer, this truck will do great.

My little brother had an '85 with a four-cylinder engine--thing ran like an absolute top. I wanted to buy it off of him and use it in college, but my parents had the fear that with as much snow as the Upper Peninsula gets, and with it being only 2WD, it'd be too light and not powerful enough to get through the rough roads. He sold that one, and he recently bought an '87 Ranger with an automatic and a V6. He bought it off of an older gentleman who bought it new and maintained it til he had to enter nursing care, and it is in phenomenal shape for being 23 years old. I don't know if he has the 2.8 or the 2.9 in it--I hope its not the 2.9--those have a reputation for an overheating issue. I know he needs to do some work on one or two of the lifters--he gets a tick when the engine is running at about 2500-3000 rpm. He wants to use it for his work truck to keep from having to pile miles onto his '98 Sierra.

I'm in Minnesota. 2 sandbags in the back of the bed does the trick for driving in most traction-intensive situations, including snow. the 4 cylinder Ford engine is a champ! We've practically abused that Ranger (hauling well over the recommended weight countless times), and other vehicles have come and gone in the meanwhile. It was the only vehicle my dad has bought new (it was new but a year-old model). Walked into the dealer, drove one, asked to buy it, but didn't want white (doesn't play nice with our dirt roads). The dealer called back the next day and said they'd obtained a tan one  :icon_thumright:

 

[Graffiti62]

Ford Ranger. I have one, and it has over 225,000 miles on it, still runs smooth. the body will go before anything else, that's for sure. my friend has one as well, same story. over 200,000 miles and running great. all I have to do is buy a thingy of freon every spring to charge up the aircon. it hauls like a much bigger truck. unless you need to pull a semi trailer, this truck will do great.

My little brother had an '85 with a four-cylinder engine--thing ran like an absolute top. I wanted to buy it off of him and use it in college, but my parents had the fear that with as much snow as the Upper Peninsula gets, and with it being only 2WD, it'd be too light and not powerful enough to get through the rough roads. He sold that one, and he recently bought an '87 Ranger with an automatic and a V6. He bought it off of an older gentleman who bought it new and maintained it til he had to enter nursing care, and it is in phenomenal shape for being 23 years old. I don't know if he has the 2.8 or the 2.9 in it--I hope its not the 2.9--those have a reputation for an overheating issue. I know he needs to do some work on one or two of the lifters--he gets a tick when the engine is running at about 2500-3000 rpm. He wants to use it for his work truck to keep from having to pile miles onto his '98 Sierra.

I'm in Minnesota. 2 sandbags in the back of the bed does the trick for driving in most traction-intensive situations, including snow. the 4 cylinder Ford engine is a champ! We've practically abused that Ranger (hauling well over the recommended weight countless times), and other vehicles have come and gone in the meanwhile. It was the only vehicle my dad has bought new (it was new but a year-old model). Walked into the dealer, drove one, asked to buy it, but didn't want white (doesn't play nice with our dirt roads). The dealer called back the next day and said they'd obtained a tan one  :icon_thumright:

It was more of my mom worrying moreso than anything else. She heard from one of her girlfriends how small the dorms were at one of the schools in Wisconsin, and that freshmen couldn't have cars. She had it in her head that all colleges throughout the country had itty bitty dorm rooms and that Northern Michigan will not let me have my car on campus. The dorms at NMU were 12x12, and we had a six foot closet that was part of the hallway, so space wasn't an issue. She was so looped on what she had heard that she didn't even let me take my VCR, saying that "You don't have room for that in college!"  Six weeks later, when my dad visited, he brought up my VCR, and everything else my mother was convinced I didn't have room for. Plus, for the winter semester, I had my Chevy with me, and, while it was RWD, I managed quite well in the snow, especially with the 300 pounds of steel weights my dad used to have on his John Deere before he installed the loader.

It was moments like that with my mom that make me think of Jim Mora:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9hY6TVWRms[/youtube]

 

[Nando Vallart]

Hey guys! Thanks for the help!

I know about the gasoline drinking behavior :laughing7: Actually now I've a 1999 A3 1.8 Turbo and it's also should go to AA But it was made to be driven on european streets, with way better asphalt on it...

I'm thinking in a pickup and the reasons I'm thinking on the Ram is: I love the design since I was 10 years old and a guy nearby my home had one... Other reason is that you can find S10 and Ranger with single cab, but is pratically impossible to find a Toyota Hilux, Mitsubishi L200, Nissan Frontier single cab... They're all made dual cab, what I think is ugly :tard: And more expensive, they start to be sold here later than american's brands pickups...

May be thinking now in not buying it... That is interesting that they make a pickup that look strong as a tractor and it isn't...

Thanks guys!

 

[DocNrock]

It is interesting reading all the badness about the Dodge Ram.  Mine has been bulletproof.  Back when I would boat frequently, I towed my 20' Reinell Fish n Ski with it for up to 6 hour drives up and down hills.  The transmission held up fine without any overheating issues.  But, I would never run it in overdrive uphill though, just so I would have plenty of torque.  Just my personal experience of a single vehicle.  Maybe I got lucky and got one of the good ones.  It is the 1500 SS/T.

 

[Cagey]

I'll have to pile on with the nay-sayers. Chrysler is good at making attractive vehicles with seemingly good specs, but the reality of them is often quite different. As somebody else mentioned, they have a good track record getting people in the first time, but not the second. You learn your lesson, and it's expensive. Their trucks aren't awful, but they're nowhere near as good as GM or Ford trucks. They seem to have a knack for taking cost out of things that leads to erratic behavior, early failures, and cosmetic ruin. But, for example, the Ford F-150/250/350 models are icons for durability, utility, and longevity. You just can't kill those things. They're not as attractive as the Chrysler or GM products, and usually aren't appointed as fancy in the interior, but that's not what you should be looking at in a truck anyway. If you want a luxury car, buy one of those.

 

[Nando Vallart]

Yes, the problem is that they're very expensive here... In deed the Ram is cheap as any imported car used here, because the parts are not cheap and most people can't buy them... While the Fords made here (ranger and F-250) are really expensive, they don't loose much of their prices, specially the diesel ones, diesel has a government help to low the price...

I'm booking to see a Ram a girl is selling this week

Lets see if I like it...

 

[AGWAN]

saying one company is good or bad is just... unrealistic.

they all have goods and bads that vary throughout models and years.

I'm a huge Dodge/Jeep fan. I'm well aware of their weaknesses and I'm also aware of GM's many, many, many weaknesses (which have diminished severely in the last few years)

The thing is, Dodge trucks will run forever... not necessarily well. hell they may SUCK half the time. but somehow they will always be driveable. but just barely.

I'd drive a dodge. because crude handling and ease of repair are things I can live with.

I'd vote nay, for you though. I have a hard time seeing this truck as something you'd enjoy long term.

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

Stay away from the mid-90s to recent Chryslers like you'd stay away from the plague.  Their transmissions are absolute crap. 

Just recently, Chrysler started using Mercedes transmissions in them, which seem to be a bit better, but still no great shakes.

I heard Chrysler vehicles will be getting improved transmissions soon, but "soon" doesn't account for "now."  If a Chrysler is a "must" for you, get one with a manual transmission.

 

[AGWAN]

^ thats actually kinda ignorant.

Chrysler transmissions are good enough Ford used them in the Super Duty. I can't tell you every single one ever was PERFECT just like I can't say THEY'RE ALL BAD. they made and make a lot of different transmissions. I'm sure there are winners and losers there.

I can tell you the 999 in my jeep is a VERY cheap chrysler Auto. and at 230,000 miles it never needed a service or ever had a problem.

I can also tell you of a Grand Caravan with a totally trashed Tranny by 40,000.

 

[Cagey]

Some things like trannys used to be grossly overdesigned. But, in their zeal to lose weight, size and materials/manufacturing cost, those kinds of things have been engineered down to the last detail to perform exactly according to spec, and no more. So, they're easily trashed with the least bit of abuse. At one time, you could race stock trannys. Or, for your average Joe, it was okay to tow things. Now, you have to baby them to do standard duty.

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

^ thats actually kinda ignorant.

Chrysler transmissions are good enough Ford used them in the Super Duty. I can't tell you every single one ever was PERFECT just like I can't say THEY'RE ALL BAD. they made and make a lot of different transmissions. I'm sure there are winners and losers there.

I can tell you the 999 in my jeep is a VERY cheap chrysler Auto. and at 230,000 miles it never needed a service or ever had a problem.

I can also tell you of a Grand Caravan with a totally trashed Tranny by 40,000.

Actually, I can tell you it isn't ignorant at all.  Everyone I know who's owned a Chrysler product have had transmissions replaced by 40,000 miles, regardless of whether it was an Intrepid, Stratus, Cirrus, or Ram.  I can also tell you of a woman my wife works with who had THREE transmissions in her Durango by the time it had 80,000 miles on it, and this was a woman who was not hard on a vehicle, so I'm sticking with what I know to be fact about Chrysler transmissions; they're crap.

Let's hope things have improved, because I'm dying to get a Rubicon.

 

[erogenousjones17]

I've heard much the same sort of horror stopry about Chrysler transmissions. Our neighbour, for instance, had the tranny let go in his new Caravan as he drove it off the lot. Of course, all this is purely anecdotal. And those mid-90s Rams and Dakotas looked positively BAD-ASS.