Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Anybody have or had a Shelby Dakota?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="XD-9Guy" data-source="post: 1401665" data-attributes="member: 4869"><p>The Syclone is a neat rig for sure and it definitely had some notable performance enchancement.</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>I think everyone wants one of those 2 cars, if not one of each but those are a little outside the limits of my pocketbook. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is accurate, engines available in the Dakota at the time were a 100hp 2.5L 4cyl engine or the 3.9L 125hp V6. Shelby's Dakotas had the 5.2L, 175hp V8 with 270 lbs/ft. of torque @ 2000 rpm. A stock V6 Dakota = 12.8 sec 0-60, Stock Shelby Dakota = 0-60 in 8.7 sec. It wasn't blowing past Camaros but for a pick-up it was quick at the time. I'd never buy one thinking I was going to go race it, unless I was ready to do have the engine/trans swapped. Evidently the 360 Magnum will drop right in and that's a much better place to start working if you want to go fast. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There's a lot of that - I know several guys that think they look stupid. I can't explain what it is about the truck but I thought those early Dakotas were almost perfect as far as aesthetics. To me it it's what a truck should look like, I'm not on board with all the smooth lines and curves in new model pick ups - I like the F series from the early 90's for the same reason and the early 70's Chevys. I like boxy looking trucks and the Dakota is about as box shaped as it gets.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="XD-9Guy, post: 1401665, member: 4869"] The Syclone is a neat rig for sure and it definitely had some notable performance enchancement. I think everyone wants one of those 2 cars, if not one of each but those are a little outside the limits of my pocketbook. This is accurate, engines available in the Dakota at the time were a 100hp 2.5L 4cyl engine or the 3.9L 125hp V6. Shelby's Dakotas had the 5.2L, 175hp V8 with 270 lbs/ft. of torque @ 2000 rpm. A stock V6 Dakota = 12.8 sec 0-60, Stock Shelby Dakota = 0-60 in 8.7 sec. It wasn't blowing past Camaros but for a pick-up it was quick at the time. I'd never buy one thinking I was going to go race it, unless I was ready to do have the engine/trans swapped. Evidently the 360 Magnum will drop right in and that's a much better place to start working if you want to go fast. There's a lot of that - I know several guys that think they look stupid. I can't explain what it is about the truck but I thought those early Dakotas were almost perfect as far as aesthetics. To me it it's what a truck should look like, I'm not on board with all the smooth lines and curves in new model pick ups - I like the F series from the early 90's for the same reason and the early 70's Chevys. I like boxy looking trucks and the Dakota is about as box shaped as it gets. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Anybody have or had a Shelby Dakota?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom