Inside, the instruments and controls work fine, the result of a '97 cockpit upgrade. We'd ask for a bit more side-bolstering in the seats (sportier versions of which went away in that interior overhaul). And GM's Monsoon stereos have become as good as all but the very high-end European systems.
Moral of story: The Camaro SS is for the one who values American-style tire-burning performance above all else. Yes, you can whine about its plasticky cargo area finish, marginal visibility, cramped back seating space, obnoxious hump in the floor to clear the catalytic converter, and annoying 1-4 skip-shift programming. If it's Good Housekeeping-style practicality you want, please, go buy a minivan. That'll mean more SSs for those of us who just wanna go.
Dodge Dakota 5.9 R/T
A Jack Russell among RottweilersAfter hopping between our four-pack of outrageously potent musclecars (and the bodacious F-150 Lightning muscle truck), I eagerly climbed into the Dodge Dakota 5.9 R/T. Meaty 17-inch performance rubber and its biggest-in-the-bunch displacement tattooed prominently on its bulging, slammed, retina-burning-yellow bodywork promised similar time-warping acceleration and brain-draining cornering force. But I soon found myself parroting the old lady in the classic Wendy's commercial who wondered why Brand X burgers were so small: "Where's the beef?"
Though the Dakota's "Magnum" OHV V-8 is rated at a peak of 250 horsepower, the Dakota 5.9 R/T's 7.7-second 0-60-mph time was a distant last in this field. In handling, it struggled to share the back row. This was a Jack Russell terrier in a pack of Rottweilers.
Even more embarrassing: This '99 Dakota 5.9 R/T (no year 2000 models had been produced at the time of our test) was 0.4 second slower 0-60 than the 300-plus-pound-heavier 2000 Dakota SLT Quad Cab, the latter being powered by what's arguably Chrysler's best-ever engine, the silky-yet-torquey 4.7-liter/235-horse SOHC V-8.
In last year's Sport Truck for the Buck comparison, a '98 Dakota 5.9 R/T turned in a 7.0-second 0-60-mph run. Curiously, this '99 couldn't match its older sibling in any performance category save stopping distance. Since Dodge delivered the '99 to us on '98-spec Goodyear Eagle RS-A tires, rather than current-issue Eagle LS touring tires, and there have been no performance-related changes through 2000, we were left to wonder how this occurred.
Dodge's press release touts the 5.9 R/T's "rubber-burning power": Not without break-torquing the driveline before a launch, that is. Even with a claimed torque peak of 345 pound-feet, the Dakota 5.9 R/T wasn't traction limited off the line. Thanks in part to a standard limited-slip differential, it produced barely more than a chirp unless we really abused it (see photo). That's pretty amazing for something with little weight over its drive wheels and gives this truck a starting-line performance advantage versus less-than-skilled drivers of Z28s and Trans Ams. The Dakota R/T's lowered suspension (rear leaf springs go under the rear axle), thick rear anti-roll bar, and 255/55HR17s deliver fairly decent handling aplomb. Its 0.80g skidpad performance and 61.4-mph slalom put it ahead of the Grand Prix, but were only slightly better than the 2000 Dakota SLT Quad Cab's 0.74 g and 60.3 mph. If the R/T offered super-car handling, we'd more gladly put up with its punishing ride, chassis vibration, and numb steering. Although with its 1275-pound payload potential and 2000-pound trailer-towing capacity, this fun toy can actually do some real work.
As far as its musclecar prowess, however, the Dakota 5.9 R/T was outclassed in this field. We included it because we thought it the quickest Dodge under $30,000, but the heavier 2000 Dakota Sport SLT Quad Cab's amazing 0-60 advantage blows it out of the water. While not exactly a sheep in wolf's clothes, the 5.9 R/T doesn't completely fulfill its performance pretensions.
...
>>next page