Hydrostatic drive

[Polecat]

I deliver trucks, towing my pickup behind (of course), and after delivery I then drive my pickup to wherever the next truck is. Having messed up my old pickup, I am looking at a 1990 Dodge Dakota to replace it. Only problem with this particular one is that it has an automatic tranny, and you know what happens when you tow an automatic. I am looking for some way (other than crawling under it to unbolt the driveshaft 10 to 12 times a week) to disconnect the rear end from the tranny. Having read about a hydrostatic setup some years ago, I am interested in replacing the driveshaft with a hydraulic pump and motor with the appropriate hoses, incorporating a crossover valve to effectively put the rear end into freewheel during towing. One parts man I talked to challenged the legality of the setup and I haven't been able to connect with anyone that can give me the straight dope in that respect. Has anyone heard of any research or experiments on hydrostatic systems in this application that would address the legality question and/or be of help to me in finding the proper capacities and sources for the components? I am not stuck on the hydrostatic concept. Any way to quickly and easily disconnect and reconnect the rear end would be acceptable.

[BleedDodge]

Never heard of anything like that before.

I think it would be way simpler to just have a truck with a standard transmission in it.

Best of luck in your search.

[Polecat]

Originally Posted by BleedDodge

Never heard of anything like that before.

I think it would be way simpler to just have a truck with a standard transmission in it.

Best of luck in your search.

Yeah, well, no doubt it would be simpler. Problem is to find one that's light enough to tow with a long bed with topper AND stick shift all in one vehicle, close enough I can get to it and at my price. Anyhow, thanks for the comeback.

[BleedDodge]

I don't think I understand what you mean by that. I'm sure that you could find a truck like this, and a standard is way lighter than an automatic anyways...

[Polecat]

Originally Posted by BleedDodge

I don't think I understand what you mean by that. I'm sure that you could find a truck like this, and a standard is way lighter than an automatic anyways...

Well, ok, I'm game. I just started looking, and the one I mentioned with the automatic is the only thing I found in my home area. From what I've seen, stick tranmissions are relatively scarce, at least around here. I did start looking online but ran out of time last night.

Here are my requirements: Curb weight fairly close to 3,300 lbs; Long bed, something near 8 feet (preferably with cover); Stick shift); 3.9 engine; A/C. Cruise and radio/CD would be nice, power windows would not. If you know of something like that, I would give it serious consideration.

Thanks again.

[Davejb]

There is a device made (designed for RVers) that has a pump to keep fluid circulating in an auto tranny when the vehicle is in tow behind the motorhome, factory warranty is retained (check with your dealer). A current 4x4 Dakota automatic can be flat towed without damage, but I don't know the miles limit.

http://www.campingworld.com/browse/p...=SRCH&tcode=37

[Polecat]

Ureka! I checked on the Remco pump and discovered it is designed for front-wheel drive, but I did a little poking around on their site and found a mechanical disconnect mechanism for the driveshaft on a rear-wheel drive. It's a little pricey, but with a little work it can be transferred to future vehicles as well, which makes the cost more justifiable. Thanks for the pointer.

[BleedDodge]

My truck is a 1997 Ram with a 3.9/5 speed, and it wasn't hard to come by. I'm actually disappointed that I ended up with it...

My truck does not have power windows, that is one thing I hate. What if someone takes the keys and you're in the truck or something, does that mean you die? I hate power windows, as crank windows make things so much simpler. The only "Power Windows" I like is the Rush album. Maybe you know what I mean...

[Davejb]

the 3.9 is too small for a Ram as you found out, even the Dakota seems underpowered with it.

[BleedDodge]

Yeah it's totally hopeless. I only really liked it because the 6-cylinder rams don't have the crappy looking side moulding and all that other useless crap I don't need. The V8 rams even have a plastic thing on the bottom of the tailgate and I can't figure out what it does.

My truck is getting a V8 someday. Not because it needs it, but just because I want it. A 440 probably because I like showing off sometimes, and I like going fast...

[Polecat]

Originally Posted by Davejb

the 3.9 is too small for a Ram as you found out, even the Dakota seems underpowered with it.

So you can imagine my tribulations with the pickup I'm trying to replace--a Chevy S-10 with a 2.8. I've run a lot of miles under it, but I spent a lot of time feeling like an new car ad I saw many years ago--this guy and a kid chugging up a hill in an old beater and the kid says, "Gee, Dad, they're all passing us!"

[BleedDodge]

I hear that.

[slantsixness]

underpowered?
0-60 in 10 minutes!
hmmm.... 3.7L (225 cu in.) 6 cylinder in a 5000 lb truck getting 29mpg (highway) for 404,997K miles (almost 405K this morning!)......

I like my six!

yeah, that's the old beast in the pix.
(and it'll tow a boat or trailer just as well as my brothers 5.9L van!)
Slantsixness

[Polecat]

Sounds to me like you're running a slant six. Big difference from the V6. I had a Valient with a slant six once. Plenty of get up and go. I think the only reason they gave up the slant six was the length of the engine. But it was a much better engine than the V6, in my opinion.

[slantsixness]

Well, of course it is!

Wish they still made it.....
I can't kill this truck!