Ski-Doo Snowmobiles Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Looking at a new '06 Dodge. Our problem is choosing between the Hemi with the new MDS cylinder de-activation, or the 4.7L. I would like to have the added power of the Hemi for towing, but the wife also uses it to commute during the week. Hoping the new MDS system can make up for the extra gas consumption of the Hemi and keep us at pretty much the same level as our current 4.7 in our 2001. Her commute is mostly highway speeds so it should be in the MDS mode most of the time.

I can say that the 4.7 we have right now is a pig when towing, just seems to be too underpowered.

Anybody know much about these new '06's or how real-world mileage is working out on them?
 

·
planes take off against the wind
Joined
·
15,035 Posts
I dont have details. But until this has been around a few years I would steer clear of the MDS... anyone remember the caddi - 4-6-8? Cylinder deselection has improved 100 fold over the designs of the 80s BUT I am not willing to be a test pilot for it yet...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,676 Posts
It is my understanding that the new Hemi was built from the ground up for the MDS. They had it in their cars last year with no complaints. I looked very close at it when I was shopping for a new truck. No one would even come close to the GM deals, so I have a new Chevy in the driveway getting 11 MPG. If I did not need the 3/4 ton for a sled deck I would have looked closer at the Ram 1500.

Also, I have heard the 4.7 is not really a fuel miser either. My guess is the MDS could get pretty close with conservative driving. I had the old 5.9er and I paid for gas with big sacks of money. You know, the ones the bank has with $'s on them...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
31,536 Posts
zdooman said:
I dont have details. But until this has been around a few years I would steer clear of the MDS... anyone remember the caddi - 4-6-8? Cylinder deselection has improved 100 fold over the designs of the 80s BUT I am not willing to be a test pilot for it yet...
[snapback]696227[/snapback]​
Chrysler has had MDS in cars now since the 300C Series came out with ZERO issues. It works way different than the old V8-6-4 Caddy had. When Car & Driver tested the 300C a while back their comment was something to the effect of: "does it work? We don't know, as we never felt it activate or de-activate." All while getting 20+ MPG out of a full sized 340HP rear wheel drive car.
That engine is an engineering marvel.

If it were me I'd buy the Hemi and enjoy the power why needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,432 Posts
MX-Z Man said:
Chrysler has had MDS in cars now since the 300C Series came out with ZERO issues. It works way different than the old V8-6-4 Caddy had. When Car & Driver tested the 300C a while back their comment was something to the effect of: "does it work? We don't know, as we never felt it activate or de-activate." All while getting 20+ MPG out of a full sized 340HP rear wheel drive car.
That engine is an engineering marvel.

[snapback]696264[/snapback]​
True, everyone says the only time they even notice the MDS is at the gas pump.

poo sucks said:
whem they started putting the hemi in the trucks it had the mds, just now they are really advertizing since gm has put it in there trucks. if you dont believe my call your dodge dealer.
[snapback]696400[/snapback]​
False, I think '05 was the 1st year for a MDS/Hemi/Ram.

RATED_X said:
Im not sure on the 06s, but I have an 03 hemi and a buddy has the 4.7 same trucks(1500 quadcabs). On the highway he only gets 1mpg better than i do. City hes gettin about 1.5 better.
[snapback]696602[/snapback]​
True, my wife has a 4.7 dakota, and that trucks mileage is almost totally dependent on driver input. It gets 20 or better when she drives it, 15 or worse when I do... If you can keep your foot away from the floorboard, the 4.7 and the regular hemi aren't that far apart on mileage. If you keep your foot out of the MDS hemi, I think it might even beat the 4.7 on mileage... I'd go for the hemi, the 4.7s have to spin like crazy to push a full size truck, even without a trailer... I'd make one more suggestion, think about going with a 2500 instead of 1500...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,111 Posts
From a Mopar guy... 4.7 is weak and thirsty! Get the Hemi. Plus resale will be better. I would rather have an old 318 than that weak 4.7!
 

·
Ka-RAY-Zeeee
Joined
·
5,301 Posts
zdooman said:
I dont have details. But until this has been around a few years I would steer clear of the MDS... anyone remember the caddi - 4-6-8? Cylinder deselection has improved 100 fold over the designs of the 80s BUT I am not willing to be a test pilot for it yet...
[snapback]696227[/snapback]​
LOL!!

That GM 4-6-8 system was the WORST thing ever put out....total crap..I can't imagine that this "new" system will be much better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,676 Posts
biggziff said:
zdooman said:
I dont have details. But until this has been around a few years I would steer clear of the MDS... anyone remember the caddi - 4-6-8? Cylinder deselection has improved 100 fold over the designs of the 80s BUT I am not willing to be a test pilot for it yet...
[snapback]696227[/snapback]​
LOL!!

That GM 4-6-8 system was the WORST thing ever put out....total crap..I can't imagine that this "new" system will be much better.
[snapback]696990[/snapback]​
That sweet Oldsmobile diesel was the worst thing ever put out.
 

·
Ka-RAY-Zeeee
Joined
·
5,301 Posts
therealsnowdog said:
biggziff said:
zdooman said:
I dont have details. But until this has been around a few years I would steer clear of the MDS... anyone remember the caddi - 4-6-8? Cylinder deselection has improved 100 fold over the designs of the 80s BUT I am not willing to be a test pilot for it yet...
[snapback]696227[/snapback]​
LOL!!

That GM 4-6-8 system was the WORST thing ever put out....total crap..I can't imagine that this "new" system will be much better.
[snapback]696990[/snapback]​
That sweet Oldsmobile diesel was the worst thing ever put out.
[snapback]697005[/snapback]​
Heheeh...my uncle had a Caprice with the gas conversion diesel in it...what a load of crap!!!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
31,536 Posts
biggziff said:
zdooman said:
I dont have details. But until this has been around a few years I would steer clear of the MDS... anyone remember the caddi - 4-6-8? Cylinder deselection has improved 100 fold over the designs of the 80s BUT I am not willing to be a test pilot for it yet...
[snapback]696227[/snapback]​
LOL!!

That GM 4-6-8 system was the WORST thing ever put out....total crap..I can't imagine that this "new" system will be much better.
[snapback]696990[/snapback]​
Not a good assumption. It works, it's proven, it's been around for a few years now. Remember when they said fuel injection was too "new fangled" and oil injection in sleds would never work either. And OMG, who ever thought about making a "rider forward" sled? I guess Ski-Doo was way out there on that one. Besides, the new system works in a totally different way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,111 Posts
Yup, I hear the Dodge system has been used for years in Benzos.
 

·
planes take off against the wind
Joined
·
15,035 Posts
MX-Z Man said:
biggziff said:
zdooman said:
I dont have details. But until this has been around a few years I would steer clear of the MDS... anyone remember the caddi - 4-6-8? Cylinder deselection has improved 100 fold over the designs of the 80s BUT I am not willing to be a test pilot for it yet...
[snapback]696227[/snapback]​
LOL!!

That GM 4-6-8 system was the WORST thing ever put out....total crap..I can't imagine that this "new" system will be much better.
[snapback]696990[/snapback]​
Not a good assumption. It works, it's proven, it's been around for a few years now. Remember when they said fuel injection was too "new fangled" and oil injection in sleds would never work either. And OMG, who ever thought about making a "rider forward" sled? I guess Ski-Doo was way out there on that one. Besides, the new system works in a totally different way.
[snapback]697244[/snapback]​
yes I doo. I also recall those first systems were very buggy and failure prone. Not to mention they would plug at the drop of a hat and if you ran too much cleaner through them it would erode the coil insulation causing them to fail. It was the early 90s before it became a 'solid' system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
chrysler,is going to offer the 3.2l bluetec engine in the jeep grand cherrokee in the fall.395ft/lbs of torqe for towing,v-6 economy when not towing.32-34 mpg.it i
s worth the wait.info can be found on www.allpar.com
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top