biggman100

I recently purchased a 2000 GMC K3500 4X4, auto, 5.7, short cab, that has an issue with the 4 wheel drive not engaging. I first thought it might be the actuator, but, after further inspection, i found that no power is going to the actuator at all. The 4 wheel drive is engaged by a lever on the floor, not a button on the dash. I have checked all the fuses, and unless i missed something, i dont see any that are blown. I dont have the manual for the truck, and i cant seem to find out if there are any relays, or even which fuses, are for the 4 wheel drive system, so, my first question is, does anyone know which fuses or relays i would specifically look for, and where they might be located? Any diagrams you can post, or point me to, would be greatly appreciated. Next question, because it is lever actuated, and not button actuated, would it still have the control unit, that i cant remember the name of, that the electronic systems have on the transfer case, and, if so, where would it be located? I cant seem to find anything on the transfer case that looks like what i found for pics of that part online. My other issue with it is unrelated to the transfer case, but, the PO installed an aftermarket cold air intake, that i had all kinds of issues with, due to air leaks at all the clamps, the filter laying against the exahaust, and basically very poor installation. My question there is, which would be the better option, as i bought the truck to use mainly as a plow vehicle, so, would it be better to find the original air box and plumbing, and install that, or, does the cold air intake really make a difference in power and fuel economy on these trucks? Thank you in advance for any help you guys can give me with this.

Janet, just a suggestion, but, talk to your mecahnic, and see what he says about you getting the parts for it, and then having him do the repairs. I know a few places in the states will let you bring your own parts for them to install, and most wont, but, if he will let you bring your own parts, then, my suggestion, before you give completely up on it would be to look for the parts through online suppliers, and see about getting them that way. Online suppliers, and even advertisers here, may be able to get you the parts at a much lower price than your local dealer or even your mechanic can get them for. Either way, it is worth looking into before giving up completely, especially after everything else you have done to it, and went through with it. I do know there are several online suppliers in the states that will ship to europe, although i dont know what the costs involved for that would be.

Another possibility, that I just corrected on an older, 2 wheel drive ranger, are the rear spring eye, and spring hanger bushings. The bushing in the hanger, and in the spring eye were both destroyed due to rust, but only on the drivers side, which caused the drivers wheel to sit further back than the passenger side wheel.

I got a chance to get back to this, finally, and even though the wheels are $1400 for 4, I think having circle track make me a set in billet, and then painted the gun metal gray that I want, is actually the best option. I talked to a couple billet wheel adapter manufacturers, and they don't recommend using them with the loads I sometimes tow, the last being in the 5500 pound range ( a 1979 Cadillac on a custom, home made, tow dolly). As for the option of drilling the hubs for a new bolt pattern, I found a couple places that will, but, they want roughly 6 weeks to do the work, and I can barely afford to let the truck sit 6 days right now.

Moses, the cables are only a week old. I replaced the intermediate and rear cables last Saturday, and the front cable last Sunday. I also cleaned all the brake dust that accumulated on the hardware since last September, and although the parking brake works, and only takes 6 click to lock the rear wheels, it won't release unless I pull the cable by hand. It seems like something is binding, but I can't figure out what it could be.

Mose, as always, thank you for the help. What makes this so odd is that everything in the rear brakes have been replaced since last September. I replaced the shoes and hardware, including the e-brake arm and spring, after I finished putting the truck back together. We even cleaned the backing plates and repainted them. I thought maybe the shoes were sticking against the backing plate, so, I put a little bit of grease where the shoe rides against the backing plate, and even that didn't help.

I have an odd one, that no one can seem to figure out. On my 1994 Dakota, 3.9L, 5 speed, i had an issue where the parking brake would stick, and wouldn't release all the way, even after it was adjusted properly. After digging into it, i thought maybe the rear cables might have been sticking, and since the intermediate cable was starting to fray, i decided to replace both rear cables, as well as the intermediate cables, but, even after having them adjusted to where both rear wheels will lock up after only 4 clicks, it still doesn't release fully. I have even tried adding a spring to the plate at the end of the main cable, and that didnt seem to help either. I thought release tension came from the springs at the end of the rear cables, and not from anywhere else, but, i am wondering, is there supposed to be another release spring in the system somewhere? Maybe on the pedal assembly, or on the tensioner perhaps?

Moses, i actually have a theory as to why manual hubs and solid front axles have dissapeared. The manufacturers say IFS makes a vehicle safer to drive, which, it may, but i think it is more for comfort than anything else. People use trucks more and more as everyday vehicles, but, they want their truck to ride like their car does. Ford used manual hubs on at least the F-150 into the mid 1990's, so they had to be a worthwhile idea. Ford stopped using them though, from what i have seen, when they started making IFS trucks. Anyway, to continue the original discussion, according to a Dodge press release, from around late 1991, that i found on an obscure Dodge site, having the front axle locked on the 1992 and up Dakota was supposed to only have a very minimal impact on fuel mileage, but was somehow supposed to decrease wear and tear on internal front driveline parts. I cant see how, unless maybe with the disconnect system, the gears didnt rotate when the front end rotated, and therefore the gear oil didnt move around as much, maybe. Im lost on their way of thinking, but, either way, it seems a good bet that locking the axle on Luke's truck definitely wont hurt anything.

Luke, i also found out something interesting on the 1992 to 1996 Dakota. The front axle is always locked, or at least seems that way, because when the front end is jacked up, if you spin either front wheel, the front driveshaft will spin, if the transfer case is in 2WD mode, but, if the transfer case is in 4HI or 4LO, the front wheels wont spin, because the transfer case locks. I found this out while checking something on my 1994, so, just to make sure of what i saw today, i also checked it on the 1995 with the same results, so, that tells me if shouldnt hurt anything if you lock your front axle.

Luke, it is his daily driver in the winter, and has been for a few years now. He drives it all over the place, including the highway, back roads, city streets, and even occasionally off road. He even tows a car trailer with it sometimes. So far,from what he said this morning, he hasn't done any damage to it, but, his highway trips usually aren't more than 30 miles round trip.

Moses, actually, the 1991 to 1996 non-abs Dakotas use the same half shafts in the front. Since Luke's is a 1991, it won't have front abs. They do make a custom chrome-moly shaft, but, unless you are doing severe off roading with a Dakota, it isn't worth the expense. One thing I would do, as recommended by a friend who has his front axle locked,on a 1991 Dakota that had the same issue as Luke's, was to make sure the engine\front axle mounts are in really good shape. He said he knows when his mounts soften up, because the front end will bind at the end of its turning radius. I forgot all about his truck until I saw him today. His front end has been locked for at least 4 years. He did say however, that gas mileage will suffer a bit, but, it was a tradeoff he was willing to live with.

I don't know if having the axle locked at highway speeds would be a good idea. It may cause damage to wheel bearings, and possibly axleshafts. I have never done it, though, so I can't say for sure. Moses or one of the other guys, especially the guys that build dedicated off road trucks may be able to weigh in better on this one.

Moses, I was wondering if you could find out if the torsion bars are the same for the v-6 and v-8 trucks. I have been searching all over for that answer, and can't seem to find it. Again, thank you for all your help in my various projects.

Moses, the image with the new canister and fork are an old pic from a friend who did a ton of upgrades and custom work on a 1991 Dakota about 10 years ago. He is also the one who helped me do all the work on my red and white lifted 1989 Dakota. His site is still around, but he doesn't do much with it anymore. As for the shift fork, the one in the Dakota 7.25 for 1990 and 1991 trucks is unique to that axle. I know the parts listing say they used that axle into 1992, but they actually didnt. They only used the vacuum actuated front axle in the 1990 (august 1989) to august 1991 (1991) models, and, under Hollander interchange, that axle shows as 1991 only. As for doing the axle swap, the half shafts, mounts, front driveshaft, and all the little pieces are interchangeable from 1991 to 1996 Dakotas, which means the 1992 to 1996 non vacuum front axle is a direct bolt in to the 1991. The only difference may be gear ratios. The only reason I suggested a transfer case swap as well is because as far as i know, the front axle is activated by the transfer case in the 1992 to 1996 Dakota, but, a friend reminded me today, the 1990 and 1991 speedometer is cable driven, and he is pretty sure it is driven off the transfer case, whereas the 1992 to 1996 Dakotas are all electronic speedometer, so, you may be able to swap just the complete front axle, if you can find one in a salvage yard, and can be sure capping the vacuum lines won't cause issues. On mine, i just used a dash mounted gps, and left the speedo disconnected. One thing i would like to clarify for anyone who does come across this in the future, and to dispell any illusions. The 1991 Dakota, which except for body panels, and a few other minor pieces, shares almost nothing with the 1992 to 1996 year Dakotas. Electrical, engine, transmission, transfer case, rear axle, ECM, wiring, fuel system, even the fuel tank is unique to the 1991 Dakota. I have had a lot of experience with the 1991 Dakota, due to building a frankenstien 1991 from the frame up, using the frame and cab for a 1996, wiring, engine, ECM, transmission, transfer case, and driveshafts from the original 1991, bed from a 1993, new, stronger front axles that were for the 1995-1996, Then swapping the front axle and transfer case from a 1995, the list goes on and on. I also just did a frame up build on a 1995 Dakota, that used the frame from a 1991. And, at least for now, the last thing i would like to clarify, the axle gears from the 1991 wont work in the 1992 to 1996 axle, due to the slider and shift fork set up for the vacuum disconnect, unless i am really missing something there.

Luke, after what Moses said, and using the part numbers he posted, i did an extensive search, and, like you came up with nothing. I did however look more into the posi-lok kit, and i dont see where it would actually be that hard to install on your dakota. The jeep kit, not the dodge kit, looks like it would work on your truck. You might need to modify your existing cover a bit to fit the cable set up from the kit, but, being that the jeep kit is adjustable, you should have enough room to play around with it until you get it adjusted right. The only downside to that would be, if you ordered the kit and then found it definitely wouldnt work, but, using the pics i attached, and going by what i see in the pics, i dont see where it would be that hard to do. Moses, as for why they used the vacuum disconnect setup, that is because when the Dakota was first built, they just sourced major parts, such as the engine and transmission from what they already had, and the transmission, from what i have found out, was basically the same as what they used in v-6 Dodge Rams at the time. The only thing in the 1990-1991 Dakota that doesnt seem to match the Ram from that era is the 7.25 front axle. That seems to be unique only to the Dakota. They still use that same axle, only they did away with the vacuum disconnect after 1991. Luke, another option, although a slightly more involved, as well as possibly a bit more pricey one, would be to source a 1992-1995 transfer case and front axle. That way you can eliminate the vacuum system completely. I did that swap on my 1991 Dakota, but, at the time the frame and cab were separated, so it was a lot easier for me to do. I am pretty sure i didnt have any issues with the transfer case mating up to the 1991 transmission. According to the pdf Moses posted about the front axle disconnect, the vacuum is controlled completely by the transfer case, and has nothing to do with the transmission. So, that leaves the only issue being that any wiring on the transfer case might be different. I did that whole swap so long ago, i honestly dont remember what all i had to do to make it work. I just remeber the axle and transfer case came from a 1995 Dakota.

Luke, my thought on that is, I wonder if the posi-lok couldn't still be used on the Dakota. Being that it looks like the rod in the kit is threaded, if the plate can be bolted in where the Dakotas original vacuum set up is, then I don't see why you couldn't just use it with the existing arm for the Dakota, instead of the one in the kit.

Luke, the part number you found doesnt seem to be for the 1990-1991 Dakota, only for the full size Ram and Ramcharger. One site shows it for the 1992-1996 Dakota, but after having several of those trucks apart down to bare cab and frame, i have never seen a vacuum motor on those for the front axle. I did find a system called the 4x4 posi-lok, that seems to replace the vacuum motor with a manual system, but, so far all i find it for is the full size trucks and jeeps. If Moses, can find the original part number for the vacuum motor, and it does show the same part number for the Dakota and the Ram, Ramcharger, and Jeeps, then you might be able to use the posi lok kit.

Moses, another detail i neglected to mention. The plow was originally on my 1991 Dakota, for almost 5 years, and although i got around a 2 and a 1/2 inch drop on that truck, it still had plenty of front end clearance. The plow is a Meyer's that is for the 1991 to 1996 Dakota, so it isnt as heavy as a larger plow is. The one major difference between the 1991 and the 1995 though, is the 1991 was a 3.9 v-6 truck, whereas the 1995 has a 5.9 v-8, in place of the original 5.2. i dont know if the extra weight of the v-8 versus the v-6 between the 2 trucks would make that much of a difference though, as Meyer said the plow is supposed to only be used on v-8 Dakotas. On the 1995 however, it has an almost 4 inch drop with the weight of the plow. The torsion bars are set 1/2 inch shy of full height, and have been that way since the truck was put together this summer. I dont want to turn the bars all the way to full height, unless i absolutely have to, due to that causing issues in the 1991, namely excessive front end compoinent wear i seemed to encounter on that truck, although that may have been due more to other issues, such as having larger, 16 inch, instead of 15 inch, tires and wheels on it. And, lastly, an issue i only just now thought to consider, and would like to see if you could look into for me, since i cant seem to get a straight answer on, is, are there different part numbers, and even weight handling capabilities, in the torsion bars for the v-6 versus v-8 trucks. The reason this may be a concern is because when i got the new frame for the 1995, i just used the bars that were already on that frame, but im not sure if that frame was set up for a v-6 or a v-8. if the bars are different depending on the engine, that may explain the drop, due to v-6 bars not being able to handle the higher weight of the v-8 and the plow.

I finally got replies back from Cragar, Wheel Vintiques, and a couple others. It seems none of them do a steel smoothie in my bolt pattern. The only one who might is Circle Track racing, but they are billet aluminum, and may be pricey, since they are custom made.

Here is one I'm not sure how to figure out which is the issue. On my 1995 Dakota, we decided to put the plow on it, and once the plow frame was bolted up, and I let the jack down, the front end dropped quite a bit, which, I expected some drop, but not that much. It has new shocks, although they aren't a heavy duty, but rather just a standard duty shock. My question is, since the 1991 to 1996 Dakota has torsion bars instead of coil or leaf springs, is there any way to check to see if the bars are weak, or is it just a matter of the shocks not being heavy enough? Would air shocks solve this problem?

Moses, id like to add to this in pursuit of another activity that we touched on before, that my father in law and I do in the winter on a routine basis. Although our exercise isnt much above sea level, we snowshoe hike quite a bit, and at times for long distances in all kinds of snow conditions, from soft powder, to packed, icy areas. Neither one of us really actually gave much thought to physical fitness, in a gym style, routine way, until earlier this year, when he and i were in the adirondacks, on a level wooded trail, and he started to get short of breath, as well as having issues seeing properly. After getting a check up, it was found that even though we do those activities in the winter, most of our summer activities are either shorter hikes, or sitting around a campfire, which was just enough for him to be that little bit out of shape. About the most execise we get in the summer is lazily paddling a canoe around a couple small lakes, and maybe a short hike once in awhile while camping. After his checkup, his doctor advised him that he needed a more structured fitness regimen, as he is getting older, so his body isnt able to take the rigors of our normal activities as much. Granted, he is in better shape than most his age, but that lazy period during the summer was just enough to put him just enough out of shape for strenuous winter activities. An example that proved i myself needed to think more about it though, was a 7 mile hike up a curvy, rutted trail on Bald mountain in the Adirondacks. I usually do this hike a couple times a year, but this year i struggled to get up the mountain the second time, and when i got to the top, my legs were a bit sore, and even though coming down was easier, it took awhile for the bit of pain in my legs to actually go away. A checkup revealed that most of our summer activities do place a bit more work on the arms, but sitting in a canoe, or around a campfire, the legs dont get much of a workout at all. He and i then both decided to join a local YMCA so we could use the exercise facilities at least a couple times a week, as well as the pool.

Tim, that is a good point about them offsetting the wheels closer to the fenders, that i didnt even consider. When i get ready to actually do this, if i go with wheel adapters, ill have to see if anyone makes wheels with an offset that will keep them inside the fenders. As for the wheel adapters, i know that most drag racing organizations also ban them, as well as most rally organizations, but, again with no real reason as to why. I highly doubt my truck will ever see the initial shock load of say a drag car at initial launch, so i doubt that ban would affect my decision to use them or not use them. The biggest concern i have with using them is, i tow trailers and cars with my Dakota, but, i dont do much in the way of off road activities with it, however, i am concerned the weight of the trailer and the cars i tow might cause issues with them. I did put out feelers to Wheel Vintiques and Cragar, and i am waiting to hear back on wether they can do custom lug patterns at the factory. I know both of them say they can do custom offsets, so i dont see where having the manufacturer do a custom bolt pattern would be out of their realm of experience, but i will have to wait for their replies.

Hey Luke, welcome. Is the pic i enclosed the piece you are looking for? We touched a little bit on this in another post, which is here: http://forums.4wdmechanix.com/topic/460-dakota-4x4-pickups-have-the-same-glitch-when-turning/#. If that is the right part, it looks like they use that same one in some of the older Dodge Rams, as well as a couple different Jeeps. This is where hopefully Moses can supply part numbers, and confirm if they did use the same one across different models.

Moses, i finally got this issue solved. I changed the radiator, which caused the needle to now stay in a more steady position once it warms up. The needle now stays pretty much in the middle, and doesnt drop off even at slow speeds. I also put the heater hoses back the way they belong, and the truck still has good heat. This has lead me to believe that after flushing the system again, and then reversing the hoses, it backflushed the heater core, and removed whatever obstacle there was. Now it is on to the next project, whatever that may be.

Moses, on the 1991 to 2004 Dakota, the front axle doesnt stick out past the studs, after it comes through the hub and the nut is tightened on. If you look at the wheels on my dakota, the plastic cap that is over the lugs only comes off the wheel maybe 4 inches, so the axle shouldn't affect the moon caps at all. The first pic i attached is my front wheel with the cap off, the second is with the cap on, the third is the wheel im looking at (which shows the depth of the area the baby moon cap sits on, which is the raised area just outside the lug holes), and the fourth shows a lowered Dakota with the style im going for. His was done by a whole lot of parts replacements though, such as changing hubs, and modifying his spindles for the new hubs. One thing i forgot to add to this, im looking to keep my truck stock height or a bit higher, not lowering it.