those consumer reports are blowing smoke.. The Dakota and Magnum engines
are among the most realiable you'll find on the road. As to the 13mpg,
that's city driving on a v8. I got a 97 cc slt 5.2L, and I get probably
13mpg city, 15mpg hwy. I'm not exactly light on the foot either ;-). The
4.7 you're looking at not only has better acceleration than my 5.2, but also
better gas milage (well, not sure about the 4wd, mine's a 2wd). Look at it
this way, you'll be able to burn virtually all other trucks out there
(besides other dak's hehe), beat or stick with most sports cars, and tow
about as much as the big boys. What more can ya ask for? :)
Ken Allgood
97 cc slt 5.2L
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Dampier" <guldam@sirius.com>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 10:13 PM
Subject: DML: New to List/Dakota rec.
> Hi all,
> I'm new to the list. I've been a Mopar fan for quite a while. Owned a 62
> Fury w/318 and push button tranny for a long time and currently own a 66
> Chrysler 300 w/383.
>
> I'm considering purchasing my first new vehicle ever, a 2000 4wd ext cab
> Dakota w/ 4.7 liter and auto. I must say though, that I'm a little gunshy
> after having read some postings at Edmunds about Auto Transmission
> troubles with the Dakotas. Also, Consumer Reports gives the Dakota a NOT
> Recommended rating because of reliability problems.
>
> Are these folks blowin smoke or is this years Dakota a questionable truck
> to buy?
>
> I'm also a little concerned when I hear about folks getting 13mpg in
> their Dakotas. Hell, I get 13mgh in my 66 300 on the highway averaging
> 75-80 mph.
>
> I appreciate any feedback and/or experiences with this truck.
>
> SteveOH
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:49:46 EDT