thats just right i tip my hat to you/ronnie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Norah Bleazard" <nbleazard@home.com>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 2:20 PM
Subject: RE: DML: RE: what is this s@#t???
> Well... I sent my reply... er... novel to these two. In case anyone is
> interested (it's long) it's below. If not, just use your delete key :-)
>
> TTYL,
>
> Norah
> current: '98 Dakota Sport black 4x4 CC V8/5.2L/Auto
> current: '95 Dakota Sport white 4x4 Reg Cab V6/3.9L/5spd
> RIP: '95 Dakota Sport black 4x2 CC V6/3.9L/Auto
> previous: '93 Dakota blue 4x2 CC V6/3.9L/Auto
>
>
> Dear Paul and Anita,
>
> I just finished reading your article on the Dakota R/T and I have to say
> that I found it very offensive and full of generalizations and
> unsubstantiated facts. After reading this article... I felt insulted,
> especially where women are concerned.
>
> >>> She: I'm shaking my head over the fact that there are still auto
> companies trying to market products like the Dakota R/T that have
absolutely
> nothing to offer real people. Even worse, a silly toy truck like the
Dakota
> R/T is so clearly aimed at guys - specifically guys who never quite got
all
> that Woodward Avenue street-rod stuff out of their system - that it's
bound
> to turn off most women. <<<
>
> Speaking as a WOMAN here.... I do not find the Dakota or the Dakota R/T a
> turn off. In fact, it is quite the opposite. I, personally, don't know
of
> many women that don't like the Dakota. Even my mom (age 63) finds my
truck
> attractive and fun. She loves being the passenger and says she feels much
> safer in my truck than in a small car. She calls it "pretty". And we're
> talking about a Hungarian woman who is the furthest from "Macho" than you
> could possibly know. Imagine Zsa Zsa Gabor saying those words and you can
> visualize my mom perfectly.
>
> >>> He: You can talk about the practical side of trucks all you want, but
I
> do understand the basic premise behind the Dakota R/T. Dodge wanted to
cram
> all the go-fast goodies it could into its midsize pickup, and keep the
price
> tag as reasonable as possible. It's really that simple. Unfortunately,
what
> they've come up with is a truck that is amazingly fast in a straight line
on
> smooth pavement. But it's not particularly comfortable, and once you get
on
> a rough surface, this pickup can get mighty squirrelly. Even expressway
> on-ramps can feel dangerous. <<<
>
> As an owner of 4 Dakotas, 2 current and 2 in the past, I have never
> experienced these problems you describe. My two previous Dakotas were
> strictly for Road and they were smooth and a joy to drive. Our current
> Dakotas are one for the road and one for Off Road, and I still do not
> experience these problems. In fact... I like the way it feels speeding up
> on the on ramp. Reminds me of taking off in a plane. And yes... I love
> flying too. :-)
>
> Practical? I think the Dakota is perfect. We manage to take all our
> camping gear without any problems (couldn't cram all that stuff into my
old
> Lemans). I also don't have to get large purchases delivered... I can just
> throw them in the truck. Try cramming a new freezer into a little VW
> beetle. :-) Oh... and guess who people call on when it's moving day?
The
> same people that ask me, "Why do you need a truck anyway?" My response is
> usually, "now would be a good time for you to look at investing in a
> so-called unnecessary truck... or pay me $50/hr to help you move." :-D
>
> As for dangerous... after being in a wreck and having my Dakota totally
> written off due to some idiot running a light, I can honestly say, that
I've
> never felt safer in a vehicle. I immediately ran out and bought another
> Dakota after my accident. The exact same accident in a small car would
have
> had much more serious consequences.
>
> >>> She: I think that, like most guys, you secretly like the idea of a
> simple red truck that looks cool, doesn't cost that much and doesn't do
much
> more than go really fast. Sorry, but that whole concept doesn't push my
> buttons. I talk to a lot of women who do like pickups, but this is one
> vehicle that would not be a good choice for everyday driving. I mean, what
> were they thinking with the Dakota R/T? This truck costs more than $20,000
> and it still has crank windows! It looks like an economy car into which
> someone stuffed a giant engine, but forgot to add even the basic
amenities.
> You like that? <<<
>
> It may not push your button Anita, but it does for most of the women I
know
> and have spoken to. As for everyday driving... that is exactly what we
use
> them for. I drive mine everyday, and my husband drives the off road one
to
> work, on the highway, 45 minutes each way in rush hour traffic -- EVERY
> DAY!!! Handles like a charm. As for the windows.... I had a hard time
> finding a Dakota ***WITH*** crank windows. I specifically had to order no
> power windows as *I* didn't want them in my truck at the time. Our next
one
> will have them though. You obviously got an R/T with absolutely no
options.
>
> What basic amenities are required in a vehicle? Personally... all I need
is
> a seat, steering wheel, windows, door, gas pedal, brakes, etc. When I
> drive, I make sure that I take care of all personal hygiene and
necessities
> before I get in to the vehicle. My purpose behind the wheel is to get to
> where I am going and enjoy the ride. Women should do their make-up and
hair
> before leaving and men should shave and handle business matters from the
> home and/or office. As far as I'm concerned... cell phone use while
driving
> is an accident waiting to happen. I still don't understand what amenities
> you would be looking for in a vehicle.
>
> >>> He: C'mon, give Chrysler some credit. They did beef up the Dakota a
bit
> to take the bigger engine - a 5.9-liter pushrod V-8 that churns out 250
> horsepower and a whopping 345 pounds-feet of torque, and sounds like a
real
> hot rod coming out of the big-bore, free-flow exhaust. Of course, it's
> offered only as a two-wheel-drive with a four-speed automatic transmission
> and a limited-slip rear axle. The engineers lowered the chassis by an
inch,
> retuned the suspension and fitted some fat 17-inch tires. <<<
>
> Sounds beautiful to me if that's what a person is looking for, and many
ARE.
> Otherwise, why would it be such a good seller?
>
> >>> She: Maybe I'm getting spoiled by all the fancy four-door pickups and
> expensive utility vehicles we've been driving. But didn't the regular-cab
> Dakota seem awfully confined? And who thought up that dreadful all-black
> cabin? Even for macho guys, didn't that monochrome look go out about 20
> years ago? And those heavy-duty shocks always left my teeth chattering by
> the time I drove to the end of the block. <<<
>
> Have you ever sat in a Corvette or any other 2-seater vehicle? That is
> confined, but I love the Corvette too. Always wished I could have one as
> well. Regular cab pickups have been around for a very long time, so why
> would there be a problem with them now? One of our trucks is a RC
(regular
> cab) and the other is a CC (club cab) soon to be traded in for a QC (quad
> cab) for my occasional passengers that can't fit in the back.
>
> As for the all-black cabin.... it's gray, not black. It is a very
practical
> color, as it doesn't show dirt or pet hair the way other colors would.
This
> was a very smart move, in my opinion. Anyway... I love black... my truck
is
> black, the other is white, and my previous Dakota was also black. It's
> tasteful and elegant (speaking as an artist of course), which is why black
> is referred to as "classic".
>
> And the heavy-duty shocks.... I specifically ordered those as well. It's
a
> truck, not a Lincoln or a Caddy. If people want a smooth ride... don't
get
> a pickup truck... that's not what they were designed for. They are
designed
> to haul, crawl, tow, speed, and fun. They don't all come with the
> heavy-duty package but are ordered that way. Also... when you have stuff
in
> the bed, the ride is much smoother. Every passenger I've had has
commented
> on the smooth ride.
>
> Do you have actual statistics on what women like or want? Has there been
a
> legitimate blind study done on this? If so, I would like to know the
> results. I would only consider it valid if it was done in all regions of
> North America and not just with the so-called "soccer moms" or "business
> executives" in a large American city. I guess I can't consider myself
most
> women according to your comments and so I must be very special and unique,
> along with all the other women and men I know that drive Dakotas and other
> pickup trucks.
>
> I am educated, an ex-professional computer analyst, now with my own
business
> in the arts, love the outdoors, and live in a large (over 4 million
people)
> North American metropolis. I am also a member of the Dodge Dakota Mailing
> List with over 800 other Dakota enthusiasts, many of whom share my
feelings
> on this. There is also the Dakota R/T Mailing List, the Dakota-USA club,
> the Dakota Quad Cab Mailing List, and the DTOA (Dakota Truck Owners
> Association) who will beg to differ with your opinions. In fact, on our
> small street in the suburbs, there are 3 Dakota's along with Ram's,
> Cherokees, and vans alike.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Norah Bleazard
> current: '98 Dakota Sport black 4x4 Club Cab V8/5.2L/Auto
> current: '95 Dakota Sport white 4x4 Reg Cab V6/3.9L/5spd
> RIP: '95 Dakota Sport black 4x2 CC V6/3.9L/Auto
> previous: '93 Dakota blue 4x2 CC V6/3.9L/Auto
> previous: '81 Lemans white, 2-door automatic
> previous: '75 Camaro red, automatic
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:52:52 EDT