I'd have to agree with you there Jon, It seems to be based on body-style
therefore a '91 should be a Gen II. Otherwise My truck would have to be a
Gen IV (4.7L engine). Or would it be a Gen V since the 5.9 came first
making the RT's Gen IV's. Or would the 2.5L be Gen I's. Oh, but we're
fogetting the V6! Nevermind... I AGREE WITH YA JON! GEN II IT IS!
(chuckling quietly to myself in the corner...)
<snip snip>
>The problem year is '91. In that year, Daks had a pre-mag engine,
>but with the updated (Gen II style) bodywork.
>
> The question is, do we call a '91 Gen I or Gen II?
>
> Personally, I'm leaning toward Gen II. The reason is, the
>designation appears to be directed more towards bodystyle than
>engine. The Gen IIIs have basically the same drivetrain, but a
>different bodystyle. Therefore, I think we should call a '91 a
>Gen II, based on the bodystyle.
>
> Thoughts?
-Jon-
=====
Nate, Ogden UT
natedak2k@yahoo.com
http://www.geocities.com/natedak2k
Forest Green 00 Dakota CC 4X4, 5-speed, LSD, 3.92 Rear, 4.7L/287ci, Po'boy cold air w/ K&N, Extang BlackMax Tonneau
"D2K"
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:53:22 EDT