At 07:43 PM 8/10/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Thursday, August 10, 2000, 5:47:01 PM, you wrote:
>
> > Call it "The Missing Link." ;^)
>
> > I agree Jon. Bodystyle usually is the key.
>
> > Richard in San Antonio
>
>I gotta say one on this one. The body change wasn't that drastic.
>The main difference is in the drive train. When the club cab body
>debuted no one felt the need to give that a gen number. Also I think
>drawing the line between the two at the pre-mag/mag change helps when
>discussing engine mods. Example: Hey there's a new kick ass cam for gen
>II's!!
>(except for the pre-'92 ones that is) -- See, it just confuses things.
Regarding the club cab; I see that as a variation on a theme. Its
basically the same, just stretched a bit. I also don't think the
introduction of the Quad Cab means its not a Gen III, for example.
As far as discussing engines, the same can be said of the body. For
example, "check out these new headlight covers for Gen I's!" Those covers
aren't going to fit a '91, its got a "Gen II" body. Also, regarding your
cam example, saying there is a new cam for Gen II's also means it will work
for most Gen IIIs, since the drivetrain didn't change. For engines, we've
got "pre-mag" and "magnum", which seems to work well. Actually, now that I
think about it, that re-inforces my leaning toward using the bodystyle as
the sole determiner... :-)
>I do agree though, we need to decide one way or the other and stick to it.
Yep, that would be helpful. :-) I suppose we could call the '91 a Gen
I.V ;-)
-Jon-
.--- Jon Steiger ---- jon@dakota-truck.net or stei0302@cs.fredonia.edu ---.
| Affiliations: AOPA, DoD, EAA, NMA, NRA, SPA, USUA; Rec & UL Pilot - SEL |
| '92 Ram 150 4x4 V8, '96 Dakota V8, '96 Intruder 1400, '96 FireFly 447 |
`------------------------------ http://www.cs.fredonia.edu/~stei0302/ ----'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:53:22 EDT