rchapell@rlps.com ("ron chapell") wrote in
<91dmn3$2va$1@twisted.twistedbits.net>:
>My first question is why? These two trucks are not in the same class.
>1. You are looking at a midsized truck against a full sized truck. 2.
>Naturally aspirated against Supercharged.
>
>We are obviously comparing apples and oranges here. The only
>simularities these trucks have are that they are both fast. Thats it.
>Now if Dodge would have made a wild Ram ss/t or Ford at least put a v-8
>in the ranger then you would have something to compare. Well guess
>what...neither did.
>
>I hope that I am on the right track here in thinking this way because
>this is how I see it. If I am way off base then I would hope that
>someone can show me the light. I get confused reading all of the
>bickering going on when it seems really senseless. Especially when we
>should be all on the same wave length when in reality I don't think we
>are.
>
>Well I have had enough of this typing crap. I need to get me on of those
>voice activated thingies that type out what I say, hehe. So long for
>now. I hope to receive some INSIGHTFUL replies.
I agree, they are in somewhat different classes. Even just taking their
characteristics and comparing them, there are VAST differences. However, I
think they are linked by one similarity, and that is both are sport trucks.
To a certain extent, that groups them together. If someone is looking for
a fast truck, sometimes size, aspiration, etc. doesn't matter. In that
respect, I would consider them direct competitors. So, I guess what I'm
saying is, wether or not they are in the same class is, IMHO, really just
in the eye of the beholder...
---Jon-
.---- Jon Steiger ----- jon@dakota-truck.net or jon@twistedbits.net ----- -. | 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 - 11:58:00 EDT