I looked at the photos provided by the link someone posted, and to me
the G4 looks like a re-skin of the existing CAB and BED on the G-3
Dakota.
The roofline,rear window and third brakelight look identical to the
current model as does the windshield............
Of course all that body cladding could be hiding the fact that they just
were using a G-3 with the G-4 body panels tacked on the front
end.............But somehow I doubt that.
I think Dodge just re-skinned the Dakota, up-graded the chassis and brakes,
and redesigned the interior!.....and did away with the idiot
6 bolt pattern on the wheels!.............finally!
just my .02 cents
Ron-
01'Dakota Sport 3.9 4WD
www.scsilverdak.1colony.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Meyerhoff" <mike@mypants.org>
To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2004 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: DML: 2005 Dodge Dakota?
>
> If I remeber right the the DML was about 2-1 for it. Most of the people
> who
> didn't like it were against the raised grill/lower headlight. Pretty much
> every make has followed dodge with the raised grill, so I guess that
> arguement was mute.
>
> The only thing I didn't like about the G3 was the rc's roofline. I don't
> care for it being sloped the way it is. As for the G4.... I'll wait till
> I
> see one in person to make a total judgement. But, the body lines don't
> really look like a complete package. They kinda look thrown together.
>
> BUT, that is exactly what the press said about my other car when it came
> out, ConquestTSI widebody. And I love the way it looks.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> >
> > What was the feeling of Gen III when they first came out compared to the
> Gen
> > II? Just wondering here.
> >
> > (not looking to start a war between the Gen II & III people here.
> >
> > --
> > *------------------------------Y2KOTA------------------------------*
> > Don Mallett
> > Y2K QC 4.7L Auto SLT+ 4x2
> > http://www.y2kota.us
> > *--------------------The fun never ends in Dakota Land! -------------*
> >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 01 2004 - 16:29:51 EST