Re: '07 Ram

• Next message: Bill Pitz: "Re: New rams are still ugly..."
• Previous message: Bill Pitz: "Pad/shoe minimum thickness?"
• In reply to: andylevy@yahoo.com: "Re: '07 Ram"
• Next in thread: Hop *: "Re: '07 Ram"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

andylevy@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> If I'm gonna get lousy gas mileage, I'd at least like to get some serious truck
> capabilities out of it (full-size bed, tow capacity, etc.) instead of whatever
> the current Dak offers (and I still don't like the body design!).
>
> 3/4 tons at least are still easy to lift with their solid axles.

I would have loved to have a Ram to begin with, but really couldn't
justify it at the time. Sadly, the monstrosity that is the Ram 2500
6.7L manages noticeably better gas mileage than my Dakota..

Of course, if I had a new Dakota, that wouldn't be the case. But who
would want one of those??!!

-- 
Bill Pitz <bill@pitz.net>
Penngrove, CA
2006 Acura TSX
2000 Dodge Dakota SLT 4x4 4.7L
2007 Honda TRX420FE

• Next message: Bill Pitz: "Re: New rams are still ugly..."
• Previous message: Bill Pitz: "Pad/shoe minimum thickness?"
• In reply to: andylevy@yahoo.com: "Re: '07 Ram"
• Next in thread: Hop *: "Re: '07 Ram"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 01 2007 - 00:15:21 EDT