Re: is this the end of the Dakota?

From: Tom Byrne (kerib@ptd.net)
Date: Fri Feb 08 2008 - 08:40:18 EST


The problem with the Dakota is that it is either too big or not big enough.
When the Dakota was first created, it was termed a "mid-sized" pickup. It
was much smaller than a Ram and bigger than the old import D-50. It filled a
niche as not everyone needed a big truck and it was more useful and got
similar fuel mileage as a small truck. Cheap gas and a strong economy in the
1990s caused the Dakota to grow and gain power. It is to the point where a
V8 Dakota is not much more fuel efficient than a Ram. In fact, a diesel Ram
is more fuel efficient.

Don't think the Dak has grown? I do. I see it every day. My 2007 Dak is huge
compared to my 89 Shelby I currently own both). I say, either shrink the
Dak, kill the Dak or kill the Ram and let the Dak become the big truck (a
long bed Dak can do the job).

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Levy" <andy.levy@gmail.com>
To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: DML: is this the end of the Dakota?

>
> On Feb 7, 2008 10:48 PM, Rick Barnes <rascal@scrtc.com> wrote:
>>
>> http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/industries/industrials/article/chrysler-p
>> lans-nearly-halve-number-models-report_471232_6.html
>>
>> Just caught this story from Chrysler
>
> The Dak's been on the chopping block for about 2 years now. No one's
> dropped the axe yet.
>
> It's not selling and it's hurting CAFE numbers. Do the math.
>
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 02 2008 - 02:10:10 EST