With cruise on, on the interstate, I can barely top 16 mpg with my 2007 Dak
Quad.
----- Original Message -----
From: ""Digger"" <dodgedakotaquadcab@yahoo.com>
To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 4:34 AM
Subject: Re: DML: is this the end of the Dakota?...Thank Goodness for the
>
> Dakota Quad Cab.Especially the 1st year(2000).The 5'3"
> bed,the back doors,and the Next generation 4.7 V8...
>
> Ours has 126,000 on her now(Blue Thunder).I dont ever
> plan to dump her.I have never loved a car/truck as
> much as this one.In fact,as much as i want a 69'
> Charger(General Lee),i wouldnt give up my Dakota..
>
> The way i have her tricked out sensibly &
> affordably,in the spring/summer & fall,we get 22 on
> the I-road.
>
> But i cant imagine anyone dumping a Dakota Quad
> Cab(2000-04),but the ones after that(05-08) look like
> felgercarb!
>
> And i feel that the Intense Blue/Driftwood Satin is a
> kick-ass color.She turns heads wherever i go...
>
> Even if Dakota is dropped,there will always be the
> DML,Dakota USA,and DodgeDakotaQuadCab at
> Yahoogroups(my group)
> --- Tom Byrne <kerib@ptd.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree. How about down size the Ram a bit and cut
>> the Dak.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <jon@dakota-truck.net>
>> To: <dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net>
>> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 1:40 PM
>> Subject: Re: DML: is this the end of the Dakota?
>>
>>
>> >
>> > "Tom Byrne" <kerib@ptd.net> wrote:
>> >> 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).
>> >
>> >
>> > I think that if a decision were to be made
>> between the Dak and the
>> > Ram, the Dak would be the one to get the axe,
>> simply because the Ram
>> > already has the full size truck pedigree. What
>> with the entire Ram
>> > lineup being essentially three different vehicles
>> between the 1500,
>> > 2500 and 3500, they will need to keep selling the
>> 3/4 and 1 ton
>> > trucks so it seems logical to keep the 1500 as
>> opposed to upgrading the
>> > Dakota to full size and then building a 3/4 and 1
>> ton off of it.
>> > Shrinking the Dak back down to its former size
>> sounds like a good idea
>> > to me. Pricing them so that they are a good deal
>> less than the Ram
>> > might help too. :-) Given the size and the fact
>> that a Ram can be
>> > had for about the same price, I wouldn't blame
>> someone for going right
>> > to the Ram; at this point it seems the main reason
>> to choose the
>> > Dakota is the slightly smaller size, and like you
>> said, that
>> > distinction seems to become less with each
>> redesign.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > -Jon-
>> >
>> > .- Jon Steiger -- jon@dakota-truck.net or
>> jon@jonsteiger.com -.
>> > | '96 Kolb Firefly, '96 Suzuki Intruder,
>> Miscellaneous Mopars |
>> > `--------------------------------
>> http://www.jonsteiger.com --'
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 02 2008 - 02:10:10 EST