yup
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bernd D. Ratsch" <bernd@dodgetrucks.org>
To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 10:47 AM
Subject: RE: DML: is this the end of the Dakota?...Thank Goodness for the
>
> 4X4?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Byrne [mailto:kerib@ptd.net]
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 9:40 AM
> To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
> Subject: Re: DML: is this the end of the Dakota?...Thank Goodness for the
>
>
> 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