At 09:54 AM 10-04-97 +0000, you wrote:
Scott,
I, have own New Chrysler products since 1958, but I stopped buying new
ones every year after 1990, and started keeping them from 3-5 years each
their after, because of the drive off loss and their resale value the first
year.
My bashing as you state, is not a bash, if it was I sure the HELL not have
owned another Chrysler product after the first one, it's just a statement
from a old Elect/Mech Space Hardware Engineer, that has seen Murphys Law
always work on the first production units no matter what it was, and how
testing was done with it by the TOP NOTCH ENGINEERS.
Bugs always seemed to always find their way to the source and the
customers, (NASA, Soldiers and other) would have to report them back for
future MODS.
Other than go on and on, if it will make you fill any better Sinloi!
>John wrote:
>
>>To: dakota@ait.fredonia.edu From: "John W.
>>Mendell" <jacksaw@cruznet.net> Subject: 1993 Dark Blue & Etc.
>>Paint
>[snip]
>>PS: It looks like you, who bought the 97' DAK's are doing
>>Chryslers Engineering Road Testing and the Bug workouts
>>(trouble-shooting) for them.
>>
>>Good Luck with them, their a nice looking vehical, but it's
>>their 1st year out, I'll wait a couple more years when the
>>Engineering is complete and the bugs are worked out.
>
>John:
>
>My father is currently on his third Dakota. I've driven each one of his
trucks
>and my '97 is far better than any of his Dakotas. He agrees that '97s are
nicer than the
>models he has owned.
>
>I don't know what problems with the '97s that you are referring to. My
truck
>arrived in great condition and has performed very well since day one.
>
>Can you list some of the reasons why you wouldn't buy a '97 Dakota? I'm
>curious...
>
>-Scott Vieth http://www.msn.fullfeed.com/~scottv
>
>'68 Camaro RS, 327/PG
>'97 Dakota Sport 4x4 Club Cab, 5.2L/5-spd
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:07:37 EDT