Re: Rear Axle Ratio 3.21 vs 3.55

From: Keith R Wanderi (keith.wanderi@fsg.deluxe.com)
Date: Mon May 12 1997 - 08:59:11 EDT


I too got the V6 being the economy minded person that I am and if I could
do it all over again, I would go with the V8. The MPG difference is not
worth the gain in power.

Keith R Wanderi
keith.wanderi@fsg.deluxe.com

97 SLT 4x4 CC V6 Auto

----------
> From: Robert P. Agnew <ragnew@islandnet.com>
> To: dakota@ait.fredonia.edu
> Subject: Re: Rear Axle Ratio 3.21 vs 3.55
> Date: Saturday, May 10, 1997 11:50 AM
>
> At 01:50 PM 5/10/97 -0700, you wrote:
> >I'm about to order a '97 4WD Dakota with the V6 and manual 5-speed
> >which comes standard with the 3.21 rear end but if you get the payload
> >package (an additional 500 lbs.) they put in the 3.55 rear end. I'm
> >looking for the maximum ecconomy so suspect that the 3.21 would be the
> >best choice. Then when carrying a heavy use a set of Helwig overload
> >springs. Any thoughts appreciated.
> >--
> > >--------------------------------------------<
> > >Ray <Piziali@slip.net> PGP Key Available<
> > >--------------------------------------------<
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > "Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute
> > master of all industry and commerce."
> > -- President James A. Garfield
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> Some good advice ... forget the 6 and order the V8 with the 3.55.
>
>
> Rob Agnew
> ragnew@islandnet.com
>
> Victoria, British Columbia
> Canada

 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:07:40 EDT