At 10:30 AM 12/20/97 -0600, you wrote:
>I don't understand how a Mustang GT is any more practical than your Dak.
>To each his own however.
>
>Dan
1. ~75% of the parking spaces on campus that don't require a permit are on
the street (i.e. parallel parking). Many times I can't get the truck
parked there--it just won't fit.
2. ~10 mpg in the city in the DAK. This is mainly due to the fact that
most of my trips are less than 5 miles, as I live close to campus.
3. Considerably higher gas mileage in mustang (something like 16/26
compared to real world ~11/18 in DAK) and is still ~2 seconds faster 0-60
than my DAK.
4. Fun-to-drive factor. The Dakota is a very fun TRUCK to drive, but it
seemed like more of a hassle sometimes than it was fun.
5. Yes, I did buy the truck to be a truck, but I just haven't needed one
as much lately, and I can't justify the lower gas mileage.
6. LOTS of cheap mods for Mustang. As for DAK, well....can't say the same.
7. NOT as a babe magnet. I buy vehicles based more on performance and
value than on looks.
Look, I wasn't looking to get flamed here. I thought we were all mature
enough to respect others for making their own decisions and having their
own opinions. You guys may not agree with my reasoning, but then again,
you're not the ones making the payments either. I just wanted something
that better fit my needs, and the mustang was it. I'm sorry if you guys
have such a problem with that.
Andy
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Andy Callahan University of Kentucky quasideedle@uky.campus.mci.net
'97, black/mist gray, 4x2, Sport, club cab, V8, 3.55 SG, 5-speed, Tire &
Handling Package, all the little goodies
Mods: Firestone Firehawk SS10 275/60/15's, GT Classic steel tonneau
cover, "Super Sucker" FIPK by Air Meldrum, CC bed mat
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:08:04 EDT