> It seems to me like it was a little unfair to include the Dakota in this
> test. The other pickups tested were smaller and (presumably) lighter.
Funny how we Dakota owners never seem to complain when our trucks are lumped
in (by Chrysler) with the compacts to compare engine, load and tow capacity,
and power statistics. Those "hightest <rating> in class" commercials always
crack me up. Yeah, compared to the Mitsubishi Mighty Max (the old D-50). ;)
The ratings game is always a two-edged sword.
The only truck that is anywhere close to the mid-size Dakota is Toyota's
T-100, and they always want to lump that in with the full-sizes. Makes no
sense to me, especially when it carries the same engine options as their
compact Tacoma. (Have they released a truck version of their V8 yet?)
> I find it amusing that the Dak came out better than the sake sucking Jap crap.
C'mon Mike, there's no need for the nationality-baiting diatribe. Makes
you sound like Cletus the slack-jawed yokel. Remember Chrysler's long history
of relations with Mitsubishi...
Ron
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:08:36 EDT