Re: Re: New Motors in Dakotas

From: Mike Crumley (mcrumley@airmail.net)
Date: Wed May 13 1998 - 13:45:24 EDT


At 12:03 AM 5/13/98 , you wrote:

<snip>

> The second thing was in the same paragraph; more pulling power and
>better gas mileage is cool, but "better initial acceleration"? Can
>I infer from that statement that the older engine accellerates better
>in the mid and top end? Doesn't sound like progress to me; just
>another way to keep the EPA happy.

<snip>

It doesn't have anything to do with keeping the EPA happy, it's a matter of
keeping customers happy. After all, we're talking about an engine which is
meant to go in a TRUCK. Trucks are made to haul things in the bed and/or
tow things behind them. This is what most people use their trucks for. And
for that purpose, low end power/torque is more important than mid/top end
power. It gets the load going. That's also why a lot of people on the list
are concerned about mods that rob low end torque.

I am extremely offended at the blatant bias of this list against low end
power.....er, never mind:)

--
Mike Crumley  mcrumley@airmail.net
97 Dakota  Regular Cab  Short Bed
3.9L V6   3.55 Auto  Rhino Liner
Bug Shield  Mud Flaps  DDBC



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:08:47 EDT