I think I know the problem, The trucks just weren't going fast enough for
the Dakota to show it's true potential. I mean come on, who only drives 40
mph in their Dak. .
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Clark <mike@snakebite.com>
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Date: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 2:17 PM
Subject: Re: DML: About the Latest Tests
>
>Pytho212 wrote:
>
>> Whats the deal with those tests Comsumer Reports put out? According to
them
>> the Dakota is a piece of shit that will kill you. I guess the lighter
the
>> vehicle the less damage it will have when hitting a solid wall. But what
>> about a dakota vs. a average family car. I'm sure everyone on this list
has
>> strong views on the subject.
>
> I think CR need to take a look at the graphics page on the DML website.
>Especially Josh Brown's pictures. You know the guy who got hit head on by
the
>bank robber at about 125mph. He would have walked away with nary a scratch
if
>he had worn his seat belt, but even without it he still kinda walked away
(ok,
>limped). I don't know maybe it's me, but that seems like a pretty damn
safe
>vehicle IMHO.... I doubt he would have fared as well in some of the other
>trucks. I also agree with what someone else said about crashing into
immovable
>objects. Sure it's gonna tear the hell out of them when you hit a concrete
>barrier that doesn't give an inch. I'd like to see any car come out of
that
>test without injury to the driver.....
>
>--Mike
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:08:47 EDT