>
>Just like a chevy, bring a V6 to a V8 fight...
A lot of people on this list have V6's in their Dakota's. What V8 fight?
> As far as room, I've been in an S-10 and a Ranger. They aren't even
close
>in the interior room category. You can't stretch out, my head bumps the
roof,
>the dash's both lack serious functionality. There is no comparison here.
That's funny. they're about the same size. If you're bumping your head in
a Ranger, you'll bump your head in a new Dakota every time you go over a
manhole.
>
>>I think that Dodge has to continue to improve its trucks -- and the faster
>>the better.
>
> Iff'n ya want speed, buy a sports car. While the R/T's and all this
What I meant was that Dodge should quickly improve its trucks - especially
the Rams - in order to keep growing its market share. It is going to get
more difficult fro Dodge to do so now, in light of the new and improved
Chevy's, and Ford's shocking rip-offs (more below). Motor Trend has for at
least 4 years been sympathetic to Chrysler (at least as compared to some
other consumer press), but, in a recent comparison of the full-sized trucks
of the Big Three, even MT could not give Dodge the high marks. In 1994, the
Dodge Ram really did change the rules, primarily for two reasons: 1) more
powerful engines than competition, 2) radical departure from competition in
styling, or, to put it another way, looks. In 1999, Chevy's Vortec engines
will be more powerful than the Magnum engines (V-10 excepted); already, the
radical 'Dodgeness' of the Ram's body styling has been shamelessly stolen
and corrupted, along with the idea of a V-10, by Ford. So where is the
undisputable superiority of a Dodge going to be in 1999?
Please understand that I like my Dakota and am not anti-Mopar by any stretch
of the imagination.
>Let's stay to comparing Apples to Apples please. This isn't a "Full Size"
>truck list, nor is it a "Compact" one. I agree with the original post.
There
>is no comparible truck to a Dakota. It is the only "Mid-Size" truck on the
>market and it's a great vehicle.
I agree. But, someone was just asking the members of this list whether he
should buy a Dakota or a Ram, and his question met a long series of
apple-to-orange comparisons between those two trucks (which are,
incidentally, much less alike than a Dakota and a Ford Ranger).
Apple-to-orange comparisons are inevitable in the real world.
>
> Daimler-Chrysler (remember, it's a merger: not a takeover) is fully
I believe the above statement to be true only in the most superficial way.
I recommend that you take a look at the thoughts of another sincere Mopar
fan on this subject:
http://www.flash.net/~bigmopar/
> Not as long as GM executives think that you can run a car company from
the
>golf course, and Ford thinks that they can toss any old crap out on the
road
>and have people buy it forever.
But the Ford F-series (or, as I think it should now be called, the F---
series) is the highest volume selling model in North America. GM and Ford
each continue to have larger market shares than Chrysler in every category,
despite Chrysler's superior offerings throughout this decade.
Anyone notice how all Ford trucks now look
>like the Dodges? I wonder how that happened.
As I've said, the styling rip-off has nauseated me, literally. I swear
never to set foot on the grounds of a Ford Motor Company dealership for the
duration of my life, while ever there may exist any other American
automobile manufacturer to patronize. What really angers me is that, in the
case of Ford stealing from Dodge, the bully has actually stolen from the
underdog. In my estimation, this is despicable cowardice, much worse than
the act of a desperate competitor in trouble.
Anyone noitice how GM hasn't
>improved the appearance of their vehicles since the mid-eighties? They all
>look bubbly, and their trucks still look boxy.
But it doesnt matter. They continue to lead in sales, and their product (at
least in the full-sized truck category) has now improved to the point where
it really does eclipse Dodge's comparable product. And, even if you dont
like the looks of the Chevy, you must admit, it is not an attempt at
ripping-off Dodge's looks. It is original. Besides, looks are secondary to
performance and reliability.
Dodge now has 30+% of the
>Truck market, in 1990 they had 5%. Who is heading for extinction? My bet
is
>on the companies that don't change their attitudes. Chrysler has a totally
>forward thinking committment now. I hope to see it continue for a long,
long
>time.
I hope so, but I doubt it.
>
>Shaun H.
Ryan Merullo
1993 Dakota Sport 4WD
V6, Z-71 Killer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:09:53 EDT