Re: RE: 1999 Beauty Contest

From: David Gloff (dgloff@xnet.com)
Date: Fri Jan 22 1999 - 23:47:24 EST


I agree with you on your opinion of the NEW ranger (98+), but I must
interject. My '96 (back when it had sleek lines and an attractive grille)
splash was a gorgeous truck. I miss the looks (Dak pretty much
compensates, will be better after lowering/new wheels), I miss the seats
(the Dak's don't compare), and I miss the handling (Sadly, the Dak doesn't
even come close--again, lowering and wheels I hope?). I could take 90
degree corners at upwards of 60 with minimal slippage (lots of fun). I
DON'T miss the transmission (worse than usual automatic--2 strikes, luv my
5-speed, even if it is geared too low), I DON'T miss the abysmal backseat
(what do I care? I never sit there), I DON'T miss the tiny bed (cute, but
worthless), I DON'T miss the brakes that failed at 23k (was using my
e-brake to stop), and I DON'T miss the broken windshield (it broke before
the ice did). I do miss the 18mpg city, though. All in all, much happier
with the Dak (but you knew that was coming :-))

David Gloff
Computer Technician
Valcom Professional Computer Center; Kemper/Scudder/Zurich Funds
aolim: dgloff
Loaded Intense Blue '99 Dakota Sport CC 318 5-speed 3.92SG
Sony C680 CD Player and HX-504 amp
Phoenix Gold XS 10" Sub, 6 1/2" midranges, 3/4" tweeters



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