I> > < > CC is down at the bottom in reliability ratings of almost anyone
who does
> > comparison testing (Consumer Union, Road and Track, etc.)>>
>
> That's funny. In a recent Consumers Report issue (either the current
> one or the month before), CU lists the Dakota as...and read this
> clearly...RECOMMENDED!
>
> > Didn't know that... I did a fair amount of research and test drove just
> about
> > every truck made but never ran across the above reports. Gotta' admit it
> > ultimately came down to looks, ride quality, V8 engine and interior
> > accommodations that made the Dak a must have for me.
>
> Those are pretty much the same reasons I had for buying it. Of course,
> owning a 1998 Ranger 3.0 had quite a bit to do with the decision as well
> ;)
>
Yeah, CU gives us the ol' recommended rateing, but if you look strictly at
reliability or repair history Ma CC doesn't look so good. I'm not here to bad
mouth MY truck, just saying some of the serious problems that have raised
their ugly heads here make me a little nervous. I also based my decision on
looks, interior accomodations, V-8 and all the other things I love about my
DAK. Oh well, might as well set myself up for a flame broadside.... one of the
biggest factors in my decision is the DAK fits in my garage and the F-150
wouldn't quite make it. Still love my DAK and pat its' little belly every
morning to keep the evil spirits away.
The OTHER Alan S from WA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:12:41 EDT