Well put.
Now this might make DC realize that the engines may be a little bit
out-dated. Wonder what they'll do with a DOHC/4V MPI 5.9L Engine. (That
should put it up in the 350+HP range.) Oh yeah...and throw a supercharger
on it just to piss off the Lightning trucks... ;)
At 07:24 PM 06/10/1999 -0500, you wrote:
>Im the first one to give credit where credit is due. Toyota makes a great
>truck, my neighbor has a Tundra and a 4Runner. They are expensive though!
>Ive raced his V6 Tundra, and my win margin was slim. I can imagine being
>pounded by the V-8 Tundra. Dakotas were #1 in 1993 when they came out w/
>Magnum V-8's in midsize trucks. Its time for DC to realize that there is
>stiff competition out there for our beloved trucks. Redo the engine, put a
>V-10 in the Dakota, something that gives us the edge(talkin stock v stock).
>The DML gives me the advantages I need to win w/ all the advice, but
>unforntunately not all Dak owners are on it. Im not meaning to bash the
>Dakotas..we have the best trucks in our price range for sure. If you have
>the means to buy a 2000 Tacoma V-8(which I know I dont) then by all means it
>should be considered. Until then, keep up the good Dak advice/work!
>Blake
>'93 LE Silver/White
>4x2 Auto
>5.2L 318cu V-8
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bob B Ford <bobngae@juno.com>
>To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
>Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 6:48 PM
>Subject: Re: DML: Dakota RT vs Tundra
>
>
>>
>>
>>On Wed, 9 Jun 1999 22:46:29 EDT Mst29@aol.com writes:
>>>are you stupid? a tundra can't do nuthin unless you put a TRD
>>>supercharger on
>>>it,,and that adds $3,000 or over to the cost.
>>
>>The 2000 V8 Tundra, according to independent tests, is 2 seconds faster
>>0-60 mph
>>than a stock 5.2L Dodge , and is 2 seconds faster towing a similar load
>>from 30 mph to 70 mph.
>>
>>Also, no need to call me a name is there?
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:23 EDT