At 11:42 AM 8/19/99 -0600, you wrote:
>
> Original Reply --------------------------------------------------
>> Agree 110% with your description but why do R/T owners have such a
>> difficult time calling their trucks D A K O T A s? Remove the R/T
>> reference in your description and aren't you describing a Dakota?
[snip]
>> '97 CC Sport, 5.2L, 3.55, auto., 4x2, flame red
>
>Look above at your sig, you refer to "it" as a sport, not a DAKOTA Sport
>considering it's a dakota list, we all know they are Dak's, just
>differentiating between models, most folks describe them as Sport, Sport+,
>SLT, etc etc without actually saying DAKOTA. No harm in that.
I totally agree with your reply. My question was really directed
at the subject line of the original message and the reasons given
in the message. I had expected to see accolades about the 5.9L engine
and/or the 'tuned' suspension. Instead, as I wrote, the reasons given
would have applied to any Dakota.
BTW, my sig line has been deliberately shortened since I joined the list
last Sept. in order to save bandwidth. That, and your above comment,
is why Dakota does not appear (although there are a few Ram and
Durango owners on the list).
Bob
Burlington, Ontario
'97 CC Sport, 5.2L, 3.55, auto., 4x2, flame red
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:15:56 EDT