Re: Truck Definition

From: ronniechapman (rchapman@iserv.net)
Date: Fri Nov 05 1999 - 12:19:34 EST


mine can do that and more and i dont have any dents/just a bad paint job
----- Original Message -----
From: <Shaun.Hendricks@bergenbrunswig.com>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 1999 12:03 PM
Subject: DML: Truck Definition

> A few digests ago, some gave their definition of a "truck" in response
to
> my question about how many were on this list who actually use their Daks
for
> "work". I know this will irk some of you, and I'm not dissin' your rides
> (most Daks will fit this "Truck" definition) but I've seen some pretty
> rediculous vehicles called "trucks" yet none of them could actually do
what a
> truck should do if it tried. So here goes: Nomex flame suit on!
>
> A truck is:
>
> 1. Capable of pulling at least its own weight. (Apologies to the R/T
crowd,
> it's not your fault!)
> 2. Capable of hauling half that weight in the bed.
> 3. Capable of handling a poorly maintained dirt/gravel road.
> 4. Capable of being driven in Rain/Snow/Sleet and Hail without fear of
> death/drowning.
> 5. Must have had at least one "Beauty Mark" or it's still a Virgin!
>
> Anything else is just a car with lots of easy access grocery storage.
>
> Is my Dak a truck?
>
> It can handle one and half times it's own weight on the pull.
> It can handle it's own weight in the bed. (Thanks to Firestone)
> It has been off-road in sand, gravel, rock and trails that can swallow
cars.
> It's been in Rain, Snow, Sleet, but not Hail yet... 3 out of 4 so far!
> It's got 5 "Beauty Marks", complements of doors, a post, and things being
> hauled.
>
> There, said it, I will deal with the consequences! ^_^
>
> Shaun H.
>
> "No Blasters! No Blasters!" -any Tattoine bar owner
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:19:07 EDT