Warren truck assy plant has had its first volume related shutdown in over 10 years. And possibly more downtime is coming! The main reason for the downtime is the extremely slow sales of the new Dakota. A friend of mine is a dodge salesman here in the Detroit area and he has told me he can't give these things away. Apparently the boys in Auburn Hills must not want to sell cars and trucks anymore. The first causality was the Durango, then Dakota, and currently Charger. Next up on the block is the Ram. Trevor Creed and the rest of the design team should be tared and feathered for all of these debacles! Sorry for the rant, but as a concerned employee I just can't stand by and watch the company go in the crapper![:@]

Joe

I'll back ya up on that. I was getting excited about the new Mega Cab Ram coming out next year. Then I found out about the Dakota style facelift... [:'(] I can't believe how badly they're screwing up good things.

That's good 'ol Dumler for ya'. The only thing they really want to do is put more money into their Benz operations, they were found taking huge fistfulls of Chrysler profits and funds and putting it into the Benz divisions.[:@][:@]

I think that the new Dakota looks great. I love the new grill and I was wating for it to go on the Ram. Give DC time for the Charger. I do agree on that the Durango looks terrible. But the Dakota does not. Everyone down here in the south loves them..

The Dakota looks just like the freakin Durango... It's a abortion...

By the way, it's people in the south that have made the F150 the highest selling truck for so damn long...:eek:

[sm=dontgetit.gif][sm=icon_stickpoke.gif]

I think the Charger will catch on, but the Dakota is one ugly truck. They really mangled the features with the re-style for sure. I've seen only one on the road so far.

I've only seen one on the road myself, and I heard that an ex-biotch's brother bought one.. [:'(] Every time I pass the dodge dealer I just get the urge to jerk the wheel and ram that fugly POS... [:@]

I have a comment that is slightly off-topic but is tangentially related...

I own a 1997 Dakota club cab base model, V6, manual transmission. To be honest, if I could choose between a 2005 Dakota and a brand-new clone of my 1997, I'd take the 1997 re-issue in a heartbeat. Maybe I just got lucky and my truck was made on a good day, with all of the parts bins being "good batches" and whatever... but the fact is, at 150k miles, my truck runs as good as it did when it was new. Hardly any rattles or squeaks. No slop in the steering or suspension. It doesn't even burn any noticeable amount of oil, and it doesn't drip any either. Original starter. Original alternator. Original fuel injectors. Original fuel pump. Original valve cover gaskets (although they are beginning to seep very slightly, to be expected). Original muffler. Original oxygen sensors. It even has the original CLUTCH!

With the exception of maintenance items and just a few replacement parts (front brake calipers, upper and lower balljoints, and a noisy timing chain) my truck is bone stock OEM factory original.

What's my point?

Again, maybe I just got lucky, but I have to wonder... why did they have to go and scrap a good truck platform like this? Mine was even the first model year of that platform, so common sense would say that it'd be the most likely to have bugs... yet it's been the best vehicle I've ever owned. This does not apply just to the Dakota or even just to Dodge... in general, I find it ridiculous that automotive companies invest millions of dollars in a vehicle platform, and then do ground-up redesigns every 5-10 years or whatever. In the case of the Dakota... why couldn't they have just continued building that platform, and perfect the thing over time? Ok, give the truck some external changes just to satisfy the people concerned with aesthetics... but under the skin, why did they really need to scrap the chassis and do a complete ground-up redesign? My '97 has given me 150k miles of never-been-stranded reliability. Yes, it's got the aged 3.9L V6... but in terms of the vehicle platform itself, it just seems to me that if they would extend that Dakota platform for a 15-20 year production run, they could gain three huge benefits... first, they could work out all the bugs (not that my truck had many to begin with), and they could save money because there would be no re-design by the engineers, and they could also save money because of no major re-tooling as would happen in a re-design. A good example of what I'm talking about is the VW bug (the original one of course). Look at the longevity of that thing.

But, this industry is market driven and the market apparently demands everything to be NEW NEW NEW, new and improved, etc etc blah blah. I guess people in general don't want to see the same product year after year after year. They'd rather pay to have the existing, perfectly adequate vehicle platform totally scrapped and re-designed from the ground up, have new bugs introduced, and then repeat the whole process again 5-10 years down the road.

Maybe I should live in Russia, because I guess I have a relatively utilitarian viewpoint on this topic... but give me a brand-new clone of my 1997 base model no options Dakota and I'll (hopefully) be a happy camper for the next 150,000+ miles and/or 8+ years. ;)

Ah, I am glad I wasn't the only one who thought the new Dakato front end was fugly.

in Soviet Russia Dodge Dakota redesigns YOU!

I say give it time. The small pickup truck market as a whole isn't exactly the healthiest segment and all the players but Ford have had a major redesign recently. It wouldn't surprise me if people are waiting till the new Frontier and Tacoma are available to test-drive alongside the recent Colorado/Canyon and new Dakota. Also Dodge's recent ball-joint debacle might have people holding back.

On styling, the '97-'04 Dakota was an exceptionally good looking model but you can't keep things the same forever. As an engineer with a consulting company that works with a major manufacturer in the compact equipment industry I know full well what would happen if they stopped innovating. Maybe the '05 was too much. Maybe not. I don't think half a model year is enough time to tell. Personally I love the new style and I'm sure I'm not alone.

Hey I LOVE the new Dodge Dakotas. The new design makes it look mean and something that shouldn’t be messed with. I know I’d take one over those Butt Ugly POS Canyons and Colorados.

I admit I felt in love with the new 05 dakotas! There is just something about that type of design I can't explain!:D

ORIGINAL: MidnightBlueNeon

I think that the new Dakota looks great. I love the new grill and I was wating for it to go on the Ram. Give DC time for the Charger. I do agree on that the Durango looks terrible. But the Dakota does not. Everyone down here in the south loves them..


I'll back you up on that. I think it looks way better than the old Dakota. The Durango now is still a piece of Garbage that can burn in a fit of inferno for all eternity....same with the Charger. If Dodge screws up the Ram, I will be so mad. The Ram is perfect.....minus the interior ;)



-Matt-

hate the new dakota my ASS


i love it

saw a 2005 one the other day..i love it

Yeah the F-150 is number on in the south, but that's because they are all over Ford's nuts. I didn't say the Dakota was as popular its just very well liked!

I want to know why the people who know Dodge dealers tell us they can't sell anything and everything coming from the factory is crap but the financial side of Chrysler is looking the best out of the big three and every projection has Chrysler outselling what they sold last year?? Maybe I must live in utopia called Florida because I see Magnums, 300's, Durangoa's, Pacifica's, PT's etc etc etc out the ass.......The only vehicle I see that isn't selling well is the 2 door Stratus and Sebrings...and you still se quite a few of those on the road

The dealers are telling you that because they are not selling cars! I don't care what Chrysler financial is doing look at the assy plants. Newark Del., durango plant rolling shutdowns due to lack of sales. Neon plant killed 2nd shift due to sales. Warren truck shutdown for two weeks after Christmas due to sales of dakotas being poor. We are suppose to be on a rolling shutdown for a while as well. And if things don't improve soon the third shift they just created this past may will be gone. Sterling Heights assy, stratus and sebring four doors and sebring convertibles, rolling shutdowns. I'd have to say we are not selling anything well, besides 300's and magnums.

Joe

i cant believe the mega ram is gonna have a simular front end, really liking my 97 ram more and more everyday

I wished the left the cluster gauges alone! Trucks should have the full cluster gauges, ie: oil, volts, temp, etc. Now they took out the volt/oil gauge. I can live without the volt gauge but I want my oil gauge! oil light just tell you something is wrong which is pretty much too late to do anything by the time the light comes on.

Now the interior dash/cluster starts to look like minivans! Bleh! First time I seen a huge speedometer that sticks out like a sore thumb!

Ugly ugly ugly ugly front end. I was thinking of waiting to buy a dakota and bought a ram instead. I am so happy i did the dakota is terrible in the front end. They should have put something similar to the ram on it. The duhrango is way ugly. Looks like a pig sleeping!!!

Interesting.

The big deal about Dakota when it debuted was it was truly 'midsize.' Then Shelby came out with a V8 convertible version and there was nothing around to compete with it.

Now Nissan and Toyota have totally abandoned compacts. I think it's dumb. Why buy the Tundra, when the Tacoma is 7/8 the size and has the same horsepower?

I consider it a mistake that they got rid of the regular cab too. When I was in Texas last year, I noticed people really go for the short bed/reg cab 4x2 (of any brand - especially Ford) - I'd never seen so many before (Dallas area). Where I'm from originally (WYO) everybody has to have the 4x4 and they like the long bed.

Also, the Dakota is a heft 4300lbs - only 300lbs less than the Ram, and it doesn't get particularly good gas mileage or anything. Maybe people figure if they are going to get a V8 pickup, why not just go the whole way?

Compact truck sales have been in decline for like 15 years. I think they peaked maybe in 1990, so this isn't a complete shock.

My advice for boosting the Dakota is to get rid of the SRT 10 Ram and base the performance truck on a Hemi Dakota - Sell it for $30G, instead of the SRT 50G.

Lastly - I really don't think the styling is what ails the Dakota sales. Increased competition - especially no longer having the so called "midsize" segement to itself is the cause for the decline.

they dont need to get rid of the srt ram they just need to do an r/t with the hemi or something

Im really not impressed with the new Kota's either. I mean I like the overall design, but they don't look as stocky or beefy (4x4 wise) as the '97-04 design. Sure they are the same size, but the 4x4 looks like a whoosey 2 wheel drive. You can barely tell a 4x4 from a 2 wheel drive until you see the badging. Like was said why couldn't they have stayed with the same design and just do a few lil updates here and there for a few years longer. I mean come on; look at the Ford Ranger. Granted the Ranger is a P.O.S, but its basically been the same design for over 10-12 years with minor changes through the years. That's why Ford has been such a success because if people like it; they're gonna like it for years to come, just make lil changes until it really starts getting tiresome, then when you start to see the sales really drop...Make a change!

I must agree the new Dakota's aren't good looking. I had a 01 Dakota and loooved it. Of course it doen't hold a candle to the love for my 04 HEMI Ram :)

http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/dakota/enlarge_9.jpg

The 2005 Dodge Dakota, is a very sharp truck in person, in my opinion... as far as the exterior I should say. However, Chrysler Group has failed to show the real capiability of this new Dakota lineup. First off, there is NO Dakota REGULAR CAB models! Why the hell not, I see just as many Regular Cab models as I do Quad Cab model Dakotas out there. Second of all is the interior... which is a very poor design. My 2000 model year interior on my Durango (same as the Dakota), was very truck like, simple but bold. The 2001-2004 model year went to a more sharp, more expensive looking dash which was very appealing and more fuctional than any Dodge truck dash I have seen yet in a pickup, minus the 2004+ Dodge Durango interior! The new one is so basic, ugly, and looks like it was made of lower cost materials than my old 1990 Ford Ranger's dash was. Lack of volt and oil gauges, are a real bummer for me! The rear seat headrest, meet new 2007 or 2008 U.S. standard, but look ugly as heck, which is the worst thing about the interior. Third biggest mistake is the not introducing the 5.7L HEMI "MAGNUM" V-8 engine in its lineup! However I have been told they are saving it for a later model year release date. BUT THE BIGGEST PROBLEM W/ THE 2005 DODGE DAKOTA IS... PRICE. Who in their right mind would want a $32,000 mid-size truck, when you can get a pretty loaded full-size Ram 1500 Quad Cab for the same price. Mid-size pickups are becoming too expensive, and are competing w/ the half ton full-sizers now! If the problems were sloved that I mentioned, I would have nothing less to think the Dakota would be a HUGE HIT like its prodcessor was.

redriderbob

i think the new dakota is pretty good looking. it took a while to get used to it and i didn't really like it at first.but then i saw a couple driving on the road and i thought they were awesome. i just wish they wouldn't do that to the Ram. i think the Ram is pretty much perfect right now.i love it.....but i guess i'll just have to get used to the new look as well.

yeah i fear the refreshed ram, i dont want them to screw it up. as for the interior of the new dakota- i think it looks a lot nicer than the previous ones, and it was dumb not to do a regular cab.

why no regular cabs? DCX loves its doors. kinda like the 4-door Charger. its pretty much that simple in my opinion.

The reason we don't build reg cabs is simple, the market was extremely poor. For example an average month we built 12000 quad cabs, 7000 ext cabs, 1100 reg cabs. And to get most of the reg cabs to sell they had extra incentives. Now while that sucks for you reg cab lovers, thats why the company did it. Personally I thought the reg cab was so small it was useless, but that is just my opinion. To those few of you who can stomach the 05, great, go out and buy one. Because there are so few of you out there we need all of you in order to survive! I really hope Chrysler gets their heads out of their butts before its too late!

Joe

I work at a Dodge Dealer.....We can't give the damn Dakota's away, I like them though. I think we've sold 4 or 5 since they've been out. Same w/the Magnum's....they're just sitting too.

See where the Magnum are a hot item in my area, more so then the 300 Series, it is hard to keep them on the lots here!

redriderbob

it really sucks that they cant sell the new daks, i think they should just give it a very early(like next model year) facelift in the front and then they would do fine, because aside from the front end, the overall design is really close to the 97-04 bodies, its just sharper edges.

You guys are missing the weakest link, it is hardly all to do with design, or interior or engines…. It has to do with rims. That’s right, wheels, aside from the 17s Option for SLT+s and Laramie’s, the Dakota wheels are the most horrible looking wheels in truck/suv history, they should all be 17s at least, and there should be a 20” wheel option. Truck and car buyers are often grabbed by levels of vehicles that are at the highest point, not everyone can afford such levels. I.E. 300C, Magnum-RT and SRT-10 Ram but many will go from the same vehicle but setting with a V6 Car, or just Hemi Ram……. There is no jazz appeal or higher model appealing in advertisements, and the dealers are not trying hard either! (I know I work for one) Yea it looks different, but those are little things… There needs to be more pizzazz to raise people eyebrows.

I sold my first 05 Dakota on Jan 25th…. I don’t think it should have taken me that long.


If people think the Minivan Like, light duty truck known as the "Titan" can sell at all, this Dakota sure as hell can do better.

Yah, another way to make it fuglier. 20's are ugly as hell on any tire smaller than 48" tall. [:'(]

I had and enjoyed one of the Generation I and Gen. II Dakotas. This new one, like the Durango, has predictable results for the showrooms. As soon as I saw them, I had that "sinking feeling." The Durango concept was SO much nicer.... I appreciate everything RedRiderBob is doing for us here but his bias has clouded his vision if he really thinks these vehicles look good. I believe anything with Dodge on it would look good to many of you. I also am biased. I hired in at Chrysler over 40 years ago and when the Germans bought out Chrysler (NOT a merger!), I was one of many that lost his job. Even so, some of the new DCX products are appealing. The SRT-8 Magnum and the SRT-10 Ram would be fun, but for now I am sticking with vehicles made in this country by Americans out of almost all American parts for and sold by an American company. These vehicles really do still exist. Face it.......Chrysler is GONE!!! ..as is the Dakota's style. For those of you still depending upon sales of the Dodges, I understand all too well your situation and hope you get to retire before losing your jobs. Now, please tell me the new Ram is NOT going to look like the Dakota. I may be fantasizing but possibly see an SRT-10 in my future if I can get over the German thing long enough, but being American, I feel responsible to help this wonderful country more than our European economic competitors.

I'm not a fan of these cheezy glued-on chrome faces on the 17" Dak wheels or what all the Ram 1500 wheels have but the cast 17". It only looks good till you look real close. I took the 16"-ers. By the way, check this out: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050201/detu020_1.html -- shows Dak sales up from last year's. It's interesting what the car numbers are -- maybe people are ditching "gas-hog" trucks? :)

Pt, those sales figures are just for Jan. The Dakota has been out for several months now. That is the first month I've seen the dakotas up. For Nov. and Dec. they were considerable down.

Danko, I hate to tell you but every SRT-10 is built in Mexico reg or quad cab. And yes they are going to ugly it up for 06.

Joe

jgralka and Danko, let me first say that you guys are probably my favorite members on here to talk to. I love reading your guys comments. Unlike most members on this site, who use it to talk about off-topic things and relationship and whatever, you two always seem to be like me and use the site for diehard Chrysler information. I thank you for that.

Alright, as for Danko's comment about how I love anything w/ a Dodge badge, that is false. For how much I have credited the new 2004+ Dodge Durango, I am very upset w/ it. Certain models really appeal to me, like the Limited and loaded up SLT models. Certain Durango models in certain colors also appeal to me, some colors, such as Mineral Gray and Bright Silver Metallic, to me don't look good on the new Durango. I absolutely hate the new ST and Adventurer models, w/ the cheap looking gray bumpers. And the lack of gauges and "wheel covers" on ST and SLT models make me sick. If I am paying $28,000 for a vehicle I want some real wheels! But some of the Durango really catches my eye. Like the sharp interior that graces its much disliked skin.

I agree w/ you a 100% when you said the 2003 Dodge Durango HEMI RT Concept (which was about 85% production ready at the time), looks better than the production model. First off, the afterburner tail-lamps on the concept, were so slick, where the production Liberty-knock-offs, look akward.

http://www.cardesignnews.com/autoshows/2003/detroit/highlights/images/dodge-durango2862.jpg

http://www.cardesignnews.com/autoshows/2003/detroit/highlights/images/dodge-durango2869.jpg

http://www.cardesignnews.com/autoshows/2003/detroit/highlights/images/dodge-durango2865.jpg

http://www.cardesignnews.com/autoshows/2003/detroit/highlights/images/dodge-durango2887.jpg

http://www.cardesignnews.com/autoshows/2003/detroit/highlights/images/dodge-durango2903.jpg

As for the new 2005 Dodge Dakota models. Some things I like, some I hate. The interior just makes me want to find a Chrysler Group interior designer and beat the bejesus out of them. The rear seat headrest, are the worst thing I have seen in a vehicle from Chrysler for many many years. Looks like they stole the rear seats from an early 90's Volvo! For how much I like this truck, there are things I hate about it too. Where when I see the previous generation Dakota in 1996. I thought it looked better than the Ram lineup did. This truck, makes me second guess about some of Chrysler Group's Dodge Truck/Jeep Design Team members.

I have been a Mopar lovers since I was 7 years of age. All I live and breathe is Chrysler. I can understand why you say I am biased, but I am really not. Some of you may recall my comments about the 2004+ Pontiac GTO over the new 2006 Dodge Charger R/T! I love this company more than anything, but there are some things I dislike about it!

Thank you for you replies, I really had a great time reading them and replying back to them.

redriderbob

Thnx RedRider. I also was a Chrysler fan, when there WAS a Chrysler. My father worked for them. My brother, neighbors and buddies too and as soon as I turned 18 I was there and bought a lot of 383's and 440's but there is no more Chrysler. DaimlerKryzlur does not count. I am sorry to read the SRT is Mexican-made but the Mexicans never laid me off. I truly enjoyed many visits to the Toluca plant. Great people and food down there. I also have trouble with the SRT-8 Magnum being Canadian with a Mexican engine made for and sold by a German company. My Lingenfelter 383 and LT4 Firehawks and one LT4 30th anniversary Camaro SS were made in Quebec and that has bothered me for a long time. My Kansas City trucks are lookin' better every day.

Thanks Bob I appreciate the kind words! You don't have to tell me about your fascination with the GTO, I'm usually one of the first in line to rib you about it.;) What amazes me is the vast info you seem to be able to collect! I know you rub elbows with some of the top brass in Auburn Hills so I always count on your info to be accurate. With all your contacts I can't seem to figure out why you don't work for the company! I wish I knew some of the people you do, then maybe I could get off the plant floor! The info I share is just what I know from being on the inside of the plants. I have such an appreciation for the company because both my Dad and myself work for Warren Truck Assy. It sure has enriched our lives to say the least!

Danko,
I suppose I am slightly bitter because I did lose my job to Mexico. Can you say HEMI? I used to work at the other V8 plant, Mack Avenue Engine. The home of the 4.7, and 3.7. The Mack complex was overlooked to produce the hemi because they did not think we could handle the capacity. Boy were they wrong! Now Mack sits half idle and has laid off over 300 people due to lack of sales for the 4.7 because of being overshadowed by the hemi. I'm one of them. Granted I did get picked up at Warren, but I give my right arm for my old job back at Mack. But I'm glad the company was good for your family as well!

Joe

I understand everyone's animosity towards DC at this time, but In some way I see alot of good things happening in the last 4 or 5 years... There was No 5 Star Crash test rating Truck, our SUV sucked, our cars were an absolute joke and there sure as hell was no Hemi..... Sorry to say it for the sake of X employees but the new DC Is kicking ass.

Kicking ass with what, a couple of station wagons, a mid size suv that can't sell unless its heavily discounted? Please, the only thing saving the sales numbers is the 300. The new dakota is tanking, pacificas are only selling because of the heavy rebates, and the neons and stratus still blow. If we didn't have the ram, 300, and minivans we'd be screwed! I think we are going in the wrong direction if you ask me.

Joe

Did anyone see the discussion in Automobile Magazine that says the hemi is no such thing? According to some people that worked on that project, the initial prototype was a hemi and so many changes were made to it that the final product does in fact NOT have hemispherical combustion chambers. Can anyone confirm or dispute based on knowledge, not emotion? Considering the mystique of the new "hemi," I am surprised more discussion about it has not surfaced if there is indeed a reason to question it. Joe, the Magnum "station wagon" is just plain magnificent and not worthy of being included in your otherwise astute slam.

so, in all of your infinite wisdom...can you elaborate on the new hemi not being a real hemi??

It still does have the hemispherical shaped combustion chambers (85cc I believe is the volume) with the intake valves on the intake side of the engine and the exhaust valves on the exhaust side of the engine, so technically speaking it still is a 'hemi'. It does not have the domed pistons anymore, and the chambers are much smaller than previous incarnations, but it is still a 'hemi' in that sense. It tends not to burn as clean as other head configurations, hence the twin plugs per cylinder in the current production version, to enable more complete combustion to occur, and lower the emissions in the process. Not sure if this answers your question or not.

i didnt mean you..i am familiar with the hemi head...even though i am some how "anti-american"... :eek:

ORIGINAL: BadStratRT

i didnt mean you..i am familiar with the hemi head...even though i am some how "anti-american"... :eek:


I KNEW ya didn't mean me.... I was trying to answer Danko's question! And how is it that you're anti-American? Did I miss something (and as you know, that doesn't happen too often!;))

there was a post, seemingly aimed at my cars...about me being anti-american...it has been deleted...but evidently the mirada and ramcharger werent made in this country...:eek:

ORIGINAL: jgralka

Kicking ass with what, a couple of station wagons, a mid size suv that can't sell unless its heavily discounted? Please, the only thing saving the sales numbers is the 300. The new dakota is tanking, pacificas are only selling because of the heavy rebates, and the neons and stratus still blow. If we didn't have the ram, 300, and minivans we'd be screwed! I think we are going in the wrong direction if you ask me.

Joe



Thats right kicking ass, take your head out of the sand and pay attention, DC is having there biggest sales hike in their companies history and is growing faster than even Toyota. Its common sense, you liking the products or not has nothing to do with it. They are selling and thats all that matters.

The Ramcharger was made in this country until the last few years of production.[sm=americanasmiley.gif]

mine is an 84

Well DaimlerChrysler's Chrysler Group posted the numbers the other day, and it doesn't look like America hates the Dakota at all!

Chrysler Group Reports January 2005 U.S. Sales Increase 9 Percent

Dodge Brand Sales Increase 7 Percent, Led by Dodge Durango and Dodge Dakota

Dodge brand sales increased 7 percent to 78,841 units compared to sales of 79,789 units last year. Dodge Durango posted sales of 8,993 units, improving 10 percent compared to January 2004 sales when 8,888 units were sold. Dodge Dakota sales increased 14 percent to 6,089 units as the all-new Dodge Dakota continues arriving at dealerships.

Looks like we could have been wrong!

redriderbob

thats ok...i still hate it...

i got in trouble today at work...a guy was complaining that he had been over charged for his oil change, and i made the comment, "he should be charged extra for buying that ugly new dakota"...

evidently he heard me and took offense to it...:eek:

ORIGINAL: redriderbob

Looks like we could have been wrong!

redriderbob



Either that, or the effects of the rebates & incentives is finally being felt!

i just hope it sells well and people start realizing how much of a huge improvment chrysler is making on all of there vehicles in ecery aspect- interior, exterior- everything. there kicking ford and gm's ass when it comes to raising the quality of there cars. hopefully people start realizing that and start buying them regardless of what they look like and buy them because they know their getting a high quality well built vehicle. thats the almost the only reason people in the U.S. buy asian and other foreign cars-because of their reputation of being very high quality. how many people buy a camry because they look sweet or have a sweet engine?? i dont think anyone does, but its like the number 1 selling car in the country!! i think chrysler is heading in a good direction for sure. there quality is blowing through the roof, and there styling(which they are known for being the best at) is maybe hitting a speed bump, depending on who you ask, but thats gonna happen every once in a while. my biggest problem with there direction is their fear of coupes, they could do so well with one but they dont realize it i guess. im still hoping for one to kick the mustangs ass, but we'll have to see!!

Take my head out of the sand? I'm the one that got laid off due to lack off sales! And as many of you know I work where all the dakotas and most of the rams are built. Those Jan dakota sales numbers are a little skewed by the fact there were still some 04's floating around. The sad reality is right now there is over 10 grand in incentives for the durango and close to the same on the dakotas. Thats not a good sign for a brand new model.

Yes I should have excluded the magnum in my rant, its not doing bad. And it is a nice car.

Bob, unless my math is flawed your numbers don't make sense we sold 78,841 this year but last year we sold 79,789? Thats less last time I checked. Also 8993-8888=103. Thats about one percent , not ten.

Joe

I'm so sick of people rantin' and ravin' about new designs. Back to what this thread was for.....The new Dakotas look good. The Rams look good. The Durango's look good. And even the Charger looks good. Yeah that's right I said it. Every one is so fiaxated on their box looking F-150's and boring a$$ Explorers. Get with it. Change is good. And styles will always change. I think the style of all of the new Dodge's are awesome. Except for the sketch of the future Neon I saw, I like everything about all the new designs. And what's wrong with the Charger? The 300C looks good doesn't it? It won Car Of The Year didn't it? The Charger replaced the Intrepid (which was stupid), but it makes sense!

So you go on a rant about other people ranting and raving? [sm=loser.gif][sm=icon_beat.gif]

There are VERY few vehicles I'd buy that are currently being produced. This year's Ram isn't bad, and the GMC's. That's it for the trucks. I hate the styling of every thing else out there, including the F150, the Superduty, the Explorer, the Silverado, the Dakota, the Durango, everything. I just hope Chevy shapes up with the new Silverados that are coming out in '06.

I like the 300C, don't like the Magnum. I hate what they're doing to the Charger. Can't stand pretty much every other domestically built car on the market. I absolutely hate the slanty-eyed look that everyone is doing these days. And I think your neon is fugly.

Guess what? This is a subjective topic! Not everyone is going to agree on everything! We are voicing opinions here. Your rant was an opinion, and gets the same priority as this post or any other. We can choose to ignore it or not. And it doesn't matter! Some of us choose to have our own opinions, others choose to follow the crowd and to believe the BS figures that DCX released trying to cover their own asses.

You want to get back to the point of the post? The fact is that people are losing their jobs because this fugly crap that the Germans are putting out thru DCX flat out isn't selling. I took a drive thru the local chrysler dealer this weekend. They have 10 Durangos, and 6 of them are 2004 model year. They can't give the bastards away! I was at the Chrysler plant in Brampton, Ontario a few months ago. They've got a parking lot with 8,000 Caravans in it, ALL 2004 model year, and they can't get rid of them because NOTHING is selling. It's all about mismanagement of the company as a whole, and the Dakota and Durango is all about mismanagement of an entire platform.

LOL, I know that it's an opininion.. I didn't say everyone had to agree with me. LOL Did I say "I'm right, listen or shut up". No. I said "I think and I like". LOL So you think that Neons and SRT-4's are fugly. I "think" they are hot and the sketch that I saw looked terrible.

And............. You say people can choose to ignore it. Then ignore it.

Once again I "think" the new designs are awesome! Yes the Chager could look better, but, "I" like it.

I don't see your point on telling me things I already know. No offense but stop being a smart a**.

You don't have to appreciate it. That's the beauty of it.

It sounds like you need to be posting in a GMC/Chevy forum, not Dodge. I mean, you don't like dodge designs and you love what GMC is doing..............

Didn't say that. I didn't like the GMC when it came out in '99. But it's the lesser of all the evils right now in my opinion. And I like the current DR, but they're fuglifying it next year. I post here cause most of the people are decent to chat with, I think the 2nd Gen Rams ('94-'02) are very good trucks and I know them inside and out, and the Dodge cars thru the '90's and early 2000's are pretty good to.

I don't like what ANY company is doing right now on it's designs, not just Dodge. However, DCX currently seems to be the worse in the market as far as mismanagement goes. I just hope they turn things around before the Germans completely put it out of business.

I actually don't mind the look of the Dakota. It's the Durango that is in need of some help.

The last gen durango looked cool. But the new one is fat. At least the dakota did not chage that much.

I don't know what you mean by DC being worse. Chrysler 300C won Motor Trend Car Of The Year and the Jeep Cherokee won SUV Of The Year. Also the Ram Power Wagon didn't win Motor Trend truck of the year but it has won many awards in other areas. One that I could note right now would be "4 Wheeler" magazine Truck Of The Year. And when the SRT-4 came out, it was Sport Compact Car Of The Year. I know it's just a couple of awards but, well I think those are some great accomplishments!

dcx had the best 4th quarter of the big 3....

That's good. That way merecedes can keep afloat. F'ing germans.

I have always been a chevy guy but since 1998 i have owned mostly chrysler products. Simply put there is alot of ugly uninspiring vehicles out there. I have owned mini vans for years and never looked at anything but DC. My family has owned there vans for years and has always driven them past 150k. Right now if i had to own a passenger car again DC probably has the only ones i would consider. Chevy has no idea what the hell there doing and ford makes cars that make you fall asleep when you look at them!!! It just stinks that DC is about to ruin the Ram front end like they have with the dakota.

Oh Well

ORIGINAL: MidnightBlueNeon

I don't know what you mean by DC being worse. Chrysler 300C won Motor Trend Car Of The Year and the Jeep Cherokee won SUV Of The Year. Also the Ram Power Wagon didn't win Motor Trend truck of the year but it has won many awards in other areas. One that I could note right now would be "4 Wheeler" magazine Truck Of The Year. And when the SRT-4 came out, it was Sport Compact Car Of The Year. I know it's just a couple of awards but, well I think those are some great accomplishments!


Well, you can think those are great accomplishments. But all those awards are bought and paid for. It's all about money and selling magazines, and Chrysler was willing to pay the biggest $$$.

The 300C is a great car. The styling is great and the layout is good. I'd get one if I was rich. The Jeep Grand Cherokee is a joke. It's by FAR the least capable Jeep ever built. Has very low ground clearance, and being a mechanical engineer the suspension scares the hell out of me. I wouldn't let ANYONE I care about drive one. The Ram Power Wagon is an extremely capable vehicle. I'd get one if it had a full crew cab available and it wasn't $35k+. [:@] And I know the Mega Cab is coming out next year, but it's gonna be FUGLY. I'm just plain not impressed with the SRT-4 at all. I'm not impressed with any Sport Compact at all.

But to each their own. :eek:

well then, what are you impressed by?

The current SRT10 Ram (until they fuglify it next year), Hemi 300C, the Corvette Z06, the Ram Air Firebird of days gone by. That's just newer performance vehicles in production off the top of my head. Obviously I'm way old school, and it takes a lot to impress me with newer vehicles. But it doesn't matter, I refuse to buy anything new anyway. The Cummins Ram Mega Cab longbed dually would have impressed me, except they're putting the FUGLY front end on it. [:@]

Mostly I'm just tired of ugly designs, poor quality, internal mismanagement of the corporations, and vehicles that don't live up to the hype. Which is really what this thread is all about.

i am intrigued by your insisting on a quad cab style truck. however, i do see your point about not being interested in new cars...a shame to think that i am forced to consider a 4 door neon if i want a new performance car...[:'(]

What intrigues you? I HATE the current quad cabs. They just are not proportional. The rear door just looks stupid on them in my opinion. Of course, design is how I make my living, and I am a stickler for complimentarty design.

Besides that, when I buy a truck, I buy it to be a TRUCK. It's gonna haul a car trailer long distances, it's gonna haul hay, it's gonna work hard. And I want it to be able to hold my whole crew comforatably doing so. If I'm hauling a competition vehicle 1,000 miles with 3 or 4 other guys in the truck, there better be room for them. There isn't on the current quad cab, but the new Mega Cab is exactly what I require in a truck. Too bad it's gonna be FUGLY. The current grocery getter yuppie trucks piss me off cause they're driving the price WAY up on my work trucks. [:@]

Only think I'm hoping is that I can put an '02-'05 front clip on an '06 or '07 Mega Cab.

i had just wondered why you wanted one so badly...the pictures of this new mega cab seem to have illuded me.

Here ya go Patrick-

Comparing size to the current gorcery-getter model

http://www.highflow.com/data/posts/Ram_Quad_vs_Mega.jpg


Spy shot of new fugly front end

http://www.dodgeforum.com/upfiles/7286/2A4DF2DF593F456584DB6D2CE9C39FB2.jpg

Just to post an update, we are starting to see how the 05 dakotas are really doing. Feb. sales down 2%. Ram Feb. sales also down 8%. If we were not selling minivans and 300's we would be in worse shape than ford or gm.
Way to go design team![:@]

Joe

Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah If you are so sick of the designs, then go buy a GM vehicle or Ford. Stop yapping about it.

not the nicest looking!

I keep buying them, because I work for them. I just wish upper management would listen to what their customers want instead of building crap nobody is buying. My livelihood depends on these two trucks selling. So yeah I care about the designs if few people like them. Because that translates into few people buying them, which could cost people their jobs. So I take it a little more personal than most.

Joe

This post ispired me to go to Dodge's website and take a look at the dakota... (I am a ram owner and fan so havent paid much attention to them) However, after looking at this pile of puke with wheels I am proud to say that I would never EVER buy it OR a RAM if they gave it that front end or body style. To be honest I felt that dodge screwed up with the 02 change to the rams front end but made up for it with the HEMI installation. The design did however grow on me but I think i still would have liked to see a front end more like the 93-01 style

Ya'll are just so blind to how sharp these new trucks are.

I might go blind if I keep looking at these ugly dakotas![sm=icon_rofl.gif]

We'll the one thing I can say is these are just opinions.

One big mistake after another... by not making a single cab, ugly or not, they are missing out on the bulk of the fleet market that uses them for damn near everything. There are no small cheap economical pickups out there anymore. Just under-powered, over-weight UGLY hunks of crap rolling around out there, posing as "mid-size" or wanna-be big pick-ups. Even Toyota, Nissan, Mazda, Isuzu and whatever other foreign manufacturers have totally missed the boat on it. Even though gas prices are heading up, it seems like the cars and trucks just keep getting bigger and suck more gas.

From the look of your sig, you like trucks that suck gas, lmao

yeh I must huh! In the last 6 years I have had a '96 Dodge Ram with a 318, a 2000 Nissan Crap Cab, a 2001 Toyota Double Cab TRD and my '04 HEMI and you know what, they all got the same gas mileage! Its just this time I neeed a powerful full-size to do some heavy hauling, occasionally, and so I got a Ram with the HEMI. I dont drive with my foot in it, in fact I would say that I am rather conservative on the road, go the speed limit and all that, I only run someone off into the ditch or cut them off every once in a while, so I am able to keep the mileage up to exactly what the window sticker said "14 city and 19 highway".

But I know people in alot of different businesses such as parts delivery, cable companies, cities and so on and these guys end up driving "mid-size" trucks that barely get any better mileage than I do. But they used to drive little lightweight four bangers around that got upwards of 30 MPG. This saved them and their companies money even when gas was cheaper. What pick-up now days gets 30 MPG?

Anyway I am off the soapbox...

The reason we stop building the reg cab was due to lack of sales. For instance, on an average month our build order was as follows, 9000 quad cabs, 6000 club, 1200 reg cabs. Dodge has not made a four cyl dakota in several years. I think 01 was the last year for them. Trust me I wish we sold a ton of dakotas, that would make my job a whole lot easier! Also just for info sake, in about five years there will probably be no reg cab full size as well!

Joe

i think the lack of sales excuse is bull. by dropping the reg cab they just handed the reg cab buyers over to their competitors. the dakota i believe was the second or third highest selling "smaller truck" but now who knows they may have dropped a couple notches just because they gave those reg cab buyers over to competitors.

I don't think you critics have a good sense for just how expensive manufacturing a different-length vehicle can be. :) Check out this page (http://www.allpar.com/ed/2003/wheelbase.html). The example is for lengthening a pickup truck so shortening it would probably be somewhat less expensive, but I'd still think $100 million extra costs would not be out of line. Making it up over 5 years (painfully long) is $20 million a year that needs to be spread out over only 14000 affected vehicles -- that's about $1500 a truck. And these are trucks that can't be sold for as much money as the longer-wheelbase Daks and have a demonstratably smaller market.

you still have to have reg cabs just for a advertising point of view. people buy smaller trucks because they are less expensive- and the reg cab is the least expensive. and not to mention what has already been said about the fact that many fleet buyers DONT WANT anything more than a reg cab- they dont need it and wont pay for it- this is especially the case for full size but does come in play with smaller trucks too. not offering a reg cab just forfiets the customers of reg cabs- it hands those buyers to ford and chevy. ALSO- if a company buys 5 reg cabs and you have 5 guys driving their "work trucks" around they will be more familiar with dakotas and when they go to buy their next truck they will be more biased to dodge than if they had a ford work truck. as for the cost of building an additional chassis- they would still make that money back with all the sales of the longer trucks. you cant look at it like the extended cabs are making most of the money so thats all we'll make, you have to look at it like the Dakota as a whole is making this much money. you cant gain buyers with less variety

the 2007 rams will be getting the facelift that
durango and dakotas have gotten
i wish they never came up with that design
its so ugly

I thought the 06's were getting it or will it be different than the style of the megacab weve seen

The 06' are getting it. Already built some pilots. Its not that bad... it might grow on me.

Joe

The grill is awesome to me

i have loved all of the rams since 94. this one is different just like the rest. i like it. i just want to see one in person.
many people had criticized the 02. it eventually grew on most people. if 1/3 loves it and 2/3 hate it, then it will sell well. that is what happened with the 94 ram.

ORIGINAL: Avenger39

i have loved all of the rams since 94. this one is different just like the rest. i like it. i just want to see one in person.
many people had criticized the 02. it eventually grew on most people. if 1/3 loves it and 2/3 hate it, then it will sell well. that is what happened with the 94 ram.


right on

ORIGINAL: Avenger39

i have loved all of the rams since 94. this one is different just like the rest. i like it. i just want to see one in person.
many people had criticized the 02. it eventually grew on most people. if 1/3 loves it and 2/3 hate it, then it will sell well. that is what happened with the 94 ram.


couldn't have said it better my self

thanx i got the 1/3 love it, 2/3 hate it somewhere else on this forum that i read a long time ago.

RE: Its official America hates the new Dakota! - 3/6/2005 11:31:46 PM
No New Messages
jgralka




Posts: 413
Joined: 2/4/2004
From: eastpointe, MI

-----------------------
Ha Ha sorry Dakota , durango , vharger and new ram not only are great/ look great, get great reviews-- but SELL GREAT
they are all hits-- Big Time.
You "dooms-day" "opinions" were not based on fact or reality
i guess its not official- america dosnt hate Dakota, and all the other dodges.
While Large/ truck based Suv' sales are down-- Dodge is up so is jeep
Durango, Grnd Cherokee up big time
while Ford, GM down big time , .
Status: offline I might go blind if I keep looking at these ugly dakotas!

Okay, I know this is a forum but ya'll are using emotion to describe sales or lack of it..... The info we need is exact and near the back of almost every Automotive News. I will try to get to the library and get the figures for the Dodge trucks but we know the Dakota and Durango are not doing as well as was hoped for. The newly styled Ram looks like the Dakota to me which is not an improvement but it might grow on me. The current one looks good and I am concerned about what the new SRT-10 Ram will look like. Pix please ASAP???

Stealthrob,

Hello, I work at warren truck assy. You know the place where all dakotas are built. Guess what for the past two months we were building very few dakotas. Usually we build about 50 percent dakota, 50 percent ram. Well we were doing 85 percent rams. So you tell me if its selling. Now march does show marginal improvement but that was due to the enterprise rental car orders. Not retail. It still sucks at the retail level. The only thing that was helping it out was the ridiculous amount of incentives that chrysler put on it for a couple of weeks. The durango is up, but not by much, and its incentives have tripled since last year. So what does that tell you.

We just started to build more dakotas this past week, but who knows how long it will last. I hope it lasts forever, because my job is much easier on the daks!
Charger... Lets just say dealers are not even getting excited over this one. And its not even out yet, neither is the refreshed ram, so they are not selling "big time". The only thing selling big time is 300's, magnums, minivans, and the ugly sprinter van.

Joe

Hello jgralka

OK Lets just say i have some connections both on the dealer side as well as corperate.
I can tell you the Dealers are Very Excited about the Charger-- The dealers demanded the model.
Also very happy about the SRT's including Charger and Magnum.
Anyone who says "charger stinks, " It wont sell, nobody wants " dosnt know what they are talking about.
People said that about 300c.
Magnum has Been a huge hit for them.
Before Magnum hit the showrooms many naysayers sounded like those dissing Charger.

Also i can tell you Dakota and durango sales on the retail level have gone up quite a bit -- word seems to be spreading.
It got a number of great reviews lately- including several in the "AUTOS" sections of the papers and the mags too
Also look At the gas Prices- & see how explorer, expidition tahoe and trailblazer. have all gotten
"KILLED" lately.
Also "smaller" Trucks havent done great lately , canyon, colorado, ranger etc
and Big trucks havent set the world on fire either.
Against this back drop Durango , Grand cherokee, and Datota are up
Ram holding up pretty good -- Especially since New updated 2006 is coming this year.

Actually from what i see and hear word of mouth and good press seems to be driving grand Cherokee, dakota and durango sales higher each month on the retail level.
Dakota Could use some more ponies from 4.7L or Hemi though.

yeah, here in mexico, the dakota will be a production model this year, and people are saying , OH I WANT A DAKOTA. It looks great

We don't sell them in Mexico? I thought we did because we build a few for the mexican market every so often. Maybe we are just getting ready to enter the marketplace down there! Like I said before, I wish we built more daks, so this is good news to me. Even though personally I can't stand it. I understand about the 4.7 needing more horse, but it seems dc is just leaving the 4.7 out to die. Its suppose to get redone for 2007, but thats a ways off.

Joe

I agree with you 100%. DC made too big of a design change too soon. Look at the Ford Ranger its basically been on the same platform for 20 years with minor changes to it throughout the years, and it still is a popular little truck. DC should have made small changes. What I dont like about it is that the 4x4 dont look as beefy as the 2nd gen did. It just looks like it dont have a lot of clearance on the undercarage....ITS CRAP! Hell, I'll probably buy a Chevy Colorado before I buy the New Dakota.

ORIGINAL: Spear_em
Look at the Ford Ranger its basically been on the same platform for 20 years with minor changes to it throughout the years, and it still is a popular little truck.

The Ford Ranger doesn't look good at all. It's design is old. AND it's not popular anymore.

Yeah the Dakota's only a few thousand units behind Ranger in current-year-to-date sales from the most recent announcements. Dakota was at something like 35,600 and about 1000 up from last year; Ranger was down to about 38,000 and 20,000 down from last year. Colorado and Tacoma are both outselling the Ranger (and the GM twins even outsell the Tacoma when added together.)

Another thing is, people say the Dakota doesn't sell that well. Well, I have some news for you, NO MID-SIZE TRUCKS SELL WELL! It just sounds stupid to me, when people say the Dakota isn't seeling well, when nither to it competitors. Technically, it's selling the same.

CHARGER -- will be a GRAND SLAM -- just watch (trying to talk my wife into getting one)
DURANGO (new style) -- not exciting, but I wouldn't turn one down
DAKOTA -- STRUCK OUT -- it's FUGLY (sorry, my 2 cents)

---Guess what? This is a subjective topic! Not everyone is going to agree on everything! We are voicing opinions here. Your rant was an opinion, and gets the same priority as this post or any other. We can choose to ignore it or not. And it doesn't matter! Some of us choose to have our own opinions, others choose to follow the crowd and to believe the BS figures that DCX released trying to cover their own asses.-----


Well said -- /agree

Saw a dodge dakota up close - like riding in my buddies 05 - Too damn small in the cab for an average adult and the front got hit with the ugly stick hard....

Lets hope the crappy sales tell them not to F up the ram



See ya

Well just to let you guys know about sales numbers on the new Dakota, they are up 7% in April over last April. Total Dakotas sold in April 2005 were 10,535 units. Sales from January 1st to May 1st 2005, are up 3% over the same month period in 2004. Total sales of units so far this year, are 35,665. Last year at the time only 34,544 Dakota units were sold.

redriderbob

Well Bob I'm still getting laid off for two weeks at the end of the month and rumor has it 3rd shift will be gone in Aug. So sales can't be that great.

Joe

Not everyone hates it, I bought one. It's lookes 1000x better in person and not in red[:'(]. Also it's what under the skin that really makes this truck.

ORIGINAL: redriderbob

Well just to let you guys know about sales numbers on the new Dakota, they are up 7% in April over last April. Total Dakotas sold in April 2005 were 10,535 units. Sales from January 1st to May 1st 2005, are up 3% over the same month period in 2004. Total sales of units so far this year, are 35,665. Last year at the time only 34,544 Dakota units were sold.

redriderbob


1,000 is not much of a difference, but still a lot of Dakotas are sol and they are great looking trucks. THe onyl people that hate them, are the people who are stuck in the past...

Almost all the ones ive seen around here have been rentals or corporate trucks...ive seen very few...Really is a shame...and when they ruin the ram for 06 i think it will be the same.

well it so happens that I own a 2005 dodge dakota 4x4 , and the front end is not all that bad to me[sm=closed.gif]

local://upfiles/16260/17E092DFEF6143F9A0D9454C88164876.jpg

ORIGINAL: flamingdakota

well it so happens that I own a 2005 dodge dakota 4x4 , and the front end is not all that bad to me[sm=closed.gif]

local://upfiles/16260/17E092DFEF6143F9A0D9454C88164876.jpg


Your front end is AWESOME! These guys don't know what they're talkin' about!

They Shoulda designed the Dakota like it had BALLS -- put a CHARGER front end on it!

Make it look mean and intimidating -- that would increase sales...

ORIGINAL: flamingdakota

well it so happens that I own a 2005 dodge dakota 4x4 , and the front end is not all that bad to me[sm=closed.gif]

local://upfiles/16260/17E092DFEF6143F9A0D9454C88164876.jpg



thats awesome i love the front ends on the dakotas

The Dakota IS ugly. Look at the bumper it sticks out two feet in front of the truck and is way to big. sic! As far as the Charger is concerned that is one sharp looking car. You cant have the new Charger looking like the old one they each have thier place. Dodge could have put a 4 cyl in it!

[quotBy the way, it's people in the south that have made the F150 the highest selling truck for so damn long...
e][/quote]

The only reason ford can make that claim is that they count the vehicles bought by dealers from the factory. Notice how many never leave the lot and the used car dealers are full of them too.

The 4.7 that we build at Mack ave#1 goes in to that euro design ulgy truck and we are slowing down also. I can only hope that they do better in the future on our trucks.

QUOTE:
Another thing is, people say the Dakota doesn't sell that well. Well, I have some news for you, NO MID-SIZE TRUCKS SELL WELL! It just sounds stupid to me, when people say the Dakota isn't seeling well, when nither to it competitors. Technically, it's selling the same.



----------

right on---- some people are just bitter like the "Big Boys at Allpar"
they just want to bitch and criticize..


Dakota is holding its own at least as good as any competetor-- Compact/midsize trucks arent booming right now b/c off gas..
Many people/companies HAVE to buy full-size trucks..

We have a 2005 Dakota V8 Quad Cab for a rental for 30 days. It's awesome! The only thing I don't like about it is the cheap interior. The power is great though!



-Matt-

ORIGINAL: StealthRob

QUOTE:
Another thing is, people say the Dakota doesn't sell that well. Well, I have some news for you, NO MID-SIZE TRUCKS SELL WELL! It just sounds stupid to me, when people say the Dakota isn't seeling well, when nither to it competitors. Technically, it's selling the same.



----------

right on---- some people are just bitter like the "Big Boys at Allpar"
they just want to bitch and criticize..


Dakota is holding its own at least as good as any competetor-- Compact/midsize trucks arent booming right now b/c off gas..
Many people/companies HAVE to buy full-size trucks..



Thats not the point, we sold far more of the old style last year than we this year of the new. I did not get laid off at all last year, this year I've been out for over a month due to slow dakota sales!

Joe

Everyone has their own opinion on the subject... Please don't make us lock this thread. No arguing.

~Amanda

ORIGINAL: jgralka

Warren truck assy plant has had its first volume related shutdown in over 10 years. And possibly more downtime is coming! The main reason for the downtime is the extremely slow sales of the new Dakota. A friend of mine is a dodge salesman here in the Detroit area and he has told me he can't give these things away. Apparently the boys in Auburn Hills must not want to sell cars and trucks anymore. The first causality was the Durango, then Dakota, and currently Charger. Next up on the block is the Ram. Trevor Creed and the rest of the design team should be tared and feathered for all of these debacles! Sorry for the rant, but as a concerned employee I just can't stand by and watch the company go in the crapper![:@]

Joe


Yes Joe I agree, the Dakota is very ugly. At least Chrysler is hanging on to their heritage for releasing ugly vehicles... hence the 1962 Dodge Dart and Plymouth Belvedere. This is history repeating itself again. First they release the Hemi ... then wrap in ugly. It's too bad they're still trying to find themselves in terms of design after all these years... on one hand I see them trying to think outside the box, on the other hand I see them designing a box.

If they did something with the front fenders and lights, I think it could be salvaged----too square like a box. Nobody wants to be seen driving a box...


Send the message to the design team. ;)

ORIGINAL: StealthRob

QUOTE:
Another thing is, people say the Dakota doesn't sell that well. Well, I have some news for you, NO MID-SIZE TRUCKS SELL WELL! It just sounds stupid to me, when people say the Dakota isn't seeling well, when nither to it competitors. Technically, it's selling the same.



----------

right on---- some people are just bitter like the "Big Boys at Allpar"
they just want to bitch and criticize..


Dakota is holding its own at least as good as any competetor-- Compact/midsize trucks arent booming right now b/c off gas..
Many people/companies HAVE to buy full-size trucks..



What planet would that be on ? .... have you read the biz reports relative to Toyota and Nissan lately?

Sales up 10% in June.... with little or no incentives offered. Toyota says they're willing to help the good ole boys in Detroit be more competitive by increasing their prices... is that arrogance or what?

Tacoma's and Tundra's are flying off the dealer lots around here.... ever look at a Tundra up close? Kinda looks like the old highly successful Ford F-150.

I don't see hide nor hair of the Dakota's.

???

Ok dude, quit hating on the South so much. Yes many people down here ARE extraordinarily stupid and a very high percentage of these extraordinarily stupid people are SO completely devoid of anything even vaguely resembling intelligence that they like Ford, and often Chevy, trucks more than Dodge, but not all of us. Nearly all of my friends and their parents loathe Ford, most of them own Dodge vehicles or wish they did, and Dodge trucks and Chrysler cars dominate my neighborhood. Oh, and when I visited Florida a few weeks ago I did notice that there was an insane number of Magnums and 300's, and most of those were the R/T or C models.

As for the new Dakota... it's certainly not bad in my opinion. I appreciate the exceedingly aggressive styling, and most particularly the enhanced towing. I do like the 94-04 (it was '94 wasn't it?) Dakota, I just prefer the newer styling. As for the Ram's progression, I like the new Rams, both the current style and upcoming style, but I would have to agree that the 93-01 was better, it just... looked like a truck should. In regard to the new Charger... it's not what I expected, certainly, but I do like it. I think it has good styling, it very nearly hides the fact that it's a 4-door, and has a pretty aggressive look overall (although from certain angles it can look pretty ugly heh). Besides, it gives me the chance to talk my mother into getting one for herself, so I won't be embarrassed when I'm forced to ride with her or drive her P.O.S. a.k.a. a 2000 Mazda 626, without making her broke. Add to that the fact that the base engine is certainly not a bad V6 at 250hp (extraordinary really if you compare it to that damned 626's V6).

Sorry for going so far off topic...

The 'O5 Dakota is stone fugly. I doubt that there will be much in the way of aftermarket for it (low numbers) 'n the fact that you can't polish a turd. It's probly just fine for Mr. Suburbia grocery-getter mommy-mobile types... but performance wise it's a dog as well. No hemi... no 5.9. Good Lord... they even put hemi's in Jeeps; then strangle them in everything with that torque-management nonsense. I bought this 2000 R/T new with the idea that I could exceed near everything for the base price of a Ford Lightning. I did. It was the Daks look that attracted me in the first place. The Ford looked like a big jellybean. This is my first (and apparently last) Dodge truck.

One thing with the new Dak's is that when it rains, water seeps into the door area. There's a big gap on the roof where it meets the door where water can get in, large enough to stick your fingers into it...



-Matt-

Dodge won't be able to give these things away after the '05 model year. The entire engineering/design department should be fired... along with the boardroom idiots that approved it... including Jurgen. They are definately NOT paying attention to the target market.

I will take my 2000 over a new one any day!!!!!

Nuff' said.

local://upfiles/9321/2960D5F0D5034705862921BE16DA330F.jpg

local://upfiles/9321/CB4A9437EE3F43EF81B8A0201F89C955.jpg

local://upfiles/9321/79F0002E19E34D8B8B5766BFE8B00857.jpg

local://upfiles/9321/1DEBAC70A0E543BB823A4436CD2D5291.jpg

local://upfiles/9321/0CEF1B85DE1B43F893505A93D35257C2.jpg

No comparison! The '05 Dak is a dog. No R/T either.

It's not a stretch to narrow the height of the front end a bit more... 'make it sleeker. Add a set of lights similar to the shape of the Charger's w/ the black background. Add the 6.1 hemi 'n a functional hood. Equip the interior with a full set of analog gauges and a functional floorshift option. Retain the reg cab and R/T option. Dodge would sell every one of 'em. I dunno where this corporate thinking is goin... or comin' from... but it's not working. For some reason the nose is gettin' more 'piggish' 'n square... like a snout. Adherence to this crusiform grille pattern on everything is boring. This chrome trim crap is a step backwards. I predict the near demise of the Dakota if they stay with this styling/performance trend. D-C is NOT paying attention... 'n I don't think they really care.

ORIGINAL: 71RoadRunner

That's good 'ol Dumler for ya'. The only thing they really want to do is put more money into their Benz operations, they were found taking huge fistfulls of Chrysler profits and funds and putting it into the Benz divisions.[:@][:@]


they should break way from them. screw benz

I don't like the new Dakota, Durango, and the new Ram coming out doesn't look good either. The Charger is a nice car but it should have been called something else or have two doors, not 4. I think DC has really dropped the ball lately. I have heard that the Dakota and Durango are up for facelifts in 07 already but I don't know how much truth there is to that rumor. I hope its true.

ORIGINAL: Viper-GTS

One thing with the new Dak's is that when it rains, water seeps into the door area. There's a big gap on the roof where it meets the door where water can get in, large enough to stick your fingers into it...



-Matt-


Ah no, Cali just had the worst rain fall it ever has and not one drop got in the truck and it site outside all day.

It was an early production problem. you don't want to know how its been fixed.

ORIGINAL: jgralka

It was an early production problem. you don't want to know how its been fixed.



hahah yes we do

ORIGINAL: TexasNative

I will take my 2000 over a new one any day!!!!!


The previous looks better, yes. But the new one isn't ugly. It just doesn't look as good as the previous, lol.

Response to old post... With a lame 4.7... who'd bother messin' with it?

Really?

ORIGINAL: Megashifter
I bought this 2000 R/T new with the idea that I could exceed near everything for the base price of a Ford Lightning. I did. It was the Daks look that attracted me in the first place. The Ford looked like a big jellybean. This is my first (and apparently last) Dodge truck.



Dodge won't be able to give these things away after the '05 model year. The entire engineering/design department should be fired... along with the boardroom idiots that approved it... including Jurgen. They are definately NOT paying attention to the target market.

Perhaps people who buy small pickup trucks to use them as a muscle car aren't exactly the "target market". Heck, look how long Ford owned the compact pickup market, with a mediocre-performing (but inexpensive) product that had its last major redesign hit the streets a few months before President Clinton was inaugurated.

re: "lame 4.7": what's an R/T rated to tow? Last I looked it was 2000 lbs. Figuring an R/T weighs about 4200, a '05, 4.7L HO w/ 3.92 gears can tow that R/T AND its biggest rated trailer, and still have 800 lbs to spare (about the R/T's payload capacity IIRC). How "lame" is that. :) I like the R/T well enough and wouldn't want to race one with either of my vehicles... but it's not very appealing as a truck to be used for truck duty.

ORIGINAL: ptschett

Perhaps people who buy small pickup trucks to use them as a muscle car aren't exactly the "target market". Heck, look how long Ford owned the compact pickup market, with a mediocre-performing (but inexpensive) product that had its last major redesign hit the streets a few months before President Clinton was inaugurated.

re: "lame 4.7": what's an R/T rated to tow? Last I looked it was 2000 lbs. Figuring an R/T weighs about 4200, a '05, 4.7L HO w/ 3.92 gears can tow that R/T AND its biggest rated trailer, and still have 800 lbs to spare (about the R/T's payload capacity IIRC). How "lame" is that. :) I like the R/T well enough and wouldn't want to race one with either of my vehicles... but it's not very appealing as a truck to be used for truck duty.


R/T's are 'muscle' trucks... it's an R/T... not an SLT. Towing is not a consideration. It's not a farm vehicle. Mine weighs 3900 with me in it. R/T's are a basis for haulin' nuthin but a$$... 'n many of 'em do that very well. You wouldn't want'a race one with good reason.

Hmm.. odd when I owned my 01 dakota cc 2wd with a 4.7 5 speed. I beat several rc r/t's. And every cc. Stock to stock, no major mods. I do find it funny how R/T guys get all belligerent on the 4.7. But the H.O. is rated at 260 horse, 310 torque. A little more than an R/T 5.9, and it doesn't suck gas as bad as a 5.9 does. So the new R/T will make more power than the old.

Joe

ORIGINAL: jgralka

Hmm.. odd when I owned my 01 dakota cc 2wd with a 4.7 5 speed. I beat several rc r/t's. And every cc. Stock to stock, no major mods. I do find it funny how R/T guys get all belligerent on the 4.7. But the H.O. is rated at 260 horse, 310 torque. A little more than an R/T 5.9, and it doesn't suck gas as bad as a 5.9 does. So the new R/T will make more power than the old.

Joe



Yeah... OK... sure. Did they know you were racing them? Did you do this on a dragstrip or on the street? Where? 4.7 CC's run mid-hi 15's. Stock RC R/T's run 14.80's/14.90's or low 15's depending upon altitude and driver ability. BUT... I'm sure you 'had' a veritable world beater. If I had a nickle for everybody who's told me they 'had' a this or that that beat this or that... I could buy a 408 crate motor. I get 11.5 in the city and 17 on the road. However... you don't run a 5.9 if you're concerned about gas milage. I recently rented an '05 Magnum with a 4.7 (2000 miles on it) in Phoenix and it was a pig. Both in performance, gas mileage and handling. You may have missed it... but I bought this thing to hot rod it. People who buy Lightnings don't tow or worry 'bout gas mileage much either. My R/T was $12,700. cheaper than the Lightning in 2000.
I only have about 2 grand over the Lightning MSRP in this R/T now.... and still N.A. 'n I don't worry about Lightnings... 4.7 Dakota's either.

did you mean an 05 dakota with a 4.7?

ANY 4.7!

the reason that i asked is because you cant get a magnum with a 4.7...just the Hemi...or a 6 cylinder

My bad... it was a 6 banger... Dollar Auto Rental. Major pig. Blind spots galore 'n the thing tracked all over the road. Any wind at all 'n it was worse. Manually shifting was a waste of time. The guy at the rental office said the 300's had the same complaints. We were thinkin' of buyin' the hemi version of the Magnum. No more.

There's an old adage: "There's no substitute for cubic inches." Power to weight... the proposed 4.7 HO R/T will still not be a match for the older 5.9's w/o some serious mods. The 'Dakota R/T Club' members universally disliked the concept R/T... along with it's hockey stick badging. I wrote earlier that Jurgen should be canned. Looks like DCX has done that... 3 years earlier than his contract. The R/T should be offered with a a reg cab and 6.1 hemi... and they gotta seriously revamp that styling. The Dakota R/T is more than a truck... it's a cult. You people not into that don't understand. It may not be practical in North Dakota f'rinstance... but not everybody lives in ND. Think 'hot rod'... not tow truck.

i love the r/ts, but 4.7s have and can beat the r/t

i forget who did it, but they put the 4.7 agaisnt the r/t on a strip, 4.7 beat it, why? the 5.9 has alot of torque, the driver friend the tires off the line every time


and 14.8 is VERY low for a RC r/t, ive seen more 15.1s, thats with a normal driver, not a pro that does it for a living


i think the new r/t, the 4.7HO will beat the old r/t, more power, less wight

and i think that the adage in question is "there is no replacement for displacement"

I ran 14.82 stock at 75-80 Dragway in Monrovia, MD second week I had it... nuthin' more than a K&N FIPK with a 1.84 60' on R-SA's @ 19psi 'n I don't 'do this for a living'. I dunno how you'd make a living with a hi-14 second car... ??? Launching an R/T requires a decent burn out (no water); some finess on the pedal and a low (1100 RPM) stall when staged. Who is this 'THEY"?

Same here, I seen some Dakota's 98-03 models with 4.7's and 5 speed sticks beat out a R/T 5.9 with 4 speed auto. There isn't much difference on power rating between the 2 engines if you play stock vs stock. 235 hp vs 245-250 hp, and 295-300lbs vs 350 lbs. But the weight may be considerably be noticable as the stick and the 4.7's are a quite a few lbs lighter??? Then again, knowing all this, the rest depends on the driver and how good the driver is that utilizes that power.

ORIGINAL: Megashifter
Who is this 'THEY"?



a magazine, cant remember which one

one of the magazines had an article about how the newer RCs with 4.7s (not the newest ones) were beating the 5.9 RTs...i didnt believe it either.

The mag was sport truck. It was a couple of years ago. The main advantage I had was the stick. The 4.7 launches better than the 5.9, so if I beat it out of the hole the gearing kept me a head. The slush box in the dakotas were terrible. I know you guys are cult like with your R/T's. I have two friends that still own the two cc that I beat. So if the truth hurts, I'm sorry. The other advantage is weight. The 4.7 is a bit lighter due to size, and aluminum heads. The races were in Michigan, on the street. You know where real people race? I got tired of hearing the smack from several r/t owners. I used to work at the 4.7 plant. Did most of the races in front of that building. I bought mine as a sleeper. I wanted a sport truck. That means stick shift, not slushbox. Should have kept that one!

"there is no replacement for displacement"

Not exactly true nowdays with the 4 bangers beating up muscle cars. Tell that to an evo, or an srt-4.

ORIGINAL: jgralka


"there is no replacement for displacement"

Not exactly true nowdays with the 4 bangers beating up muscle cars. Tell that to an evo, or an srt-4.



thats very true, an i agree with you, but they both have power adders...

while there are some fst SRT4s and Evos, I have also sucked a few of them through my hood scoop who wouldnt move over...and the NHRA sport compact series is no where near the capability of the real NHRA, but I think that the Evo is awesome....dodge, as usual, is dropping the ball by getting rid of the SRT4, and if they dont want to offer anything performance wise that isnt a land yacht, in the next two years, my name will likle become BadLS2GTO or BadEvoIX :D


mmmmmmmmmm....evo....

Patrick you know me I'm a die hard real muscle car lover. My point was just because its lower displacement does not mean its lower performance. Another fine example is the 340. I'd take a 340 over a 383, or a 360, and most definitely a 400 any day of the week!

Joe

I've never read a magazine article yet that favored the R/T. Car & Driver for one, needs a competent drag racer. Hot Rod magazine incurred my wrath years ago with their article "Dogkota". Most of the 'truck' mags are into bling 'n not much else. Dunno who you ran (age/experience) but there's quite a few MI R/T's that could blow my doors off. The average R/T is runnin' low 14's to mid 13's w/bolt ons. The hot rodders are low 13's to mid 10's. I've never encountered a problem with any 'Sport' Dakota on the track or off. Only one I know of that really hauls ass is Duner's turbo.

sure your dakota doesnt have a problem, its heavily built.

this is similar to the arguement about how "any LS1 F-body will run into the 11s easily with bolt ons....then why isnt every LS1 F-body at the track running 11s? the same way, why isnt every dakota RT running mid 13s if it is so easy? i have seen some screamin' dakotas, but not a majority number, and even running on an all mopar national circuit, the only dakotas that I have run against who had a chance heads up were crate engine trucks.

You're hangin' with the wrong bunch of R/T owners. LOL! C'mon up to Cecil County Dragway sometime.

ive been meaning to get out there for quite a while, since i have heard people go on and on about how it is the fastest track on the east coast...but that may also account for the very fast times...id like to see some of those slightly built dakotas run low 13s on a slow index track like quaker city...poor elevation and a slight grade from 1000 out...

i know i hate it was looking at a new one or buy a older one and fix it up went with the older one it has the curves not a star trec wannabe an the durangos? they are minivans now oh well if that what some want what ever ill pass them on the trail and shake my head hope they like it i dont

You also don't like punctuation.

Megashifter it's just not practical for Dodge to put a larger engine in the new R/T's when none of the other Dakota's use it. You have to think about manufacturing costs. Besides that the R/T doesn't have a huge market, most people who want performance like that end up buying a car, not so many buy a pickup.

As for "no replacement for displacement", much as I love old musclecars and huge motors that statement is a complete myth. I've seen videos of 1000+ wheel hp integras, that's a lot of horses for a little 4 banger. Plus if you look at power to weight ratios. The K20a in the Acura RSX-S was the first engine I know of to break 100hp/liter N/A (stock).

Newbie old thread resurection #304,508,594,320

I usually don't pay attention to the dates if it's at the top of the forum... oh well[&:]

Stay in the hills with your sister HillBilly. :D