- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 48
- 91
Next-Gen Dodge Dakota cancelled, M80 compact truck steps to the plate
- Thread starter NFS4
- Start date
the Avalanche looks like dog droppings... and the M80 is OK.. but obviously I think the current Dakota looks better... I'd rather see a new redesign on the Dakota personally, with a nicely done up R/T model!
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 48
- 91
<< the Avalanche looks like dog droppings... and the M80 is OK.. but obviously I think the current Dakota looks better... I'd rather see a new redesign on the Dakota personally, with a nicely done up R/T model! >>
I never really liked the looks of the Dakota. From the front, it looks as if the front grill was squashed and it just has an overall "melted" look to it. The M80 is a breath of fresh air IMHO.
Does this mean that they are AXING the Dakota alltogether or leaving it Alone?
<---- LOVES HIS DAKOTA (other than the tranny Problems)
<---- LOVES HIS DAKOTA (other than the tranny Problems)
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 48
- 91
<< Does this mean that they are AXING the Dakota alltogether or leaving it Alone?
<---- LOVES HIS DAKOTA (other than the tranny Problems) >>
Looks like...and it makes very good sense.
1) Dakotas and Rams are VERY close in price right now.
2) A 10" increase in wheelbase (as described in the article) would put the Dakota VERY close to the Ram in size.
3) The M80 (as a compact pickup) would be a cheaper vehicle and should be cheaper to produce. That means they can crank out a large number of them.
4) The current Dakota doesn't really fit in anywhere. It's larger than the S-10/Ranger/Frontier/Tacoma, but smaller than everything else. It's in a class of its own that nobody really needs. Either you are or you aren't.
Looks like a baby New-Power-Wagon, as long as they dump the Corvette size wheels it could be pretty cool. I like the simple interior, though in a truck that manual would need to go also but thats an option anyway 
Is it just me or are all these companies using that 1970's Golden Yellow color, Next thing the showrooms are gonna have shag carpet too
Anyway I think NFS is right, with a good color scheme it would look much better, for me I think that "Light Pewter Metallic" GM always shows their new trucks does Zero justice for the truck, C'mon guys, lets get back to White, Red and Blue... I'd say Black but I know how it is to own that color, I've owned 2 vehicles that color (My 1st and LAST) Would be impossible to keep clean unless they used a clean room in Seagate's lab or something
Is it just me or are all these companies using that 1970's Golden Yellow color, Next thing the showrooms are gonna have shag carpet too
Anyway I think NFS is right, with a good color scheme it would look much better, for me I think that "Light Pewter Metallic" GM always shows their new trucks does Zero justice for the truck, C'mon guys, lets get back to White, Red and Blue... I'd say Black but I know how it is to own that color, I've owned 2 vehicles that color (My 1st and LAST)
Would be impossible to keep clean unless they used a clean room in Seagate's lab or something 4) The current Dakota doesn't really fit in anywhere. It's larger than the S-10/Ranger/Frontier/Tacoma, but smaller than everything else.
Um, that's exactly why it's so popular. That's the SPECIFIC reason why I bought it -- the Ranger crowd is just too small, and the four door Ram is too large, along with all the other 4D full-size trucks. I needed four doors since we're planning on having kids; I wanted a V8 with hauling capacity to be able to move things around (I'm military so frequent moves are a given); and I wanted a smaller than full-size pickup because I simply don't need something that size.
A quick "build your vehicle comparison" has the 1500 Quad about $3200 more than a comparably equipped Dakota. That's $53 more per month for the 1500 than the Dakota, not counting interest which will add even more. Looks like I won't be buying a Dodge when we return from Japan in three years (have to sell my truck!).
Um, that's exactly why it's so popular. That's the SPECIFIC reason why I bought it -- the Ranger crowd is just too small, and the four door Ram is too large, along with all the other 4D full-size trucks. I needed four doors since we're planning on having kids; I wanted a V8 with hauling capacity to be able to move things around (I'm military so frequent moves are a given); and I wanted a smaller than full-size pickup because I simply don't need something that size.
A quick "build your vehicle comparison" has the 1500 Quad about $3200 more than a comparably equipped Dakota. That's $53 more per month for the 1500 than the Dakota, not counting interest which will add even more. Looks like I won't be buying a Dodge when we return from Japan in three years (have to sell my truck!).
<< ) The current Dakota doesn't really fit in anywhere. It's larger than the S-10/Ranger/Frontier/Tacoma, but smaller than everything else. It's in a class of its own that nobody really needs. Either you are or you aren't. >>
Accually The Dakota fits into a great catagory!
I wanted something that would be able to be used as a truck and wasn't as big as my House!
The dakota is perfect for those of us who Haul stuff but still Like to park!
I sort of agree with what AndrewR and tm37 are saying, in that it's nice to have a truck that isn't as big as a RAM1500 but bigger than a Ranger.
But adding 10" to the Dakota wouldn't pretty well push it out of the mid-size and into the full-size category.
Also, while some people do like the mid-size I think the numbers are pretty small unfortunately.
People who want a big powerful truck got for the Ram (or whatever other Brand they like)...people who don't are mostly happy with the Ranger size.
I can see where you guys are coming from, but from Dodge's view, I see why the Dakota is getting axed. I just don't see it generating enough sales to make it profitable.
Also, I think the M80 is pretty damn ugly. It's nice to see some people trying some new things with designs, the some old will get boring eventually...but I think that M80 concept should have gotten the rejected stamp.
But adding 10" to the Dakota wouldn't pretty well push it out of the mid-size and into the full-size category.
Also, while some people do like the mid-size I think the numbers are pretty small unfortunately.
People who want a big powerful truck got for the Ram (or whatever other Brand they like)...people who don't are mostly happy with the Ranger size.
I can see where you guys are coming from, but from Dodge's view, I see why the Dakota is getting axed. I just don't see it generating enough sales to make it profitable.
Also, I think the M80 is pretty damn ugly. It's nice to see some people trying some new things with designs, the some old will get boring eventually...but I think that M80 concept should have gotten the rejected stamp.
Hmmm....I didn't know that Toyota sold so few Tundras....only about 10% of F-Series or Silverado sales.
Outsold by the Avalance.... it shows Truck guys still care about Powertrain over looks and whatever crap car people have a need and like for...
Last edited:
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 48
- 91
<< Also, I think the M80 is pretty damn ugly. It's nice to see some people trying some new things with designs, the some old will get boring eventually...but I think that M80 concept should have gotten the rejected stamp. >>
Actually, both the Dodge Razor and the Dodge M80 concept trucks got a HUGE positive response from the general public and journalists. That's why they are moving forward with the design.
<<
<< Also, I think the M80 is pretty damn ugly. It's nice to see some people trying some new things with designs, the some old will get boring eventually...but I think that M80 concept should have gotten the rejected stamp. >>
Actually, both the Dodge Razor and the Dodge M80 concept trucks got a HUGE positive response from the general public and journalists. That's why they are moving forward with the design. >>
Fair enough. I'll probably grow to like it.
I hated the Prowler when I first saw it....but I kinda like it now.
Same for the Razor.
Maybe the m80 will be the same.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter