AF: Missing the boat without a midsized truck(Dakota 2) | Page 23 | Allpar Forums
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Missing the boat without a midsized truck(Dakota 2)

Discussion in 'Mopar / FCA News' started by CDJSalesPro, Aug 3, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 12soldier

    12soldier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2005
    Messages:
    562
    Likes:
    241
    Assuming it's going to happen, I would hope the rear overhang would have much better departure angles than the ones built by AEV. I realize it would result in a smaller bed, but that could be where Jeep falls short and lets RAM pick up where Jeep leaves off. In other words, if you need the larger bed for plywood or to haul that new 100" tv across town, then maybe a Wrangler type truck isn't the right option. I don't believe Hummer was concerned with truck beds when it made it's H2 SUT. But it still sold quite well. I'm not sure how many were built, but when they were up and running they were hard to find in my neck of the woods. The H3T was a nice vehicle too, but I don't think it ran more than 2 years before they closed up shop. Those things still catch my eyes. It might be taboo to speak of Hummer in relation to the Jeep, but everybody seen the two as contenders. People were always rumor talking around these parts about Hummer making a Wrangler style vehicle and Jeep making a full size vehicle. I believe the H3T came with a $40K price tag fully loaded and the H2T around $55, I don't recall the actual numbers, but neighbor said he paid around $55k for his H2 version. SO, if Wrangler came anywhere in-between those 2 vehicles with a V8 or diesel, then it should most definitely will be in short supply for the first 2 years. And one thing I'm sure the number crunchers at FCA want is backordered vehicles. Nothing like not having to wonder when your products are going to sell than to have piles and piles of transactions waiting to be filled for official value and no incentives.
     
  2. md80891

    md80891 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,404
    Likes:
    456
    Other reports had it at 350k per year from 240k per year for total capacity
     
  3. valiant67

    valiant67 ...

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    36,661
    Likes:
    19,401
    GM is not in the habit of building fewer vehicles than they can sell (except for some high profile models over the years). If they think they can sell more than 49k units in 7 months, they will be producing more soon. Time will tell.
    Even by 2002 (when Chevy sold 150k S10s in the US) the small truck market had substantially contracted from what it was in late 1999's.
     
    Mike V. likes this.
  4. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,139
    And then the epic 67% decline in sales occurred from 2002 thru 2014.

    Even with the success of the GM twins, the 2015 compact and midsize truck overall sales are projected to be less than the 10 year sales average for the class.

    We are right back where we were at post #288. :)

    Mike
     
    #444 Mike V., Aug 19, 2015
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2015
    JKU12 likes this.
  5. Dave Z

    Dave Z It's me, Dave
    Staff Member Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2001
    Messages:
    34,924
    Likes:
    20,597
    Comanche also ended because XJ sales were high enough to saturate the factory and MJ had a much lower profit. I believe Evan Boberg once said management was in the position of saying, “The good news is, Comanche sales were high this month. The bad news is, Comanche sales were high this month.” I believe it was put in because Jeep did not trust XJ to sell well enough on its own, but it did, even after ZJ.
     
    Mike V. likes this.
  6. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,139
    Comanche served its purpose, for better or worse. There are several aspects of the Comanche that should not be forgotten.

    Mike
     
  7. valiant67

    valiant67 ...

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    36,661
    Likes:
    19,401
    I really like Comanche, but Dakota's larger cab made me chose a Dakota instead in 1987.
    But the Jeep 4.0 engine was a powerhouse compared to the 3.9 slug in the Dakota.
     
    burtstwins and Mike V. like this.
  8. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,139
    Heck the first 3.9's did not have fuel injection IIRC.

    Kind of ironic that the AMC engine destined to replace the AMC 4.0 became the main engine for the Dakota in later life.

    The 4.7 is a great engine, just keep up with maintenance and it will run and run and run.

    Mike
     
  9. md80891

    md80891 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,404
    Likes:
    456
    The dope dealer next door in Houston had a Comanche so my 88 2wd 8ft box Dakota was parked next to it for awhile. Big diff was ease of entry and the box. My 3.9 ended up towing several full size Chevy trucks with snapped cranks.

    I was the first on the office the another co worker had Shelby, helped sell five or six in the office but when the first V8 came in then the race was on. The V8 was a huge selling factor,
     
    #449 md80891, Aug 19, 2015
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2015
  10. valiant67

    valiant67 ...

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    36,661
    Likes:
    19,401
    Yep, I had a 1987 3.9 carb Dakota. it was really slow.
    Then I had a 1989 3.9 TBI Dakota - a little more pep, even though I think the horsepower rating was supposedly the same.
    But the Magnum treatment (which involved a bit of "AMC" engineering as I understand it) is what really woke up the 3.9 (as well as the V8s).
     
    Mike V. likes this.
  11. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,139
    Yup! Those dang 302 casting swirl port LA heads were not performance minded. The Magnum was huge improvement.

    Mike
     
  12. suzq044

    suzq044 Resident Photoshop Nerd

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2005
    Messages:
    7,923
    Likes:
    6,844
    If I wanted a smaller truck, I wouldn't mind something like this (photoshop by me, and yes I know the base image is a full-size Ram of the era with a v10) -- it's an older photoshop obviously, not as well done as it could be. I'm considering redoing it now. lol

    [​IMG]
     
    freshforged and MoparDanno like this.
  13. MoparDanno

    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Messages:
    4,262
    Likes:
    4,629
    I always wished they had brought the Sidewinder to production as it was. Loved that crazy lil thing.

    PS I think it was Dakota based.
     
    Mike V. likes this.
  14. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,139
    IIRC it was a square tube frame built by Riley & Scott using an unequal-length control-arm front suspension with coilovers and a Viper independent rearend and coilover dampers. The body was another gorgeous job by Metalcrafters.

    Allpar does not have much info on this concept.

    Yes that is the same Riley who is involved in the current Viper GT3-R program ;)

    Mike
     
    freshforged and MoparDanno like this.
  15. WS23Mopar

    WS23Mopar Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2015
    Messages:
    170
    Likes:
    191
    The extendable bed option from the Gladiator concept would solve these issues and still allow people to have a real sized truck bed.

    http://www.jeep.com/jeep_life/news/jeep/gladiator_concept.html

     
  16. MoparDanno

    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Messages:
    4,262
    Likes:
    4,629
    Good info! Thanks for that.
     
    Mike V. likes this.
  17. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,139
    Absolutely!

    Mike
     
  18. md80891

    md80891 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,404
    Likes:
    456
    The grill is close to what charger became
     
    suzq044 likes this.
  19. suzq044

    suzq044 Resident Photoshop Nerd

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2005
    Messages:
    7,923
    Likes:
    6,844
    MoparDanno and Mike V. like this.
  20. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,139
    MoparDanno likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...
 We are not affiliated with FCA. We make no claims regarding validity or accuracy of information or advice. Copyright © VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.