Curt,
Now you're talking something I know. Suzuki Samurai's......Might I
suggest a tintop Sidekick for pulling a trailer. Samurai's are not good
trailer pullers and do not get very good mileage. The EFI models are barely
capable of pulling themselves let alone a trailer and the carbed models are
even worse.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Curt Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <mercedes@okiebenz.com>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] mileage
But what about something the size of a Colorado with a 120hp/250lbft
torque diesel getting 30mpg? The 4cyl gas Colorado breaks 20mpg making it
the most fuel efficient 4wd pickup in my admittedly not terribly through
survey of pickups on sale right now so 30mpg with a small diesel seems
doable. Thats a truck I'd be very interested in.
My '96 v8 Dakota was rated for 17mpg highway, I'm shocked to read that
today's v8 Dakota with a smaller engine is rated at 20mpg. The Durango is
rated for 18mpg and based on a trip to NJ in my friend's thats very
generous, I'd bet his got closer to 14mpg empty.
Of course I expect a large part of it is culture. The Dodge hemi
commercials are a good example. I care not how fast my pickup can go, when
I want to go fast I get on my motorcycle. My pickup is for carrying
things, my motorcycle is for going fast, my car is for commuting. MOST
people don't need pickup trucks. I have a farm and a camp and snowmobiles.
I only barely need a pickup and in fact the one I need isn't made any
more. I need a small pickup that gets good mileage. I don't care how fast
it goes from 0-60 as long as its around my 190D. I need it to have ground
clearance and 4wd for traveling REAL offroads where we snowmobile or plant
trees or hunt deer or haul rocks etc. My truck works and gets the snot
beat out of it. That said I'm considering replacing it with a Suzuki
Samurai because I also own a trailer...
-Curt
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 10:11:32 -0400
From: Mitch Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [MBZ] e: [MBZ WAS ] Anyone Have Carfax? NOW mileage
To: Mercedes Discussion List <mercedes@okiebenz.com>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Curt Raymond wrote:
By amazing I really mean a helluva lot more than anybody really
needs. All that power in the Dakota is good for is ruining tires.
In 1987, my dad bought a '85 Chevy with manny tranny and 4.3L V6. It
was as
powerful as the '76 with 350 4bbl it replaced, and got noticeably
better mpg.
That was an advance, we gained 4wd and 4mpg without giving anything up.
What I miss are the small cars and small pickups with small prices and
small
fuel consumption. Park a 1981 Escort on the scales, and then follow it
up
with a 2007 Focus. Remember mini pickups in the 1970's? They gave way
to
vehicles like the Ranger and S-10, which got upstaged by the larger
Dakota,
and then all three proceeded to grow incrementally until the Ranger and
Colorado weigh as much as a 1985 full size pickup, and generally have
more
power. The Dakota would have been considered portly for a full size
truck
twenty years ago. But I don't think we could go back. If somebody made
a
2100lb pickup with no back seat option and a 50 hp diesel would anybody
want it today, even if it got 50 mpg?
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/
For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
