According Doug W. here, whom took the pictures.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

IsellJeeps wrote:
>
> lol was that really at a car show Bill?

 

According Doug W. here, whom took the pictures.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

IsellJeeps wrote:
>
> lol was that really at a car show Bill?

 

In alt.autos.dodge.trucks , Daniel J. Stern wrote :

> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Geoff wrote:
>
>> > Looks like one of the rejected designs for the new/current Dodge
>> > Durango. Taillights are the stupid kind and look like the design
>> > that almost went on the Chevrolet Equinox until someone at
>> > Chevrolet said "Clear taillights! No! Dude! We TOTALLY have to do
>> > clear taillights!"
>
>> The wrap-around taillights suck, I agree.
>
> And they're all red. No amber turn blinker. Suddenly it's 1991...
>

No 2002,
One thing I would love to change on my Dak is my non-amber turn signals....

 

In alt.autos.dodge.trucks , Daniel J. Stern wrote :

> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Geoff wrote:
>
>> > Looks like one of the rejected designs for the new/current Dodge
>> > Durango. Taillights are the stupid kind and look like the design
>> > that almost went on the Chevrolet Equinox until someone at
>> > Chevrolet said "Clear taillights! No! Dude! We TOTALLY have to do
>> > clear taillights!"
>
>> The wrap-around taillights suck, I agree.
>
> And they're all red. No amber turn blinker. Suddenly it's 1991...
>

No 2002,
One thing I would love to change on my Dak is my non-amber turn signals....

 

In alt.autos.dodge.trucks , Daniel J. Stern wrote :

> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Geoff wrote:
>
>> > Looks like one of the rejected designs for the new/current Dodge
>> > Durango. Taillights are the stupid kind and look like the design
>> > that almost went on the Chevrolet Equinox until someone at
>> > Chevrolet said "Clear taillights! No! Dude! We TOTALLY have to do
>> > clear taillights!"
>
>> The wrap-around taillights suck, I agree.
>
> And they're all red. No amber turn blinker. Suddenly it's 1991...
>

No 2002,
One thing I would love to change on my Dak is my non-amber turn signals....

 

Hmmpf!!!

I challenge them to get it to run smoother than a well tuned slant six.

--
Budd

"Daniel J. Stern" <dastern@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.58.0410121453500.9994@alumni.engin .umich.edu...
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Geoff wrote:
>
> > > Looks like one of the rejected designs for the new/current Dodge
Durango.
> > > Taillights are the stupid kind and look like the design that almost
went
> > > on the Chevrolet Equinox until someone at Chevrolet said "Clear
> > > taillights! No! Dude! We TOTALLY have to do clear taillights!"
>
> > The wrap-around taillights suck, I agree.
>
> And they're all red. No amber turn blinker. Suddenly it's 1991...
>
> > Boo! on the V6 replacing the I6; SUV engines ought to have low-end
> > grunt. That I6 was an institution, and it deserved to be updated rather
> > than discarded.
>
> Agreed. I'm sure Car and Driver will cream their jeans about the
> "silky-smooth V6" being better than the "agricultural-sounding pushrod
> inline 6 it replaces".

 

Hmmpf!!!

I challenge them to get it to run smoother than a well tuned slant six.

--
Budd

"Daniel J. Stern" <dastern@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.58.0410121453500.9994@alumni.engin .umich.edu...
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Geoff wrote:
>
> > > Looks like one of the rejected designs for the new/current Dodge
Durango.
> > > Taillights are the stupid kind and look like the design that almost
went
> > > on the Chevrolet Equinox until someone at Chevrolet said "Clear
> > > taillights! No! Dude! We TOTALLY have to do clear taillights!"
>
> > The wrap-around taillights suck, I agree.
>
> And they're all red. No amber turn blinker. Suddenly it's 1991...
>
> > Boo! on the V6 replacing the I6; SUV engines ought to have low-end
> > grunt. That I6 was an institution, and it deserved to be updated rather
> > than discarded.
>
> Agreed. I'm sure Car and Driver will cream their jeans about the
> "silky-smooth V6" being better than the "agricultural-sounding pushrod
> inline 6 it replaces".

 

Hmmpf!!!

I challenge them to get it to run smoother than a well tuned slant six.

--
Budd

"Daniel J. Stern" <dastern@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.58.0410121453500.9994@alumni.engin .umich.edu...
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Geoff wrote:
>
> > > Looks like one of the rejected designs for the new/current Dodge
Durango.
> > > Taillights are the stupid kind and look like the design that almost
went
> > > on the Chevrolet Equinox until someone at Chevrolet said "Clear
> > > taillights! No! Dude! We TOTALLY have to do clear taillights!"
>
> > The wrap-around taillights suck, I agree.
>
> And they're all red. No amber turn blinker. Suddenly it's 1991...
>
> > Boo! on the V6 replacing the I6; SUV engines ought to have low-end
> > grunt. That I6 was an institution, and it deserved to be updated rather
> > than discarded.
>
> Agreed. I'm sure Car and Driver will cream their jeans about the
> "silky-smooth V6" being better than the "agricultural-sounding pushrod
> inline 6 it replaces".

 

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Budd Cochran wrote:

> > > Boo! on the V6 replacing the I6; SUV engines ought to have low-end
> > > grunt. That I6 was an institution, and it deserved to be updated
> > > rather than discarded.

> > Agreed. I'm sure Car and Driver will cream their jeans about the
> > "silky-smooth V6" being better than the "agricultural-sounding pushrod
> > inline 6 it replaces".

> Hmmpf!!! I challenge them to get it to run smoother than a well tuned
> slant six.

How it runs isn't the issue for the bananaheads in the motoring press.
Does it sound like a Honda? If yes, praise. If no, make dumb jokes and
then laugh.

 

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Budd Cochran wrote:

> > > Boo! on the V6 replacing the I6; SUV engines ought to have low-end
> > > grunt. That I6 was an institution, and it deserved to be updated
> > > rather than discarded.

> > Agreed. I'm sure Car and Driver will cream their jeans about the
> > "silky-smooth V6" being better than the "agricultural-sounding pushrod
> > inline 6 it replaces".

> Hmmpf!!! I challenge them to get it to run smoother than a well tuned
> slant six.

How it runs isn't the issue for the bananaheads in the motoring press.
Does it sound like a Honda? If yes, praise. If no, make dumb jokes and
then laugh.