Chrysler CEO Comfirms New Dakota, More Diesels

I'd be cool with a unibody Dak if it shares a decontented platform with the Durango/GC... but would it be small and cheap enough to successfully differentiate itself from the fullsize Ram? I'm hoping the next Dak is appreciably smaller than the recently murdered model.

I'd be cool with a unibody Dak if it shares a decontented platform with the Durango/GC... but would it be small and cheap enough to successfully differentiate itself from the fullsize Ram? I'm hoping the next Dak is appreciably smaller than the recently murdered model.

Ocn's on a roll here......I was pretty much thinking the same thing....

A diesel mid size Dakota would be perfect. At 6'6" tall the small trucks are too small and yet I really do not need a full size.

Here is to hoping they get a truck that has the style of the new Durango with the diesel in crew cab. That would rock.

Wish this had seen the light of day!

Yeah, FCA is denying there is a smaller pickup in their (U.S.) future. Dumb.

Maybe they saw the GM twins and gave up. I wonder if the Ranger is still due to return.

Maybe they saw the GM twins and gave up. I wonder if the Ranger is still due to return.

Probably not. Methinks GM and Toyota will own this segment for the foreseeable future. Too had, asba funky Dakota could entice me back into American Iron.

I've recently rented a Nissan Frontier.... if I were buying today (note, before the GM twins arrived) this would be my pick. When Suzuki announced they were closing, I was actually looking at Equators (a Frontier badge job) to pick up cheap and run into the ground... but they went super quick with very little discounting.

One nice thing about the frontier is that with such a long production run, they really have all of the kinks ironed out of this thing.

well, it still feels superior to the Taco

well, it still feels superior to the Taco

The Taco for what it is does feel cheap.

If it were only Datsun and Toyopet, I would buy another Datsun way sooner. I just wish the Frontier weren't such a gas hog.

Again, had Chrysler decided to build something like a diesel Dakota, that would have solved a lot of problems.

Unionist is fine for a mid size or small pickup. A Grand Cherokee is unibody and can go off road and tow 7500 lbs, you can get the needed capabilities from unibody. Ride comfort and gas mileage are bigger factors that max tow capacity for a small truck, I don't think.I ever saw a Tacoma, Frontier or Ranger towing something.

If it were only Datsun and Toyopet, I would buy another Datsun way sooner. I just wish the Frontier weren't such a gas hog.

None of the entries in the segment have been particulary fuel stingy... I think the Colorado/Canyon had the most advanced engines in the class sadly.

Well, if I were back on the farm working, perhaps I wouldn't have gotten rid of my 2010 Colorado so soon, just use the big Fords for work, and the Chevy for running around. The Frontier is a good truck, no doubt, but it is hard not to be very anticipatory of these new GM midsizers.

Fuel efficiency in a large pickup is one thing, as long as it doesn't compromise capability, but there are plenty of folks who just prefer something more maneuverable, for real, for a list of reasons. The U.S. Ranger was too old to bolster for safety rules, and the Dakota was too big and thirsty. Those customers were just as diehard loyal as their fullsize brothers, hence a reason why Nissan saw more of a gain in sales than Toyota with the loss of American compact trucks... a lot of Americans are anti-Toyota, proudly, and see Nissan as a less arrogant company.

I hope the new GM trucks sell like hotcakes, forcing action from the other two U.S. makers.

GM is not going to screw the pooch on the next gen of midwize trucks. They are on a roll, thankfully!