- Chrysler told Inside Line on Tuesday that it is "studying the demographics and business case for a small Ram pickup" as it ended production of the midsize Dakota pickup truck.
- The automaker said it pulled the plug on the Dakota because "there just isn't a big enough gap between it and the Ram 1500."
- Chrysler sold 13,047 Dakota pickups in 2010.
WARREN, Michigan — The last Dodge Dakota rolled off the assembly line at the Warren Truck Plant here late Tuesday afternoon following a 24-year run. Despite the end of the line for the midsize pickup, Chrysler told Inside Line that it is "studying the demographics and business case for a small Ram pickup."
"As the truck phases out of its planned lifecycle, we're exploring plans for an affordable replacement that meets the work-hard, play-hard needs of our customers," wrote Nick Cappa, a Chrysler spokesman in an e-mail response to an Inside Line query. "Although the Dakota is a great truck, there just isn't a big enough gap between it and the (full-size) Ram 1500.
"We believe there is still a substantial market for small pickups. We're studying the demographics and business case for a small Ram pickup, but there's nothing to announce at this time."
He said there "aren't any special plans for the final Dakota."
The Dakota was a victim of dwindling sales and disappointing fuel economy. Chrysler sold just 13,047 Dakotas in 2010. The base 2011 Dakota is equipped with a 210-horsepower 3.7-liter V6 linked to a four-speed automatic transmission. It returns 15 mpg in city driving and 20 mpg on the highway, according to the EPA. The base 2011 Dakota starts at $23,950, including a $740 destination charge.
The Dakota seemed to be somewhat of a corporate lost soul of late. Its official name is the Dodge Dakota, but consumers looking to build one online using the corporate configurator could only find it listed under Ram trucks.
The rear-wheel-drive Dakota was introduced in spring 1986 as a 1987 model. In the 1990 model year, a V8-powered Dakota debuted, with the truck getting upgrades throughout its long life cycle. In the 2006 model year, a limited-edition Dakota Night Runner with such touches as a black-chrome grille surround and 17-inch black chrome wheels debuted.
Inside Line says: Chrysler drops a long-time staple in its lineup, but the possibility of a new small Ram truck definitely lessens the blow.
Add A Comment »
knight444 says:
08:53 AM, 10/26/2011
The PAst few days I have been looking at maybe a new truck. I have a dakota quad cab.. this is my 2nd one, even same grey color..MIne is bigger than a regular small truck, I like it.. I have tried out before the next up in line, 1500 to my opinion is bigger..Taller, From my past vehicles, trucks are bigger than they use to be and I have had over 7 trucks, Small trucks?? Like the 50 was too small for a truck.. The dakota will still be called ram, but Chrysler has a change up comming up as late as 2013, guess we will have to wait and se, but I do like the quad cab.. I have a 07 now, had an 02.. I actually liked the 02 style better, the front grill and profile, had a 3.9 v6 07 has a chromish grill, squarish nose, 3.7 motor. I lost my cruise 6 months after warantee..lol..they both were nd have been good pickups..The 1500's are just taller. As far as Ford, I had a 94quad ranger royal blue, looked like it was built taller than other rangers.I liked it..although once the tires wear out or before I put wider , and thick grip firestones on all my trucks..( and get this the price was better than Wal-mart, plus American made)...But anyway the ranger is history, Ford may be coming in with a F100 series again..taking rangers place.with no quad cab. I looked at a toyota also.. I want American made, but the tacoma looked good..Quad cab and rugged, lil smaller in length, but only 1 more MPG on highway..But after all the chnage.. IM affraid to trade.. MIne has only 57k on it.. City mile and a few beach n mtn miles..Idk .. MAn.. I just like the dakota quad..its a love thing.. maybe they could come up with a smal but mid size ram, lil bigger than a 50, with 4cyl..with power. then a ram quad 6 cyl but a 4.0, then the 1500 up..8cyl..
mklrivowner says:
06:08 AM, 08/25/2011
I'd be interested in a (true) half-ton pickup.
threemopars says:
06:53 PM, 08/24/2011
"The problem is it got to big, a small truck should be small."
It never was small from the get-go. Look at one of the original advertisements when it came out, it was clearly larger than the Ram 50, but smaller than the full sized Ram of the time.
damaje says:
04:27 PM, 08/24/2011
That leaves only one smaller truck for people who use their small trucks to work hard. Don't get me wrong, the tacoma is nice to look at, but their bed rail system inspired by the titan doesn't have the strength of the frontiers, and I think a lot of truck buyers who buy their truck for real dirty hard work would rather not have a plastic bed like the tacoma has, as oppose to the factory lined one in a Frontier.
wjtinatl says:
04:06 PM, 08/24/2011
Too bad Ford hasn't done even a mild refresh on the Ranger and stuffed the 3.7L V6 from the Mustang in it. With all the tooling paid for about 20 years ago, they could sell a very competitive (and fast) small truck and sell it at the same or lower cost than the imports and soon-dead GM rivals.
joe_scuba says:
01:20 PM, 08/24/2011
The problem is it got to big, a small truck should be small. The small GM got to big, the small SUVs got to big all when gas was going up. Detroit did not learn its lesson from the 70's very well.
Ford is hoping for free trade to import a new Ranger.
Basically the whole small truck market got screwed up and everything got to big. make a Pick up the size of the old RAM and S10 they'll get better gas mileage and sell better and bring back the smaller SUVs
ne_blackshirts says:
11:53 AM, 08/24/2011
@ copmotor
Your so right that Ram Dakota has the ingrediants with the pentastar V6 and actual truck frame and with the new automatic trannys on the way to really set a new standard in the midsize market. But after running the same crap with the only changes being price and weight year after year after year people start to forget you even make a certain product. Look at GM god how many times do they visit the plastic surgen for a shot of botox!!! How many more face lifts can that line take its time for the surgen to say look GM I know your insecure about your body but I'm running out of places to put this injection in, maybe its time for you to hit the gym gain some muscle lose some fat. If all these trucks could lose about 500lbs while keeping power up WOW the asians would be SOL.
retiredwimedic says:
11:09 AM, 08/24/2011
There is one important point that most people, including the people at Chrysler, are missing, it is that that the full-size Ram does not fit in most garages, it's too tall. The Dakota does, it was designed to fit in the standard garage from the very start.
copmotor440cid says:
10:40 AM, 08/24/2011
@ ne_blackshirts
The Dakota did have an available 4.7L SOHC 302 hp/329 lb-ft V8. It was the only midsize truck with a V8 since the early 1990's (maybe even late 80's). The main problem with the Dakota was that, following the redesign in 2005 it was too close in price, capability, and fuel economy to the Ram 1500. Also, the base 3.7 V6 was nothing more than adequate. Dakota lost its niche in the market. Now if the current Dakota was the same size and weight as the second gen with the new Pentastar and Hemi as engine options, we might be talking about the demise of the frontier and tacoma.
mrbacon says:
10:35 AM, 08/24/2011
The only small truck currently on the market is the Ranger, which is in its last year. I see this as a problem, especially considering the current prices of gasoline.
It's time to bring mini trucks back.