2005 or future Regular Cab Dakota
Does anybody know if 2005 (or future years) Dakota will be offered with the regular cab. Hear on Car & Driver that because of lower sales the regular cab won't be offered (only club cab & Quad Cab). It didn't specify if this is the case in the first release or never again. Thanks
The Original plan for the regular cab, was to have it be sold as a Mitsubishi, with them ONLY getting the regular cab model, but now as it turns out they'll be getting more than just that. Which I just think is ignorant.
I can't blame Dodge for dropping the regular cab. It's not like they haven't made potentially unpopular cab deletions before (like dropping the Club Cab from the Ram in 2002!) I almost never see RC 97+ Dakotas on the road or elsewhere anyway -- most people driving Dakotas where I travel, in the Dakotas and Minnesota, seem to buy QCs now, with a few CC holdouts like me. In fact when I told my dad (the owner of 2 V6 5-speed CC 4x4s, a '93 and a '95) the RC had been available through 2004 he was surprised.
As an engineer I can see many reasons to drop the RC. It wouldn't surprise me if the '05 CC and QC, whether 4x2 or 4x4, ride on the same frame and share most of their mechanical parts (heck, the commonized front suspension architecture is supposed to be a selling point!) Hydroform dies for frame rails can't be cheap, and they'd need another set for a RC with a shorter wheelbase than the CC and QC. There'd be more form dies needed for the cab roof, back, and side structures. A short RC would need unique plumbing for the brakes and fuel system, and new wire harnesses for those and the rear lights. All those form dies would cost big $$ and the extra part numbers would make life more complex for the assemblers. The new structures would potentially require different weld fixtures and robot programs too. I bet Dodge simply determined that the extra income potential of a RC Dak wasn't worth the development and manufacturing costs.
As an engineer I can see many reasons to drop the RC. It wouldn't surprise me if the '05 CC and QC, whether 4x2 or 4x4, ride on the same frame and share most of their mechanical parts (heck, the commonized front suspension architecture is supposed to be a selling point!) Hydroform dies for frame rails can't be cheap, and they'd need another set for a RC with a shorter wheelbase than the CC and QC. There'd be more form dies needed for the cab roof, back, and side structures. A short RC would need unique plumbing for the brakes and fuel system, and new wire harnesses for those and the rear lights. All those form dies would cost big $$ and the extra part numbers would make life more complex for the assemblers. The new structures would potentially require different weld fixtures and robot programs too. I bet Dodge simply determined that the extra income potential of a RC Dak wasn't worth the development and manufacturing costs.
i didnt agree with dropping the reg cab at first but im starting to swing that way now, but only with the dakota, not many people want a cab so small, but when it comes to a full size truck they better not quit doing the reg cab, because a lot of work vehicles, sport trucks and companies use the reg cab trucks, not to mention stake trucks,dump tucks and what not. my dad has a reg cab ram and there is plenty of room, he loves it


