well.... first, i'd probably use my 727 that i had on the 340 before. So that wouldnt be needed.

And it would be 8.75'd

 

Resons i'd prefer a 2.5 Dak:

cheap insurance
put the 2.5 in one of the FWD cars
sell the trans easier
no column shifter so i can put a quarterstick on the floor

 

but im not sure they made cab & .5 with 2.5Ls.... i'd like the extra room inside for my long legs

 

?



http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1856391894

 

oh crap..........

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1857597611

http://www.usautomartinc.com/760-dakota/760-dakota.htm

 

I am crying my eyes out, OMG that is so sad.

 

I vote #3
looks the best of the original post.

 

I like number 2 just for the extended cab, but insurance would be higherbecause of the v8. You might want to call and find out about the differences because I know my shelby dak was cheap as hell to insure just because it was a pickemup.

As for the fenders, i think they changed in 92 which was when the v8s went into real production, and for 92 they were longer than mine in all the models not just the v8. And besides, the 92-99? look a whole lot better than the earlier ones, just a little bit heavier. With the engine you're putting in it, I don't think you have to worry to much about weight.

 

Bah!!!! What do you need a extended cab for, this isn't a ranger or s-10 we are talking about.

If I was choosing I would just get any of the RC ones you posted and paint it white or black, lower it some and throw on some current 17" R/T wheels, oh and no chrome.

However you probably have different criteria than me

I am sure some of you have probably seen these pics
http://rcst.com/Y2K/members/RYANN/ryan.htm