<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Autoblog - Comments for </title>
<link>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/04/chicago-preview-dodge-facelifts-the-dakota-for-2008/</link>
<description>Autoblog Comments for </description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/04/chicago-preview-dodge-facelifts-the-dakota-for-2008/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/04/chicago-preview-dodge-facelifts-the-dakota-for-2008/</guid><description><![CDATA[so it's difficult to say whether this is enough less-bad than the GM midsize pickups to be a good deal.  It's certainly less antique than the Ranger, but I don't see any reason to buy it over a Tacoma.  Still, it will probably undercut the real-world prices of the competitive Tacoma, so some people will buy it.  Overall, it reminds me of the '79 D100 pickup I used to have, except these pics aren't in TXDoT yellow.  I just don't see anyone buying this truck on looks.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[DKB_SATX]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Feb 4th 2007 6:33PM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>