An Invitation...

Mustang vs Camaro

Do You Have An Opinion? Come Check Out My Yahoo Group...

formatting link
..thanks for your time! Steve

Reply to
Steve L.
Loading thread data ...

Why is web tv not yet made punishable by death??

2.3Sleeper: "Anyone know how to disable the daytime running lights on a 2001 Crown Vic or on a 2002 GMC?"

SVTKate: "A ball peen hammer?"

Reply to
WindsorFox[SS]

| > Do You Have An Opinion? | > Come Check Out My Yahoo Group... | >

| >

formatting link
| >

| > ..thanks for your time! | > Steve | >

| | Why is web tv not yet made punishable by death?? | |

LMAO!!

Maybe- It's like preschool for AOLers

Reply to
SVTKate

WindsorFox[SS] opined in news:l_tUd.23930$7z6.20684@lakeread04:

I know that group.. it's right down the list from

Bush v Gore.. who REALLY won?!

Reply to
Backyard Mechanic

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 02:16:36 GMT, Backyard Mechanic wrote something wonderfully witty:

I don't know who won, but I do know who lost.

Reply to
ZombyWoof

There are simply too many of us to count.

Reply to
Wound Up

WF?!?!? 2 quotes in your sigline?? CobraJet will throw a fit! Watch out!

-Mike

-- A happy kid behind the wheel of a 98 Mustang GT Cold air intake FRPP 3.73 gears Steeda Tri-Ax Shifter Flowmaster 40 Series mufflers (self-installed woohoo) Hi-speed fan switch

255/60R-15 rear tires Subframe connectors Aluminum adjustable clutch quadrant

Reply to
<memset

It was all from the same thread. Q&A

| > > Mustang vs Camaro | > >

| > > Do You Have An Opinion? | > > Come Check Out My Yahoo Group... | > >

| > >

formatting link
| > >

| > > ..thanks for your time! | > > Steve | > >

| >

| > Why is web tv not yet made punishable by death?? | >

| >

| > 2.3Sleeper: "Anyone know how to disable the daytime | > running lights on a 2001 Crown Vic or on a 2002 GMC?" | >

| > SVTKate: "A ball peen hammer?" | |

Reply to
SVTKate

Camaro . . . Camaro . . . where have I heard that name before? Oh yeah, isn't that the rebodied Firebird that Chevy used to sell, the ones with the Playboy rabbit decals on the back windows? I always wondered, did they come standard with the gray primer splotches, or was that a dealer add-on?

180 Out
Reply to
one80out

The Firebird has always been the "re-bodied Camaro".

"At the time of its creation, the head of the Pontiac Division was John DeLorean. Delorean had envisioned a much sportier car to compete with the Ford Mustang. The original DeLorean had designed a two seat sports car with a body style very similar to what was to later become the Corvette's body shape. In an effort to have a sports car available as soon as possible, Pontiac used the existing F body of the Chevrolet Camaro."

the

Reply to
Wound Up

I don't know about you Wound Up. Again, my remark was a "joke," intended as a little dig to our Crapmaro-loving friend Steve L.

Let's try this: when you read something that I type, just imagine a bunch of smileys after every sentence. Maybe you'll sleep better, and you'll definitely have a lot more time for that "job search" your wife thinks you're conducting while she's at work all day.

What's this now, talking "facts" about the old iron? I thought you didn't care about facts, which is a good thing because I don't see too many in this quote. At least none that support this line about Pontiac using "the existing F body of the Chevrolet Camaro," much less your statement that the Firebird has always been a re-bodied Camaro. The Camaro and the Firebird both rolled out in the same year, 1967. So there was no "existing F body" prior to the first Firebird. With the exception of the engines and exterior and interior trim, the first gen Camaro and Firebird were the same car. (Oh yeah, Chevy had this thing at first about mono-leaf springs, too.) It's not even a chicken and egg thing; it's two eggs laid by the same chicken.

All GM styling emanated from a central studio, so it would be inaccurate to credit either division with the styling. I have always seen a family resemblance between the curve of the first gen Cambird's rear fender and those of '65 Corvairs and Impalas, but then again '66 and even more so '67 Tempests have the same curve, so it's probably more accurate to call it a GM thing than a Chevy thing.

I am not familiar with the R&D of the first gen Cambirds, so I don't know who deserves the credit for the basic engineering, Chevy or Pontiac. You could research it if you care. Considering the Cambird was based on the Chevy II, and Pontiac had no Chevy II cognate at the time, I would guess that Chevy did most of the R&D.

Anyway, to get back to your quote, it sounds like DeLorean was closer to the father of the Cambird than anyone at Chevy. My understanding is that Chevy thought it had the new Baby Boomer youth market covered with the six cylinder, rear-engined Corvair, and that when the Mustang rolled out Chevy was not particularly interested in developing a direct copycat. At the same time according to your own quote DeLorean WAS interested in offering a front-engined, V8 coupe to that market. Again it sounds like DeLorean was the prime mover, not anyone at Chevy.

Which is another way of saying, in too many words: back to the drawing board Wile E., you've gone over the clifff again.

Meep-meep.

180 Out
Reply to
one80out

I realize that.

I have no trouble sleeping. And be very careful with the rest of that.

Look harder. I don't see many accurate facts in what you write, with the surprising exception of the response to that PS inquiry.

At least none that support this line about Pontiac

The Camaro came out before the Firebird. That's my whole point.

Blah blah, tell me something I don't know

I have always

As would I, since the Firebird was a variant of the Camaro.

So why did the Camaro come out before the Firebird? DeLorean wanted a two-seater, but for time-to-market purposes, he used the existing Camaro to deliver a competitive car in this segment.

It just galls you to be factually contradicted, doesn't it, Purveyor of Inaccurate Information?

Reply to
Wound Up

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.