Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 12/4/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!rlgvax!guy
From: guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Re: Muscle_car != Sport_car
Message-ID: <1985@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 3-Jun-84 22:31:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.1985
Posted: Sun Jun  3 22:31:20 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Jun-84 20:17:31 EDT
References: <468@hou2h.UUCP> <899@eosp1.UUCP> <1972@rlgvax.UUCP> <1550@uw-june>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 17

> Reading about the 'Vette's handling, and whether or not it is a real
> muscle car, I pose the following question:

> Do we have a consensus that anything with handling is by definition not
> a muscle car?  If the answer to this question is in the affirmative,
> what do we do about all those Herb Adams Camaros?

Simple - we say they're not muscle cars.  It depends on the definition of
"muscle car" - is it a car with muscle (in which case I think we'd all
agree that a Porsche 928 or 911 Turbo is definitely a muscle car) or is
it a car with nothing but muscle (in which case a Herb Adams Camaro isn't
a muscle car)?  I'd make the decision based on what the "classic" muscle
cars had - could you take, say, a 440 Hemi 'Cuda down a twisty mountain
road without too much, shall we say, "drama"?

	Guy Harris
	{seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy