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