>And the best they could pull off, with a 258, 4bbl, headers >and Clifford or Edelbrock intake, and nitrous for sh*t's sake, >was 18 secs? I think my Rambler will do that. I also saw it last night. I was impressed with the effort to portray AMCs heritage and history, and they did a good job with the facts about the introduction of the Gremlin and Pacer, etc. HOWEVER, there were a number of glaring oversights... 1) They went OUT OF THEIR WAY to ignore the fact that BOTH Gremlins and Pacers had an optional V8. They went SO FAR out of their way that they actually indicated that the 'Gremlin X' drag racer (shown pulling the front wheels in a race) was successful because of the SIX CYLINDER engines available! This is ludicrous, but I guess the producers thought the cars wouldn't come off nearly as 'funny' or 'ugly' if they acknowleged the significant V8 capabilities of these cars. 2) They actually suggested that the Gremlin and Pacer 'lost favor' in the marketplace because they were 'underpowered'...especially after '77 when the Gremlin went to a 4-cylinder. WHAT? 3) They used two near-mint examples...why? If they are supposed to be 'funny' and 'ugly', why not use a couple of sh*t-can examples? The Pacer in particular was in excellent condition, and a desirable color/wheel combination to boot. 4) I believe both cars were 232-1bbls, as they mentioned '90 hp' at the beginning of the show. Why both putting a 4-bbl on a 232? Did Clifford underwrite the program or something? 5) Why spend so much time on the exhaust 'modifications'? Cutting the tailpipe off at the header pipe would have accomplished the exact same thing. 6) Why tout it as a 'competition' (Gremlin vs. Pacer) if they did it as a bracket race? The teams should have just thrown the parts in the back and raced them as-is and the result would have been the same? 7) Did I miss it, or was there NO information as to how much the 'modifications' IMPROVED the cars? Did they run them stock first? Alfred Koos Alamo AMC San Antonio, TX akoos@xxxxxxxx