Re: [Amc-list] old cars suck, but new ones are worse

[Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>]

Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Could have been 42 could have been 48.
>   All I rememebr was it looked bone stock from 5' away, wire wheels and all.
> Sounded like a rattly old four cyl too. 
> I had ignored it for years till I got close enough to see the white interior and did a double take as I knew that was not stock!
>    Then I just talked to him, now I'd make him open the hood!!!

I love stuff like that. To me personally, that's the best sort of car. I 
don't even care if they are shiny, anymore; a patina of well-cared-for 
wear is more beautiful to me now.

I've decided that even if this T-96 lunches again, I'm sticking with the 
195.6ohv unless some evil economic reason forces my hand to a 2.5L or 
something. I *like* this P.O.S. motor, and it suits the car. It took 
some time to get used to driving it, I was surprised how long!

It goes like hell if you are clever and plan ahead. I swear, it's twice 
as fast as a year ago, and nothing has changed but my driving (OK, more 
ignition advance). To take out this motor would be to ruin the car.


I bet that 194x Furd thing was a blast to drive. I'm not switching 
brands, but the people who make stuff like that, and avoid the 
cookie-cutter copycat kits, you gotta respect.
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list