What it all boils down to is JB is just trying to say AMX's are better than everyone else's AMC cars and that 2 seater AMX's rule and him owning a 2 seater elevates his ego and makes him better than everyone else. I wonder how old this clown is? It sounds like a 5 year old saying my toy is better than yours. Na Na Na Na Na!!!! Me only being on line for 3 1/2 years have heard this attitude was the reason for the bitternes between the different club factions. Just my 2 cents. "Doc"
--- Begin Message ---If Bildo owned a Javelin, this dicussion wouldn't be taking place.
- From: "ndaracer1975" <ndaracer1975@xxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:51:16 -0000
Instead he would be asking the proper way to put air in his tires, or
how to refill washer fluid. Installing seat belts in his car baffled
him for a couple weeks so this really isn't far off base for him.
--- In BaadAssGremlins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "John W Rosa" <JohnRosa@xxxx>
wrote:
>
> Bilwin dared to type...
> "Dick T's Rehtoric VS Historical Facts"
>
> Richard (Dick) Teague was the VICE PRESIDENT OF STYLING
> at AMC when the two cars were designed. How dare you
> call his first-hand, hands-on knowledge of the history
> of these cars 'rhetoric'! It takes a special kind of
> idiot to dismiss the man that was there building the
> car, to go with your own fantasy version of the events.
>
> Bilwin also challenged...
> "So let's hear it, give the chronology that I somehow
> am missing."
>
> I have, below, but you'll call every piece of it 'rhetoric',
> no matter who it comes from if it doesn't agree with your
> mysterious, home-made version of the actual events.
>
> Have you noticed that every person answering in this thread
> has told you that you're wrong? Did you miss that, too?
>
> Here are the HISTORICAL FACTS. Start deleting the crap
> you've typed, because this is the real thing.
>
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> AMAZING AMC MUSCLE (c)1988
> by Edrie J. Marquez
>
> Page 20
> Vice President of Styling Richard A. Teague was the
> man most responsible for the design of AMC models
> from 1964-85."
>
> JR note: So much for poor Dick's 'rhetoric'.
>
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> JAVELIN PHOTO ARCHIVE (c)2002
> by C. L. Zinn (owner of one of the very best restored AMXs
> in the world. It's unlikely he'd give away credit to a
> Javelin if it belonged to any form of AMX)
>
> Page 7
> "Please keep in mind (contrary to what has been said before)
> that the AMX II, as with all the rest of the Project IV cars,
> was strictly a show car. The production cars came off other
> clay models done in-house. The production cars did not come
> from the Project IV cars."
>
> Page 23
> "Please note: this car (AMX II) debuted on Monday, June 20,
> 1966, at the New York Auto Show as one of the Project IV cars.
> This car had absolutely nothing to do with the Javelin. The
> Javelin was in clay back in February and was pretty much
> finished in March before work was even started on this car."
>
> JR note: If you look at photos of the AMX II, you'll see
> it has almost NOTHING in common with a Javelin except four
> tires and a windshield, and even they are nothing like a
> Javelin wore.
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> The fact is Project IV was a completely separate operation
> from the work being done to create production-type cars.
> The only reason Project IV existed was to excite the public
> with wild new ideas and to impress banks that AMC was a
> viable force in the marketplace worthy of financing. NONE
> of the Project IV cars were ever intended to become
> production cars.
>
> And when Javelin, born of regular styling exercises that
> got much less press, became a hit, AMC decided the Project
> IV AMX could be 'faked' using the Javelin as it's base.
> Hence, AMXs in all forms had no influence on Javelin.
>
> You go ahead and quote the bad info again. It won't change
> this correct history.
>
> John
--- End Message ---