Re: [BaadAssGremlins] Re: what is a musclecar

["Eddie Stakes" <eddiestakes@xxxx>]

John, the best comparison I can give would be the term Hispanic. It's not a
race. It could be anyone from a slew of countries. Muscle Car will always be
a cobbled together group of vehicles without a solid definitive definition,
depending on who is judging them, writing about them, or owning them.
Another comparison would be the never-ending-debate of what was the first
muscle car. Some say Plymouth, some say Nash, some say Studebaker, others
say Rebel, some write GTO. No dust has ever settled.

Here is another comparison in the watered down title department. When you
watch any news, they refer to illegal street racing as 'drag racing' which
gives drag racing a really bad black eye in my humble opinion. More recently
more and more news organizations have been actually labelling it 'street
racing' which is correct, and for some reason, they leave out the illegal.
Like aliens, for some reason they call them immigrants, but they still are
illegal, so the term has been misused, abused, over used till no one knows,
and probably don't care, about it anymore.

I'm sure some people vomited when they saw a 51 Hudson Super Six in HMM's
Feb 04 issue. Od Donnie Solomon's Gremlin X garcing the pages in Jan 04. Or
a case could be made by Perry Mason of the Muscle Car Shootout HMM had (Feb
2004) whereas the following competed: 65 GTO; 71 LeMans; 73 LeMans; 72
LeMans convertible; 87 Sunbird GT turbo; 64 GTO. While there was a huge
turnout, they decided to focus on Pontiac here. Again, by my definition, not
all above in the 'musclecar shootout' were 'musclecars'. The little Sunbird
turned 14.1; 14.3; 14.3; 14.3; 14.5 consistently, not bad. But also not what
I would consider a musclecar either, others may disagree too!

The bottom line is that, there never will be a true definition of what is a
musclecar. The term has been watered down and overused whereas some would
even call a Pinto with a 429 a muscle car.
Eddie Stakes
www.planethoustonamx.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John W Rosa" <JohnRosa@xxxx>
To: <BaadAssGremlins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 11:23 AM
Subject: RE: [BaadAssGremlins] Re: what is a musclecar



-----Original Message-----
From: Eddie Stakes [mailto:eddiestakes@xxxx]

Either way, I think this whole 'what is a real
musclecar' debate should be left to those
editors to define in the major magazines.

---------------------------------------------

Oh, Hell no I won't. They are going to coddle to
whatever direction will sell more issues, not
work to maintain historical accuracy. That work
must be left to those of us that haven't a penny
to gain from the process.

I can honestly and unashamedly state I have never
owned a true 'Muscle Car', and I've now owned over
20 Javelins- Pony Cars all.

Can a Pony Car outrun a Muscle Car in a straight
line? Sure, some can.
Can a Muscle Car outrun a Pony in a slalom? A few
could, I suppose.
Is one title better than the other? Not in my book.
Is it insulting to be left out of the Muscle Car
category? Maybe for some, but it's just a
classification based on wheelbase, really. Just
a way to measure the car's size and intended use.

The 'aura' of the title has become so big that
folks like Bilwin lump all the fast US cars of the
era together, calling them all 'Muscle Cars', but
as I've said, it's an incorrect application of the
title, just as a cheesecake isn't a cake- it's a pie.
Just as American Motors didn't install motors- they
installed engines. There's the way we use a term,
and then there's the proper use of the term. Just
because something is popular, that doesn't make it
correct (Germany, 1934, for an extreme example).
In the 1700s, you were nuts to believe in micro-
scopic beings that invade our bodies are what cause
illnesses. Today, it's crazy to not believe that.
Yet, in both times, the WRONG side was the same one.
'Muscle Car' is a victim of the reverse. It was
coined for use to describe a particular class of car.
Over time, it's been abused by people wanting their
own car to fit under it. Hell, I've heard Tuners
described as Muscle Cars, and even Bilwin will
agree that's crazy (OK, maybe he wouldn't).

The terms are exclusive for reasons. You can blur
the distinctions by building a car that almost fits,
but in the end, when you apply the criteria of each
class, the vehicle ends up in one or another. Not
in two or more at the same time. You can't be a Pony
and a Sports car...tho AMX is the closest anyone came.
You can't be Pony and Muscle...your wheelbase and
seating will put you in one of them, never both.

'Muscle Cars' isn't an umbrella for everything with a
hood scoop. That's what 'Performance Cars' is for.

Gremlin = Sub-Compact Car
Gremlin 5.0 - Performance Sub-Compact
Hornet = Sub-Compact Car
Hornet SC/360 4v = Performance Compact Car
[Above size cars often called 'pocket rockets' until
quick Asian cars took the term]
Javelin = Pony Car
Javelin 4v = Performance Pony Car
68-70 AMX = Performance Sports Car
Rebel / Matador = Intermediate Car
Rebel 4v / Matador 4v = Muscle Car
Ambassador = Full-Size Car
Ambassador 4v = Performance Full-Size Car

In this discussion, wheelbase is paramount.

John




Yahoo! Groups Links