Honda Car Forum

Camaros turned into doo doo in the mid 1970's and everything since then
produced by GM followed suite...

JT

(Who owns five American cars but they are all Studebakers)

1931 Studebaker President State Coupe (Q4)
1955 Studebaker President State Coupe
1955 Studebaker President State Sedan - Almost done Daily Driver
1956 Studebaker Power Hawk - Long Time Fun Car - (Will be burial
container)
1964 Studebaker Champ P/U T-6 Long Bed - Daily driver
1983 Honda Civic FE Project
1956 Leica M2




C B George wrote:
>
> Beat me to the punch Bob. I was going to comment on how few Hondas I see on
> the side of the road versus how many GM products I see on the side of the
> road.
> C B
>
> "bob" <nowhere@a.com> wrote in message
> news:5Fddd.962$sR2.796@fe61.usenetserver.com...
> > yawn.
> >
> > I pass camaro's all the time in my wimpy cr-v. They are up on lifts,
> > jacks, junkyards, on blocks, etc.. Yep, got to love those camaro's, they
> > can pass anything on the street except a service station.
> >
> >
> > "98' Camaro" <icruzn@webtv.net> wrote in message
> > news:24278-4174BC80-301@storefull-3178.bay.webtv.net...
> >> What is the deal with you Honda owners trying to take on and burn a
> >> Camaro? Do you think you will actually burn one with your wimpy
> >> 4-cylinders, as compared to a V-6 or V-8 Camaro? You guys must like
> >> getting burned- and what is the deal with reving your little 4-cylinder
> >> engines at stop lights? Are trying to sound impressive or are you just
> >> trying to keep your engine running? By the way, just in case, you DIDN'T
> >> know, adding some stickers and a spoiler to your car DOESN'T qualify as
> >> a "performance upgrade" in any way- all it REALLY does, however, is give
> >> everyone a good laugh whenever they see your joke of a car on the
> >> street.
> >>
> >> LONG LIVE THE CAMARO
> >>
> >> alt.autos.camaro
> >>
> >
> >
>

98' Camaro wrote:
> What is the deal with you Honda owners trying to take on and burn a
> Camaro? Do you think you will actually burn one with your wimpy
> 4-cylinders, as compared to a V-6 or V-8 Camaro?

Sure, with my V6 Honda.

You guys must like
> getting burned- and what is the deal with reving your little
> 4-cylinder engines at stop lights? Are trying to sound impressive or
> are you just trying to keep your engine running? By the way, just in
> case, you DIDN'T know, adding some stickers and a spoiler to your car
> DOESN'T qualify as a "performance upgrade" in any way- all it REALLY
> does, however, is give everyone a good laugh whenever they see your
> joke of a car on the street.
>
> LONG LIVE THE CAMARO
>
> alt.autos.camaro

A dying breed.

Long live the Rambler American Classic.

icruzn@webtv.net (98' Camaro) wrote in news:24278-4174BC80-301@storefull-
3178.bay.webtv.net:

> What is the deal with you Honda owners trying to take on and burn a
> Camaro? Do you think you will actually burn one with your wimpy
> 4-cylinders, as compared to a V-6 or V-8 Camaro? You guys must like
> getting burned- and what is the deal with reving your little 4-cylinder
> engines at stop lights? Are trying to sound impressive or are you just
> trying to keep your engine running? By the way, just in case, you DIDN'T
> know, adding some stickers and a spoiler to your car DOESN'T qualify as
> a "performance upgrade" in any way- all it REALLY does, however, is give
> everyone a good laugh whenever they see your joke of a car on the
> street.
>
> LONG LIVE THE CAMARO
>
> alt.autos.camaro
>

HEY, GREASEBALL, you have NO idea what a 'Powered by Honda' sticker does
for performance, so WATCH OUT!

Here's what an idiot decided to post on alt.autos.honda. I've never read
or posted on the camaro newsgroup, nor will I likely do it again, but
will you please keep your trolls in their cage?

The Camaro newsgroup can be trolled as well, and to quote someone from
the Honda newsgroup, "I pass camaro's all the time in my wimpy cr-v.
They are up on lifts, jacks, junkyards, on blocks, etc.. Yep, got to
love those camaro's, they can pass anything on the street except a
service station."

Cosmin

98' Camaro wrote:

> What is the deal with you Honda owners trying to take on and burn a
> Camaro? Do you think you will actually burn one with your wimpy
> 4-cylinders, as compared to a V-6 or V-8 Camaro? You guys must like
> getting burned- and what is the deal with reving your little 4-cylinder
> engines at stop lights? Are trying to sound impressive or are you just
> trying to keep your engine running? By the way, just in case, you DIDN'T
> know, adding some stickers and a spoiler to your car DOESN'T qualify as
> a "performance upgrade" in any way- all it REALLY does, however, is give
> everyone a good laugh whenever they see your joke of a car on the
> street.
>
> LONG LIVE THE CAMARO
>
> alt.autos.camaro
>

In case you guys are wondering, I posted that message in
alt.autos.camaro to see what those people think when they're being trolled.

Cosmin

>> LONG LIVE THE CAMARO
>>
>> alt.autos.camaro
>
>A dying breed.

Dying? Last time I checked it was a DEAD breed! Just try to go out and
buy a brand new '05 Camaro and you'll see just how dead that breed
became.

At leas the new Pony Wars have much better cars: Evolution Vs. STi

DragonRider wrote:
>
> >> LONG LIVE THE CAMARO
> >>
> >> alt.autos.camaro
> >
> >A dying breed.
>
> Dying? Last time I checked it was a DEAD breed! Just try to go out and
> buy a brand new '05 Camaro and you'll see just how dead that breed
> became.
>
> At leas the new Pony Wars have much better cars: Evolution Vs. STi



I would take issue in that the original Camaro was a better
designed/built vehicle than the Mustang. I just could have not a bit of
respect for any vehicle that incorporated the trunk floor as the top of
the gas tank...

<shudder>



--
JT

Just tooling through cyberspace in my ancient G4

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:35:50 GMT, Grumpy au Contraire
<Grumpy@doofis.FAKEcom> wrote:


>I would take issue in that the original Camaro was a better
>designed/built vehicle than the Mustang. I just could have not a bit of
>respect for any vehicle that incorporated the trunk floor as the top of
>the gas tank...

I figure there were a number of reasons the Mustang beat it. These
included ease of getting in and out as well as outward visibility. The
smaller overall size (real or imagined) and real storage area. One
might recall that the majority of Mustangs were V6's and that of those
the bulk went to ladies as owners and the rest to rental fleets. The
Camaro may have been faster, and it may have done some things better,
but in day to day use it fell short and the lack of sales reflected
that.

DragonRider wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:35:50 GMT, Grumpy au Contraire
> <Grumpy@doofis.FAKEcom> wrote:
>
> >I would take issue in that the original Camaro was a better
> >designed/built vehicle than the Mustang. I just could have not a bit of
> >respect for any vehicle that incorporated the trunk floor as the top of
> >the gas tank...
>
> I figure there were a number of reasons the Mustang beat it. These
> included ease of getting in and out as well as outward visibility. The
> smaller overall size (real or imagined) and real storage area. One
> might recall that the majority of Mustangs were V6's and that of those
> the bulk went to ladies as owners and the rest to rental fleets. The
> Camaro may have been faster, and it may have done some things better,
> but in day to day use it fell short and the lack of sales reflected
> that.



Uh, I don't think that V6's were a factor in the 1960's or a good
portion of the 1970's for that matter...



--
JT

Just tooling through cyberspace in my ancient G4

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:04:24 GMT, Grumpy au Contraire
<Grumpy@doofis.FAKEcom> wrote:

>
>
>DragonRider wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:35:50 GMT, Grumpy au Contraire
>> <Grumpy@doofis.FAKEcom> wrote:
>>
>> >I would take issue in that the original Camaro was a better
>> >designed/built vehicle than the Mustang. I just could have not a bit of
>> >respect for any vehicle that incorporated the trunk floor as the top of
>> >the gas tank...
>>
>> I figure there were a number of reasons the Mustang beat it. These
>> included ease of getting in and out as well as outward visibility. The
>> smaller overall size (real or imagined) and real storage area. One
>> might recall that the majority of Mustangs were V6's and that of those
>> the bulk went to ladies as owners and the rest to rental fleets. The
>> Camaro may have been faster, and it may have done some things better,
>> but in day to day use it fell short and the lack of sales reflected
>> that.
>
>
>
>Uh, I don't think that V6's were a factor in the 1960's or a good
>portion of the 1970's for that matter...

In the 60's and 70's there were still Camaro's.. In the '60's there
were still Camaro's worth buying!