jeff@oblio.UUCP (Jeff Buchanan) (03/05/85)
>Are you for real Dennis? Gee, I feel just terrible when I think of all the >Porsches, 280Zs, BMWs, and other put-put cars I've blown away with my >427 Corvette, and I DIDN'T MEET EMISSION STANDARDS!! Oh my God! Not only >that, but I wasn't even getting good gas mileage!! (as those cars were becoming >specs in my rear view mirror). Sure glad there are guys around to remind >me that performance is the least important measure of a car. In fact, Dennis is for real. I believe the point he's making is that you're comparing apples and oranges. You can compare Corvettes vs. Porsches, but make sure that BOTH CONFORM TO THE SAME STANDARD. If you don't conform to EPA, then make your comparison to a Porsche that doesn't either. Or if you want to compare to stock BMW's, get an EPA certificate for your car. Performance certainly is not the least important measure (at least not to me, and probably not to Dennis either). However, I know of several VW Beetles that could probably give you at least a very good race, if not blow your doors off. (They don't pass EPA either... :-) ) I may be wrong, though --- maybe your 'vette does do sub-9-second 1/4-miles... \tom haapanen watmath!watdcsu!haapanen Dear Tom, Wrong again as usual. The cars I'm comparing DO conform to the same standard. They are all street driven cars. I drive my car on average 20 miles a day, just as the mentioned cars are. Your mistake is choosing the wrong standard. If someone decides to weaken their engine with smog pumps and make other adjustments to meet the arbitrary standards of the EPA, that's their business. They can expect to get their doors blown. For the most part, I am talking about street legal cars that did meet government standards the year they were produced. Your comparison to a VW Beetle is comparing apples to oranges. Sub-9 second VW's do exist, but they are trailered to the race track and their slicks never touch a residential street. Also, they don't have VW engines, blown hemi's are the norm for the cars you cite. Now that I've made my point that there is absolutely no reason for not comparing a street legal/street driven car of 1969 vintage to one produced in 1985, let me say that I would never race a late model car on the street. This is because there is no thrill beating a car that has purposely been designed to produce tiny amounts of horsepower. The fastest of todays' cars fall into that catagory (Porsche 928 and Ferrari 308 GTS, for example). They aren't really all that slow but my one experience with such a car was against a 928 when I was driving my 1984 Corvette. It was a virtual tie. Thing is, I could pull two spark plug wires off the motor in my 1966 Corvette and still turn a faster time than my 1984. Furthermore, I'm not even saying that the government should or should not have forced the auto manufactures to destroy the horsepower that used to be available from the factory 20 years ago. I'm simply making an observation, so if you choose to call that a comparison, fine. But the EPA standards are arbitrary when you consider the REAL health hazards that the EPA purposely choose NOT to go after. Jeff
haapanen@watdcsu.UUCP (Tom Haapanen [DCS]) (03/07/85)
In article <284@oblio.UUCP> jeff@oblio.UUCP (Jeff Buchanan) writes: >Wrong again as usual. The cars I'm comparing DO conform to the same standard. >They are all street driven cars. I drive my car on average 20 miles a day, >just as the mentioned cars are. Your mistake is choosing the wrong standard. >If someone decides to weaken their engine with smog pumps and make other >adjustments to meet the arbitrary standards of the EPA, that's their business. >They can expect to get their doors blown. Jeff, take a look at any reasonable sanctioned race series. They have separate classes for 'showroom stock' and 'modified'. If you do work on your car, it no longer is stock, and hence you end up being in a different class. Yes, they are apples and oranges. Or is a street-legal 935 in the same class as you? >For the most part, I am talking >about street legal cars that did meet government standards the year they >were produced. Your comparison to a VW Beetle is comparing apples to >oranges. Sub-9 second VW's do exist, but they are trailered to the race >track and their slicks never touch a residential street. Also, they >don't have VW engines, blown hemi's are the norm for the cars you cite. Wrong again as usual. [ :-) ] There are *many* street-driven VWs out there that can do the quartermile in the 9-second range. They don't have blown hemis either; they usually run VW engines (no *real* VW enthusiast will but a water-cooled engine in a Bug) in the 2-litre to 2.4 litre range, frequently turbo'd and occasionally with nitrous. And they do blow rat-motored Corvettes off the stoplights. >This is because there is no thrill beating a car that has purposely been >designed to produce tiny amounts of horsepower. Fine, Jeff, fine. To each his own... >But the EPA standards are arbitrary when you consider the >REAL health hazards that the EPA purposely choose NOT to go after. AMAZING! Jeff, we actually agree on something! EPA's and Environment Canada's hypocrisy (sp?) really makes me puke. Incidentally, where are you going to get gas for your '66 when the new laws come into effect? I won't have the problem since I intend to sell my car in order to make a trip to Europe this summer [ :-( and :-) ], but I'm sure there are a h*ll of a lot of people out there with high-performance engines (be they rat Chevys, blown VW flat-fours or BMW 2002tii's). \tom haapanen watmath!watdcsu!haapanen Don't cry, don't do anything No lies, back in the government No tears, party time is here again President Gas is up for president (c) Psychedelic Furs, 1982
hkr4627@acf4.UUCP (Hedley K. J. Rainnie) (03/11/85)
Sorry, but a sub-9-second VW powered street bug? I assume the timing was done in a driveway.