home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.autos
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!jec326.its.rpi.edu!kokerj
- From: kokerj@jec326.its.rpi.edu (James Matthew Kokernak)
- Subject: Re: Why is US engine technology so retrograde?
- Message-ID: <xxn3hll@rpi.edu>
- Nntp-Posting-Host: jec326.its.rpi.edu
- Reply-To: kokerj@rpi.edu
- Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
- References: <1993Jan15.173353.16295@newsgate.sps.mot.com> <1993Jan20.022407.9567@en.ecn.purdue.edu> <IfLw32G00ioW8Ns6J6@andrew.cmu.edu> <4606@unisql.UUCP>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 14:56:29 GMT
- Lines: 13
-
- In article <4606@unisql.UUCP>, wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:
- |> In article <IfLw32G00ioW8Ns6J6@andrew.cmu.edu> jyri+@CMU.EDU (Jyri Virkki) writes:
- |> >Large engines tend to be sluggish and low revving, thus no fun at all
- |> >on a sports car.
- |>
- |> Yeah, like those 427's they used to put in Cobras, or the 454
- |> in my old girlfriend's Chevelle SS, or those Corvette engines, or the
- |> 383 I had in my long-lamented Charger... No fun at all, nope...
- |>
- |> wr
-
- There is a big difference between a sports car and a muscle car. I`d have
- trouble finding an American made sports car. I don't think there are any.
-