Wound Up wrote:
>> Let's try this: when you read something that I type, just imagine a
>> bunch of smileys after every sentence. Maybe you'll sleep better,
>> you'll definitely have a lot more time for that "job search" your
>> thinks you're conducting while she's at work all day.
> I have no trouble sleeping. And be very careful with the rest of
"Sleeping" and "passing out" are not the same thing.
> I don't see many accurate facts in what you write, with
> the surprising exception of the response to that PS inquiry.
That's probably because of your severe reading comprehension problem.
I don't see you responding to much of what I write without reading into
it a bunch of stuff that just isn't there. The problem is in that
muddled mess between your ears, not in what I type on this here
> The Camaro came out before the Firebird. That's my whole point.
Liar. You had one point, and it was this: "The Firebird has always
been the 're-bodied Camaro.'" I responded that they were the same car,
developed at the same time, and that there was no "existing F body of
the Chevrolet Camaro" prior to the devopment of the Firebird. I will
give you credit for knowing that the Camaro was released 134 days prior
to the Firebird. I guess I had heard that before, but I had forgotten.
I have copied and pasted at the end of this post a paragraph from a
first gen Firebird fan site, with the particulars. It includes the
fact that Firebird development commenced in March 1966, and that at
that point the Camaro was so far along that it was just 60 days from
the start of production.
So this exchange boils down to semantics: was a
60-days-from-production Camaro an "existing F body . . . Camaro," such
that it would be accurate to call the Firebird a "re-bodied Camaro"?
Did a production Camaro exist at the time that the Firebird project
kicked off in March 1966? No. Did everything about the Firebird --
other than things like styling details, interiors, engines, and
suspension tuning -- derive from the Camaro project, as the Camaro
moved from 60 days short of production to a September 29, 1966,
roll-out? Yes. Does anybody other than a certain unemployed alcoholic
welfare queen care? No ****ing way.
>> All GM styling emanated from a central studio, so it would be
>> inaccurate to credit either division with the styling.
> Blah blah, tell me something I don't know
Ouch! Scorched again. Careful where you point that witty
flamethrower of yours, Wound Up. You might hurt somebody.
> It just galls you to be factually contradicted, doesn't it,
> Purveyor of Inaccurate Information?
Not even slightly, Wound Up. Try this: do an advanced Google Groups
search on author "180" or "Philly" and search for "thank" (as in "thank
you for the correction") or "thanks" and see how many hits you get.
There should be many. If anything could "gall" me it would be your
lying, repeatedly stating that I am rarely correct. But you're so
morally weak, stupid, and dishonest, and so persistent at revealing
these things in these groups, that it doesn't really bother me anymore.
Mostly you're just a creepy Usenet stalker. You really need to burn
that computer before it gets any worse.
P.S. Here's the quote, from
Using the same floor pan, cowl & sub frame as the Camaro and Chevy II,
the first Firebirds were known as '67 1/2's having been introduced late
in the model year. Pontiac started the F-body program in March of 1966,
forced by GM management to use the 60 day from production Camaro
engineering. Required to retain the Camaro front fenders and doors, the
Pontiac design and engineering staff, headed by John DeLorean,
transformed the F-body platform into a bonafide Pontiac. They added
Pontiac's own engine & drive trains, hood, tail panel, side marker
lights, and a one piece solid chrome combination bumper & grill "Bird
Beak". And that is how "Firebird One!" came to first arrive in dealer
show rooms on February 23, 1967. 134 days after Camaro, and 133 days
after Mercurys' new Cougar.