<VV> Re: early vs late, again! (humor)

[airvair]

As always, Bill, you're full of **it. The reason the '64's are
considered the best early is because they had to cobble a suspension fix
on it just to tame its quirkiness. Like putting a bandage on road pizza.

With the lates, not only did they learn from the best suspension design
they had (Corvette) at the time, but the LM also lead the way in
styling, since every other GM car had to copy the LM's classic design.
Even the Camaro couldn't improve on the original LM styling.

And they didn't stop there. Sure, they might have continued to use a
"few" things like the EM air cleaner, because it worked. But they
improved on a host of other things, like the perimeter seal, the a/c
system, the (dual master) brake system, Astro bucket seats, and 4-carb
engine. Heck, just the improved servicability resulting from the LM's
perimeter seal and double U-joint suspension makes EM owners jealous.
Some have even cut up their EM just to accomodate LM suspension! I've
seen several cars and trucks like that, and not one LM with EM
suspension. That says it all.

Why you're ragging on LM's is plain to see. You're just jealous. (G)

-Mark

Bill Hubbell wrote:
> 
> Bill is ALWAYS listening.
> 
> Late model owners suffer from SPS (if you have to ask, forget it), which is
> why they are always bragging up their stuff.
> 
> The rest of us know that only the 1960 was named CAR OF THE YEAR, and that
> the 1964 represents the penultimate of Corvair Engineering before they caved
> in and stole technology from the Corvette and body styling from the upcoming
> Camaro.  Why, they couldn't even figure out a better air cleaner design than
> the 1964 so they had to keep it for the rest of the run (other than the
> changes that were forced onto them by the AIR pump).
> 
> In fact, the best argument for Early models being better than Late models is
> that the Earlies were not designed by government regulations.
> 
> Bill Hubbell (VBG)