Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cisden.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!pesnta!hplabs!hao!nbires!boulder!cisden!gmack
From: gmack@cisden.UUCP (Gregg Mackenzie)
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Re: best car, worst car
Message-ID: <427@cisden.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 20-Jan-86 12:30:24 EST
Article-I.D.: cisden.427
Posted: Mon Jan 20 12:30:24 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 26-Jan-86 04:29:05 EST
References: <2800005@faust.UUCP> <1071@osu-eddie.UUCP> <385@cisden.UUCP> <211@pilchuckDataio.UUCP>
Reply-To: gmack@cisden.UUCP (Gregg Mackenzie)
Organization: ConTel Information Systems, Denver
Lines: 22

In article <211@pilchuckDataio.UUCP> ingrid@pilchuckDataio.UUCP (the Real Swede) writes:
>
>OH FLAME YOU!!!
>
>indestructable! And how and why the hell do you put Saabs and Volvos
>in the same category as the Pinto and Pacer?! I think you've been grinding
>your valves too long....yeah yeah, the 244 series Volvos were the pits;
>and those old 99 series Saabs are meant to be stayed away from--but one

For everyone who has asked me why I lump Saabs and Volvos in with Pintos
and Vegas, it's because they are ugly.  Ugly, ugly, ugly.

>model does not mean the whole make is the pits?! Why did you just say 
>Gremlin, then, and not just AMC?!

Because the Jeeps are good vehicles and the old Rebel Machine (I don't 
remember the year, '68 or '70, I think) is a good vehicle.

(UGLY!)

Gregg Mackenzie
cisden!gmack