As Gary pointed out, one that was prepared to comparable condition with the
other cars in the test. I don't have the article in front of me, so I can't
quote from it. But I remember that GRM admitted that the 2000 was not in prime
condition, while several of the others were pretty fully autocross-prepared.
jdg1 wrote:
> Gordon,
>
> You usually are precise in your word selection -- so -- what do you mean by
> "truly representative 2000"?
>
> Jerry
>
> '69 2000 ( I'm wondering)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gordon Glasgow <glasgow@serv.net>
> To: Datsun Roadsters <datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 1999 10:38 PM
> Subject: Re: GRM Test
>
> > While I basically agree with Gary that it sure would have been nice to
> have
> > a truly representative 2000 in the comparison test, I can't criticize GRM
> > very much overall. They have done two previous Vintage Views articles on
> > Datsun roadsters (May 1989 and Nov/Dec 1993), which is two more than any
> > other magazine has done!
> >
> > Gary Boone wrote:
> >
> > > Datsun Roadster List & Grassroots Motorsports Magazine,
> > > There was a recent thread on the Datsun Roadster List regarding an
> > > attempt to get more attention, respect, and value for the Datsun
> > > roadsters. There was also some mention of a thought to get Grassroots
> > > Motorsports Magazine (GRM) to give the Datsun roadster some attention.
> > > GRM had a great comparison test of several makes of roadsters from
> > > different makes and vintages, which included a '69 Datsun 2000. It was
> > > GRM's March/April 1998 issue. The comparison test was for best...
> >
> > --
> > Gordon Glasgow
> > Renton, WA
> > http://www.gordon-glasgow.org
> >
> >
--
Gordon Glasgow
Renton, WA
http://www.gordon-glasgow.org
|