Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2019 6:54:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tubbs on Dec 6, 2019 8:21:13 GMT -5
easy, cause its short 2 cylinders.
|
|
|
|
Post by tubbs on Dec 6, 2019 8:27:42 GMT -5
really??
now that I have lost 30 seconds of my life looking at that car. it would be totally rude but sorry, if I saw that at a show, I wouldn't stop to look at it, i'd just want to ask the question "why"!
and the title says "cause he could" doesn't mean he should. it would be so much better if he would have just stuck with even a 340.
my apologies. I just call it the way I see it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2019 13:21:14 GMT -5
I'm not an opponent of, or proponent of, the Slant Six. I am, however, a staunch supporter of any MOPAR that turns 10.xx second quarter mile times.
|
|
|
|
Post by BUCKY on Dec 6, 2019 13:33:53 GMT -5
Two less cylinders means less weight to propel down the track!! LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by BUCKY on Dec 6, 2019 13:36:13 GMT -5
.........and I'm diggin' the side stripes with the "225" call-outs!  |
|
