[Alvin]

Originally Posted by Diego

Otherwise, I'm going to quote myself (again):

Mr. Rosenberg: The Focus here is PONTIAC not FORD! Ex: NASA vs. NACA


In your own words:

WHAT'S CORRECT - Want to know what’s the deal with the 1971 Mustang with a 351 Cobra Jet on eBay? Chances are the seller doesn’t know what he’s talking about (seen it plenty of times)…

Understandable that you would call the FORD Mustang scoops NACA. But YOUR calling the PONTIAC scoops NACA, instead of the correct NASA, can not be justified as correct just because you say so.
When talking about a FORD, I use FORD terms, NOT PONTIAC terms for a Ford vehicle or option, unless FORD used they same term as Pontiac.
Ex: RAM AIR Firebird and GTO and RAM AIR Mustang.

Perhaps one too many “Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords” articles you’ve written has blurred your correct terminology by other brands.
Topic here is P-O-N-T-I-A-C.
Again; understandable. However, when you’re presenting information you submit as “an expert information” please use a basic fact check to verify you are referring to a P-O-N-T-I-A-C. and NOT a FORD, MOPAR, AMC, etc. Disseminating incorrect information doesn’t make it correct.

Ford NACA hood scoop

Attached below are the images – and text - from the 1975 Pontiac distributed documentation referring to this option; once again; as the N.A.S.A. hood option.

From the 1975 Pontiac Performance Accessories and Packages page:

Hood Scoops (Code 681-UPC T36) Available on LeMans, LeMans Sport Coupe and Grand Am. Included in GT Package (Code 352-UPC WU2). (Below)




(Above) GT Package (Code 352-UPC WU2). Available on LeMans and LeMans Sport Coupe 2-door models only with V-8 engine and automatic transmission. Includes: GR70-15, white letter, steel-belted radial tires; Rally II wheels without trim rings; outside sport mirrors, left-hand, remote controlled; wheel opening moldings; vinyl accent stripes; N.A.S.A. hood and blacked out grille.

(Below) the 1975 Pontiac Performance Accessories and Packages page

The statements and figures herein, while not guaranteed, are secured from sources believed authoritative.
P-O-N-T-I-A-C 'Nuff Said!

[Chief Wanabee]

Apparently, the Internet is serious business.

Would like to know the number of four speed manual transmissions installed in A-bodies so we can quote a different number than 187 built.

[Don Keefe]

A little information can be a dangerous thing. Just because Pontiac called them NASA ducts in some of their factory literature does not make it correct to refer to them as such. You cannot accurately call street racing "drag racing" just because newspaper and TV reporters do not know the difference between an illegal activity and a sanctioned event.

The ad department writers erroneously referred to them as NASA ducts when in fact, they were actually developed by the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics (NACA) in 1947. NACA was the governmental ancestor of NASA. Look it up.

[Alvin]

Here you go: “Diego Sez”Again, his creation and “More fact” according to Diego Rosenberg here:

Senator Eyes Collector Cars as Revenue Source

Sorry John, thankfully this is not true.....fortunately! It was a SAAC
April Fools' Day joke gone wrong....

SAAC’s April Fool’s Spoof Angers Classic Car Lovers
[image: Diego Rosenberg]

by Diego Rosenberg <http://www.streetlegaltv.com/author/diegorosenburg/> on
April 6, 2011

0Comments<http://www.streetlegaltv.com/news/saacs-april-fools-spoof-angers-classic-car-lovers/#comments>
**

<http://www.streetlegaltv.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/10/files/2011/04/17.jpg>

Everybody likes a good joke, right? Especially when April 1st comes around!
It’s only human to enjoy a laugh, guffaw, or even a chortle, especially when
it’s due to the misfortune of others!

But an innocent joke intended for members of a car club ended up going viral
and demonstrating the power of the Internet.

When the SAAC is the Shelby-American Automobile Club <http://www.saac.com/>,
sent out their annual April Fool’s
gag<http://www.saac.com/files/newsletter/0411/news-04-01-11.pdf>,
some people posted it online for others to see. Most notable was a
semi-accurate mock-up of the front page of The New York
Times<http://www.saac.com/files/newsletter/0411/news-04-01-11.pdf>with
a headline that read
*Senator Eyes Collector Cars as Revenue Source* and an article about how
auto enthusiasts who dodge taxes are in Senator Chuck Schumer’s crosshairs.

The Internet exploded, with many
comments<http://www.realoldspower.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=75480&start=0&sid=6e13bee3ca9079d7 305f2b0929d3769f>on
various automotive websites (and even a gun site, pun not intended)
adding to the political discontent that already exists in America. “This
should make all you LIBERAL *** suckers [sic] here proud. One of your party
does it again. When the fark [sic] are you liberal lovers going to wake up
and realize the DEMOCRAPTIC [sic] party hase [sic] no shame in their game?”
said a guy from Ohio. It should be noted that even when shown evidence the
item was a gag, this guy did not stop believing it was true.

Meanwhile, in Albany, Chuck Schumer started receiving negative messages from
disgruntled car nuts from around the country. Eventually they and, in turn,
SAAC’s Rick Kopec realized something was very wrong, and Rick sent out a
message to put it all to rest:
*The Shelby American Automobile Club’s annual April Fool’s gag reached a
much wider audience that anyone could have predicted.(…more) Initially a
four-page newsletter was emailed to every member. It contained stories about
a perpetual motion ’68 Shelby, a ’69 GT350 that supposedly got 40 miles per
gallon and a bogus front page recreation of the New York Times, dated March
28th, that had two stories. One was a hoax about purported tax legislation
being prepared by Sen. Charles Schumer, which would tax every collector car,
antique, hot rod and race car in the country. This was, of course, concocted
out of thin air. But it was, on the surface, believable and it hit numerous
hot buttons of car owners.*

* *

*As soon as some SAAC members read this they immediately went into full
“Paul Revere mode,” posting the article on a wide variety of Internet car
forums. Once on those forums, readers swarmed like angry killer bees, both
posting angry comments about the unfairness of the concept and spreading
parts and pieces of the original article in emails and postings. It was the
classic definition of something “going viral.”*

* *

*When readers on some forums recognized the whole thing as an April Fool’s
joke and posted this, other readers seemed to look right past the warnings.
We now know how Orson Wells must have felt after his 1938 “War of the
Worlds” radio broadcast resulted in traffic jams as panicked people tried to
flee New Jersey.*

* *

*While we enjoy a good April Fool’s prank as much as anyone, we never
envisioned that this one could spread so quickly or so widely beyond the
Shelby American Automobile Club. We deeply regret if taking this story
seriously has caused anyone any undue distress or embarrassment. To keep
more of that from happening we would greatly appreciate it if you could
forward this message to as many car enthusiasts as possible. If they forward
it to others who can forward it to even more people, maybe this second
message will catch up with and overpower the first one.*

* *

*And finally, please do not contact Senator Schumer’s office. He already has his hands full with real issues of importance.*


…

Yeah Don, I did look this up. Here is the Diego Rosenberg NYT front page article he concocted and posted (below).

Senator Eyes Collector Cars as Revenue Source

http://socalsaac.org/pipermail/membe...ay/000227.html

[Don Keefe]

I'm sure all of this fascinating internet cutting and pasting is trying to prove some point about legitimacy of sources but for me, it is largely a waste of time and effort. To that end, I'm going to see what we can do about getting written permission to publish, not just post, some of this information so that all of the self-appointed authorities on the subject can broaden their knowledge base. Hopefully, this will encourage them to move beyond the flaming and the "my source is better than your source nonsense."

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by Don Keefe

The ad department writers erroneously referred to them as NASA ducts when in fact, they were actually developed by the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics (NACA) in 1947. NACA was the governmental ancestor of NASA. Look it up.

Hey Don, no look up needed, here are some for you though.

Since your insinuation; “LOOK IT UP” here are a some NASA projects for you to look up, in which I was personally involved, and therefore am certain existed.

I was present and resided onsite for several years while contracting and completing these Kwajalein projects. :

ERIS - Exoatmospheric Reentry-vehicle Interceptor System

Hit-to-kill missiles

the Kwajalein GPS/GT world wide final grid test, completion and World Wide grid startup.

Yeah, as part of the Prime Contract administration, I contracted (hired) all of the rocket scientists, subcontractors, support personnel, hardware, logistics, and materials.

BTW: According to PONTIAC DOCUMENTATION provided so far – it is still NASA.

Prove me wrong and submit a PONTIAC NACA document - Please! I'm done here.



.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by Don Keefe

To that end, I'm going to see what we can do about getting written permission to publish, not just post..."

Exactly, hence my originial question/request for verification.

[Don Keefe]

Alvin, see your PM I sent you.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by Don Keefe

Alvin, see your PM I sent you.

GOT IT!

[Diego]

Originally Posted by Alvin

Please! I'm done here

Somehow I don't think we've heard the last from you . . .

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by Diego

Somehow I don't think we've heard the last from you . . .

Correct! Good luck with the book launch!

Now, back to topic:
how many 1973 GA 4-spd Coupes and GA 4-door sedans were made?

BTW: Don said he was going to search for his NACA Pontiac docs to post. Bring them on - let's see them!

[Brian Baker]

Originally Posted by Don Keefe

I'm sure all of this fascinating internet cutting and pasting is trying to prove some point about legitimacy of sources but for me, it is largely a waste of time and effort. To that end, I'm going to see what we can do about getting written permission to publish, not just post, some of this information so that all of the self-appointed authorities on the subject can broaden their knowledge base. Hopefully, this will encourage them to move beyond the flaming and the "my source is better than your source nonsense."

Don, I haven't followed this verbatim, because like you, I find it tiresome, but I do have one question.

What is the issue with publishing this information? Is the information owned by GM or by someone else who may be hanging onto it for profit (ie - to publish a book)? Help me understand why sitting on 40 year old information about automobiles no longer produced, by a company no longer in business, is such a "top secret" affair.

[Chief Wanabee]

How many 1975 Grand Am four doors were made?

[Don Keefe]

Originally Posted by Brian Baker

Don, I haven't followed this verbatim, because like you, I find it tiresome, but I do have one question.

What is the issue with publishing this information? Is the information owned by GM or by someone else who may be hanging onto it for profit (ie - to publish a book)? Help me understand why sitting on 40 year old information about automobiles no longer produced, by a company no longer in business, is such a "top secret" affair.

In a nutshell, they consider it intellectual property, much like a photo. They want control of where it goes, how it is used, etc. The reality is, it's just math, but their legal people want controls on everything, so we have to jump through hoops.

[rexs73gto]

You can get most all the info you need by going to the A-BODY site & join for no cost we have most all the info you can need our site is deticated to the preservation of the 73-77 a-body & grand Am , GTO , Lemans & Grand LeMans, see you there. Lots of parts & info await.

[Diego]

This one?

http://www.abodysite.com/frameentry.html

[Brian Baker]

Originally Posted by Don Keefe

In a nutshell, they consider it intellectual property, much like a photo. They want control of where it goes, how it is used, etc. The reality is, it's just math, but their legal people want controls on everything, so we have to jump through hoops.

When you say "they" and "their", are you refering to GM?

[Don Keefe]

Originally Posted by Brian Baker

When you say "they" and "their", are you refering to GM?

Brian, yes I meant GM.

[rexs73gto]

Dieago yes thats the site.

[Diego]

I didn't see anything on your site that wasn't published already, or am I missing something?