[this may have been discussed before, but I'm too tired to look so there...!]
What's with the 91/92s? Same engine as the previous generation, drum brakes, SF etc.
Sure seems like they weren't ready for a new Cruiser and made do there for a coupla years. What's with that? Seems more evolutionary than a new generation of vehicles. Weren't they ready with the engine or was that super conservative thinking?
So, in retrospect, do you think they made a mistake to put out the 91 and 92s as they did? Despite the undestandable possessive feeling of our early model brethren (all fine folks), I'd much prefer a later 80 model. Another reminder not to buy the first year of a new model?
hmmm...
What's with the 91/92s? Same engine as the previous generation, drum brakes, SF etc.
Sure seems like they weren't ready for a new Cruiser and made do there for a coupla years. What's with that? Seems more evolutionary than a new generation of vehicles. Weren't they ready with the engine or was that super conservative thinking?
So, in retrospect, do you think they made a mistake to put out the 91 and 92s as they did? Despite the undestandable possessive feeling of our early model brethren (all fine folks), I'd much prefer a later 80 model. Another reminder not to buy the first year of a new model?
hmmm...