Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 11:47:41 -0500 From: 'nuther Bob <noemailnopsammain.com> Subject: Re: What to call the "new" 9-3 ?
On 26 Mar 2003 15:38:56 GMT, davehinznopsamcop.net wrote: >Someone who looks an awful lot like Johannes H Andersen <johsnopsamfitter.com> wrote: >>> Is there a reason we can't call the new 9-3 the "new 9-3"? The >>> name "new 900", after all, clearly enough tells everyone which car >>> we're talking about... >>> >>> Just stating the obvious, perhaps? Seems OK at first, but then we have: 900/OG900-->900/NG900-->9~3(equiv NG900)-->NG-9~3 So, if someone posts "How hard is it to change the struts in a 9-3", I'd have to say "an NG900 9-3" or an "NG 9-3" ? Maybe it works if we start calling the 9~3 the OG9-3 and the new 9~3 the NG9~3 ? SO now it's: 900/OG900-->900/NG900-->OG9~3-->NG-9~3 Bob
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
