From: alc@gdstech.GRUMMAN.COM (Al Chang)
Subject: Re: BETTER? 92 Camaro or 92 Iroc Daytona?????
Organization: Grumman Corporation
	<1992Nov5.133324.15478@swlvx2.msd.ray.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:39:54 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.133324.15478@swlvx2.msd.ray.com> hsd@swl.msd.ray.com (HERBERT DASILVA) writes:


   >I am thinking of purchasing a brand new car.  I have narrowed it
   >down to either a '92 Chevy Camaro or a '92 Dodge Iroc Daytona.
   >The Iroc Daytona I am looking at only has the 3.0 L V6.
   >As for the Camaro, it would either have a 305 ci V8 or a 3.1 L V6.
   >I think a V6 in a big Camaro would be pretty poor on power, yet
   >good on gas.
   >Anyway, I would like your opinions as to which car would be better,
   >and more importantly, which one would have a higher resale value in
   >about 3 years.  Please E-mail any responses.  It would be greatly
   >appreciated.  Thanks!!!

   >Jason

     That depends on you.  Here in New England, the Daytona is simply an all
     around better vehicle.  Better fuel economy, better traction in bad
     conditions (even with performance tires), comparable if not better
     performance than the V6 Camaro, by far better quality control and paint,

The IROC Daytona is alot faster than the V6. But definitely better all
weather handler.

     better warranty, better safety features (at least the last time I looked,
     the Camaro still had the suicide seat belts that attach to the door, the
     Daytona has conventional belts and an air bag), anti-lock brakes

The Camaro has airbags

     available on the Daytona, Daytona has a larger cargo area (with the rear
     seats folded down), Daytona will likely have a better insurance
     rating and not be on the "frequently stolen" list, and most importantly,

Alot of insurance companies won't even insure even the 100hp Daytona
let alone the IROV. My Daytona was stolen, but recovered.

Daytona has very poor insurance claims history, I didn't believe it
until I bought one. My Daytona had 3 major accidents ($7500, $3000 and
$3000) The brakes (non-ABS) locks up too easy in panic situation. I
still believe it is safe in major accidents, just that it is poor in
avoiding accidents when you don't have ABS. BTW the insurance cost
$1700 vs 900 for a Mustang w/ 5.0 liter in my case.

     you won't be viewed as just another follow-the-crowd-Camaro-owner.

     So, if the roads are always dry, gas is cheap, insurance is cheap, crime
     is low, you don't wear your seatbelt, and you like to be "just another
     face in the crowd", the Camaro is the obvious choice.

     But then again, I'm biased... :-)

I love Mopars but I think you was slightly overbiased in this case.

	   Herb "Mopar Maniac" DaSilva
--
     ---  My opinions do not represent the opinions of my employer.  ---  
******************************************************************************
Al Chang                                        email: alc@gdstech.grumman.com
Grumman Data Systems                                  Woodbury, New York 11797
******************************************************************************
-- 
     ---  My opinions do not represent the opinions of my employer.  ---  
******************************************************************************
Al Chang                                        email: alc@gdstech.grumman.com
Grumman Data Systems                                  Woodbury, New York 11797
Newsgroups: rec.autos