Question: I won’t bore anyone with all the details, but here are a few interesting notes. The LT1 was about $ 3500 more than the RX-7, while by far the Mustag was the cheapest. Someone previously mentioned the RX-7 only displaced something like 1.6 l compared to the Corvettes 5.7. How can a rotary engine be compared to a piston type? BTW, they get exactly the same 17 mpg.
I guess it matters which numbers you want to pick to decide which cars are better (Turbo/non Turbo, Slalom, acceleration, price, …). I do know the magazines are sometimes biased. How can Super Chevy test a ‘92 LT1 @ 13.7 while Road & Track says a ‘93 only runs 14.1 ? I think all the sports car magazines are biased against American, while I know the muscle car mags are biased against foreign. Finally, I couldn’t find any up to date info on the L-98 Vette (THE ‘91 RAN 14.3). I don’t think they put these in the Vettes any more since the LT1 ??? Finally, if I had a lot of money to spend, I would still take any of the Vettes over the others. I wouldn’t be dissapointed at all with a Mustang though.

Answer: Take all times with a grain of salt. R&T generally tries to keep the car in one piece while taking their runs, and some magazines correct to standard sea level and temperature conditions. Also, not all engines are created equal off the assembly line. This was how Ford claimed 225 for the old Mustang while it now admits that 205 is more realistic for an average example.

Related posts:

  1. TT Supra vs. C5 Corvette
  2. Camaro vs. Firebird vs. Mustang?
  3. 69 camaro vs. 69 firebird, which is better?
  4. Corvette vs Supra vs Mustang vs M3 – Stats dont lie
  5. 98 Supra vs 98 Corvette UNBIASED
  6. 98 Supra’s????
  7. Want to buy JL Audio Camaro/Firebird stealthbox?