Instead of waiting, how about researching yourself before making these claims? Motorweek test of the 1985 Corvette for 13.9 1/4 mile, official Callaway stats for top speed, SCCA autocross records show a ‘91 C4 winning the solo championship vs C6s. ‘85 to ‘87 examples have fared even better, but the BCA Corvette was…

Of out-handling the Ferrari 328GTS and 911 enough to get banned from showroom stock racing? Of winning national autocross championships until quite recently? Of turning a 13.9s quarter mile 31 years ago while being far more reliable and cheaper than the non-shitboxes that couldn’t? Let’s not forget the shitbox…

Definitely an automatic.

Wow, those were some capable shitboxes!

refuse to learn

Hoped it would be something bold and original and ‘Cadillac,’ expected some different take on the Escalade, got something that was really neither.

What made Cadillac cool was the middle finger it gave to progress and competition in the name of comfort and tradition, and I doubt that identity would find a target market…

The irony of this question.

The Z was really more of a touring car whereas the Vette was built from the ground up to totally reinvent the image and do away with the “cruiser” perception of the later C3s. In 1984, the Z51 smashed handling records in testing. With more power in ‘85, performance was enough to make Porsche and Ferrari throw a bit of…

But it wouldn’t have outpaced it on track; in fact, the opposite happened.

I’m more an early C4 guy, just for the character factor and original design really. Antennas and shocks actually aren’t bad; regular old shocks are what they come with, with coilover upgrades out there if you’re feeling the need for them. I spent about $220 all told for 4 KYBs. Wanted to do Bilsteins but that’s down…

So basically fuck people who have it tough and keep them away from me! is reasoning for passing on/buying a car. Someone spouting off about black-on-black crime is not going to keep me from driving a ‘64 Cadillac Series 62 convertible because of some purple-robed pimp stereotype (outdated analogy but it does the job).…

Lingenfelter I believe.

“A little more” than $5,000 for a good L98 driver for a Stingray “that you can fix up?” That will then look pretty after 5 times the investment but have its ass kicked in every measurable and immeasurable way behind the wheel by the cheap C4? Ok then.

I’ll put up with the people shouting “poser” for that.

Japanese sports cars at that time were built so well, though. They just didn’t spare any cost and it showed. There were other factors in the US pricing (exchange rate, cache at the time, etc), but the quality of Supras and Z32s really is impressive in today’s market.

I don’t know where the 3,800 is from. They start running out of steam at 4,500, sure, but you’re doing it wrong if shifting before then. A 5.0 Mustang (I assume you mean Foxbody) might be a problem if you’re granny shifting like that. Dubious even then.

That you can appreciate that a well-engineered sports car with what it takes to still do well on track and in autox 32 years later can be had for under $5,000?

Even as the person who’d be in the Corvette’s corner here...

A ZR-1 never cost anywhere near $33,600. This reminds me of the time Matt Farrah did a Corvette vs Nissan comparison...

Well I just checked and I’m not wearing a trucker hat! I mean, the engines were made there and I wanted to show the irony of people buying the Corvette to support towns such as Flint only to have them destroyed in one fell swoop by GM in the end. I’m not so sure either.

I happen to know that’s Doug Nash Vineyards Chateau 4+3, Grady!

I’m thinking that massive lump hanging out in the rear makes up for the lack of grip from whatever tires they were putting on. They were also super light then and had some power. Evolution over 20 years worked well for the 911 from ‘63 to ‘83... and not so well for the Corvette. Then revolution worked well for the…