The Celica was supposed to be a fun rear-wheel drive Japanese coupe. When they switched to front-wheel drive, the Celica I grew up loving was dead to me.

Definitely true that the DC5 Integra (RSX) was certainly a more competent car, but the Celica still held its own in the chassis/handling department. Funny also that among Honda aficionados, the DC5 doesn't have the reputation for handling that you give it. The switch to front struts and 200 lb weight gain over the DC2…

At least in the U.S., the 6th generation Celica had no performance model (unless you count the 2.2L/135hp/5S-FE). Gen 7 was also lighter and more agile than the previous version. The seventh gen was commonly regarded as possessing the best chassis dynamics in class..right up until its death. That's something I don't…

Every model listed makes sense as a spin off brand. I questioned the Kia at first, but after a bit of pondering I have to agree. With the new Canyon in Gm's portfolio, a luxo SUV version a la Hummer H3 would fit under Escalade branding quite well. Good compilation!

Viscous coupling only applies to manual trans Subies, so definitely not most.

In Ford's case, the vehicles conformed to NHTSA and EPA regs. They were imported as passenger vehicles with interiors to skirt the 25% "chicken tax" on light trucks.

So true!

The 1991 "selection" of the Caprice, with its decade old chassis and 4 year old engine, permanently destroyed any credibility Motor Trend possessed.

Just curious, considering the Boxter's power deficit vs S2000, how well do those engines wake up basic intake/exhaust/ECU upgrades? Others have mentioned aftermarket support for the Honda, but without forced induction they don't respond to bolt ons IIRC.

my apologies for the redundancy. Kinja decided to hide the later replies until after I posted :(

PatrickPm is referring to the McLaren F1 ROAD CAR...the one with 3 seats.

but that car had magic underwear!

Also, it's difficult to simulate intercooler efficiency at 200mph, and an inertia dyno would give an underestimated reading compared to what the turbo engine at full load would actually produce during a top speed run.

I believe Car and Driver achieved 197mph in a US spec version (much heavier). Pretty sure it was an owner's car, so of course not factory prepped or approved for testing.

But it's difficult to extrapolate from the figures you posted. Example: the McLaren F1 achieved a measured 243mph, but it didn't have the factory spec maximum horsepower at that speed. It was producing less than 627 at that rpm. The rev limiter was raised/disengaged for that run, so the engine speed was well beyond…

"It's because a solid front axle causes poor emissions."

So, what head/block combo won't work? Because I can think of few that haven't been done. I didn't take Andrew's post to claim a 4v swap would be identical to factory spec. I apologize if I took a sarcastic tone, but you made 2 statements that seemed questionable, if not false.

Not a Mod Motor guy, huh? Was there EVER a DOHC version that didn't utilize 4 valves/cylinder,lol? The 3 valve versions were SOHC. The Ford GT used a bespoke aluminum block ($5,000 for JUST a bare block when Ford Racing sold them IIRC) and heads at the time- although the heads were based off of the Y2K SVO Cobra R.…

No, Pantera was from Alrlington, Texas,lol! Actually, post 1988 De Tomaso Panteras used Windsors..351 and 302.

not an automaker. Those who Hennescrew themselves with one have a Lotus title as far as I know.