View Single Post
Old 04-27-2018, 01:36 PM   #420
Tcoat
Senior Member
 
Tcoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Drives: 2020 Hakone
Location: London, Ont
Posts: 69,841
Thanks: 61,656
Thanked 108,295 Times in 46,456 Posts
Mentioned: 2499 Post(s)
Tagged: 50 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoni View Post
i think the premise that the ae86 was inferior is off base. by todays standards its trash but at the time, it cost more than a mustang gt. it wasnt a cheap car and it did well performance wise. a 1.6 liter making 110-130 hp while that cheaper mustang was making 210 out of a 5.0 was pretty impressive. i think the philosophy of the two cars is very much in line. i dont know how many people in this thread have actually owned both but i can see the dna.
No doubt the performance versions of the AE86 were pretty scarce but so were the performance versions of the Mustang. When comparing the two it has to be remembered that most people's exposure back then would be the far, far more common base models. As I have said before I know nothing of the AE but have little doubt that the base model would have blown the doors off the base Mustang in all aspects of performance. The base and intermediate models of the Foxbody Mustang sucked so bad that they almost killed the model for good.
__________________
Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar, because Racecar.
Tcoat is offline   Reply With Quote