This week’s Thursday Twister, is brought to you by Andy L who writes: In your hours and hours spent browsing through car ads, have you
ever thought to yourself: why didn’t this car maker put this engine or
transmission in this model? It would have been amazing! For example,
why was a 350 unavailable with a manual transmission in the 3rd Gen
IROC/TransAm? Of course, the book answer is that the T-5 was too weak
to hold the torque of the 350, and the real reason may have been that
such a car would have come danger-close to besting the vette.
Strangely, the GNX and 89 Turbo T/A more or less broke the GM “nobody
beats the Vette” rule, and the Gen 4 Z/28 and Trans Am was on an even
par with entry level Corvettes.
Perhaps the same forces kept
the Fiero from getting the Quad 4 or hanging around and getting the 3.1
turbo found in the 89 MacLaren Grand Prix, but wouldn’t they have been
sweet options? There was no such protectionism going on at
Ford during this time. Why, then was a world-beating Yamaha V-6 only
found in the Taurus grocery getter? I am sure there are clearance and
strength limitations that kept this mill out of a 2-door or AWD Tempo,
even though Mazda was able to produce a run of AWD, turbo 323s at the
same time. And imagine if the mid-engined SHOgun Festiva would have
become a production vehicle!
Other examples of missed
opportunities, or at least theoretical possibilities, seem to present
themselves in hindsight. Why was there no Supercoupe engine available
in a Mustang? Couldn’t a Camry V6 fit into a MR2? Did the Neon SRT-4
have to be a 4-door? Porsche really couldn’t fit a GT3 engine and
limited slip differential into a Cayman? Can you think of
any other examples of engine/chassis that could have come together like
Legos to create a legend, or at least something more interesting?
So, for today’s Twister, you (the reader) are going to help build a list of the best factory cars that SHOULD have been built. Comments below.
Standard Twister rules…don’t apply. Have at it!