Daytona Iroc R/T Mag. Article

[DC Turismo]

http://www.stangbangers.com/93_Dodge...RT_Article.htm

Thought it was pretty neat. Enjoy

[BadAssPerformance]

Sweet!

[jeffhambone]

"Chrysler planners aren't spending many scarce development dollars on this generation Daytona when the all-new car is only a year or so away."

Assume this is a reference to the next-gen Daytona that was never built....?

[Directconnection]

as usual... they crapped on the dodge.

[TurboRon25]

"Chrysler planners aren't spending many scarce development dollars on this generation Daytona when the all-new car is only a year or so away."

Assume this is a reference to the next-gen Daytona that was never built....?

They did build it. It's called the Avenger.

Ron

[Birddog]

That article was written like the guy from Top Gear was testing the car...
Good read but it seems like the FWD performance capabilities were still being questioned. You can't hop out of a RWD car with 200+ hp and into a FWD car with 200+ HP and go with the same driving style!

"the styling of Dodge's little G body go fast toy was ahead of it's time when introduced in 1984. Eight years later, though, it's a familiar look in need of complete updating."
WTF?? Compared to what? the F-body that was born in 1982 and ran to 92? or the Fox car born in 1979 and ran till 93 with little more than facelifts?

2. "There's enough torque steer to divert a Greyhound bus"
I see nothing wrong with being able to change lanes just by stabbing the throttle!

Do you have the March '93 issue? I'd like to see how many people wrote in with gripes about the review.

[Directconnection]

I never understood the torque steer thing. My cars never did it. Maybe I am just used to them. Grab the F'n wheel like a man, and not a pooh-say with a Volvo and drive it.

[cordes]

That article sure wasn't kind to the R/T. I can't imagine the IROC Cameros and the daytonas being close in performance at all. I would have thought that the tona' would have stomped it in about every category.