https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMNvV93qifA
This review is pretty spot on. Casual car enthusiasts thought these were really cool but in reality they weren't that great.
RCR: 91 Dodge Stealth R/T AWD
Re: RCR: 91 Dodge Stealth R/T AWD
https://www.caranddriver.com/archives/n ... rison-test
So how heavy was the twin turbo AWD Stealth?
Other info. These cars were like $30-$36k depending on which we are talking about. A 92 Corvette was around $34k, had 300 hp (from an N/A V8) and ran 14.1 @ 102. And probably had brakes that didn't fade after the first lap. Just to keep everything in perspective, in case someone remembers the Stealth/3000GT twin turbo AWD super fondly in terms of performance but a same-year Corvette is just "meh" while probably being cheaper and most likely more reliable than these cars. Plus, V8. And ZF 6-speed manual.
To be clear, I like the 300ZX and it most likely drives in a more refined manner than a C4. However I think the Stealth/3000GT VR4 are just POSs. Always have.
So how heavy was the twin turbo AWD Stealth?
Well for starters the more sports-car-like 300ZX was 200 lbs more than a Corvette.There's a notable size difference between the two coupes, too. The Z rides on a 96.5-inch wheelbase and measures 169.5 inches from nose to tail. It doesn't look it, but it's a hefty car, weighing 3570 pounds—about 200 pounds more than a Corvette. The Stealth is even heftier. Mounted on a 97.2-inch wheelbase, it's about two inches wider and a full eleven inches longer overall than the Z. And it's more than 250 pounds heavier—the price to be paid for carrying the extra length and four-wheel drive.
Good lord - about as heavy as a BMW 735i?? I am going to remember that forever.Despite the Stealth's weight (about as much as a BMW 735i), it charges to 60 mph in just 5.2 seconds and trips the quarter-mile lights in 14.0 seconds at 98 mph. That's even better than the performance we measured with a pre-production car last October; our technical director attributes the progress to a strong production car and a more aggressive launch during testing.
The lighter 300ZX Turbo is even quicker. It reaches 60 mph in just 5.0 seconds and flashes through the quarter-mile in 13.7 seconds at 102 mph. This car proved to be the fastest Z we've ever tested.
Other info. These cars were like $30-$36k depending on which we are talking about. A 92 Corvette was around $34k, had 300 hp (from an N/A V8) and ran 14.1 @ 102. And probably had brakes that didn't fade after the first lap. Just to keep everything in perspective, in case someone remembers the Stealth/3000GT twin turbo AWD super fondly in terms of performance but a same-year Corvette is just "meh" while probably being cheaper and most likely more reliable than these cars. Plus, V8. And ZF 6-speed manual.
To be clear, I like the 300ZX and it most likely drives in a more refined manner than a C4. However I think the Stealth/3000GT VR4 are just POSs. Always have.
Re: RCR: 91 Dodge Stealth R/T AWD
That was R&T. Evidently C&D got 13.6 @ 104.kevm14 wrote:Other info. These cars were like $30-$36k depending on which we are talking about. A 92 Corvette was around $34k, had 300 hp (from an N/A V8) and ran 14.1 @ 102.
Some info on pricing and options: https://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/sp ... 2prod.html
You could easily option up a C4 to 300ZX Twin Turbo pricing, FWIW. But if you consider that in the early 90s, these Japanese performance vehicles started out around Corvette pricing, they escalated quickly through the mid to late 90s. Not so much because they were vastly more expensive than the Corvette, but because cheap speed was available as soon as the new LT1 went down-market into an F-body. I know there is no comparison to driving an RX-7 or Supra compared to a 4th gen F-body but in terms of performance/dollar, there is ALSO no comparison. And from what I recall, no one really talked about how nice those cars were to drive (maybe with the exception of the RX-7). All people talked about was speed and how many turbos each one had.