1968 Dodge Coronet Super Bee Tribute 383 V8 Automatic Green Iowa on 2040-cars

Auto blog

MotorWeek relives '80s coupes with Dodge Daytona, Ford Escort EXP

Get ready for a wave of nostalgia and the rapid realization of the huge progress in performance cars over the last 30 years. For its latest Retro Review, MotorWeek takes a look back at two, front-wheel drive coupes from the '80s that seem to have entirely vanished from the roads today. Both the 1986 Dodge Daytona CS and the 1986.5 Ford Escort EXP were considered affordable, sporty options in their day, but the passage of time hasn't been kind to either of their specs. The Daytona certainly looks the part of a performance machine with a body that's reminiscent of other '80s coupes, like the third-gen Chevrolet Camaro. However with 146 horsepower and 170 pound-feet of torque from a 2.2-liter turbocharged four-cylinder, acceleration wasn't exactly a strong suit. MotorWeek complained about copious torque steer, as well. The optional CS suspension upgrade package on this Daytona was apparently a nod to Carroll Shelby who was working with Dodge at the time. If anything, the Escort EXP withstands the test of time even worse. As a two-seat coupe, you might have expected Ford's engineers to really turn up the performance to fit the sporty image that the exterior conveyed. That didn't really happen, and depending on which model buyers ordered, they got either 86 horsepower with a 1.9-liter engine or the "high-output" version of that mill with 108 hp.

Top torque-to-weight ratios under $100k, $50k and $25k

Horsepower may steal a lot of headlines, but the always-more-complex torque figure is often a critical one for both the workingman and the motoring playboy. The measure of rotational force represents the twist that can liquefy one's tires or haul one's horse trailer. Good stuff.
It follows then, that as with the horsepower-to-weight list that we assembled for you a few months ago, a list of cars that offer the most pound-feet with the fewest pounds to carry, is an interesting one to break down. Sure, there's a big difference in how the torque is applied from a turbocharged six-cylinder in a Swedish luxury sedan and a massive heavy-duty truck's turbo-diesel. But being the car/stat geeks that we are, we think it's kinda neat that those two vehicles rank near each other where torque and weight intersect.
As with the horsepower list, we've given you figures as pounds per every one pound-foot. Again broken down into broad price categories, we've got a mixed bag of 2014 and 2015 models here, too. Every effort has been made to select the most up-to-date prices and specs, and we've also to omitted some '14 cars that won't be re-upped after the ongoing yearly changeover.

Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski  Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.