Seating Capacity______________2___________________2_______ _________

Wheel Base__________________97"_________________94.5"___ __________

FR.Track____________________59.7"________________5 8.3"_____________

R.Track_____________________57.0"________________5 8.2"_____________

Length______________________177.2"_______________1 59.8"____________

Height______________________51.7"________________5 1.4"_____________

Ground Clearance____________5.29"________________4.9"____ __________

Curb Weight________________3035 lbs._____________3084 lbs.__________

Weight Distribution F/R,%_____57/43________________54/46_____________

Trunk Space cu.ft.____________9.6__________________7.6________ ______

Turns Lock to Lock____________3.8__________________3.1__________ ____

Turning Circle________________33.5'_________________32.9__ ___________

Engine Compression Ratio______10.2:1________________10.0:1__________

SAE. H.P.____________________225__________________215__ ___________

Frontal Area sq.ft.____________20.6__________________20.6______ ______

Final Drive Ratio_____________3.15:1________________3.27:1____ _______

Body Construction____________Unitized_______________Uni tized_________

Steering___________________recirculating ball________recirculating ball___

Braking 60-0 m.p.h.__________115'__________________114'________ _____

Automatic Trans. Performance__Motor Trend____________Motor Trend_____
30 m.p.h.___________________2.9 sec.________________2.5 sec.________
60 m.p.h.___________________6.9 sec.________________7.1 sec.________
1/4 mile time & speed_______15.2 sec. 92 mph._____ 15.18 sec. 96 mph._

Manual Trans. Performance____Car & Driver____________Car & Driver_____
30 m.p.h.___________________1.9 sec.________________2.1 sec.________
40 m.p.h.___________________3.1 sec.________________3.5 sec.________
50 m.p.h.___________________4.5 sec.________________4.7 sec.________
60 m.p.h.___________________6.6 sec.________________6.5 sec.________
70 m.p.h.___________________8.5 sec.________________8.2 sec.________
80 m.p.h.___________________10.7 sec._______________10.2 sec._______
90 m.p.h.___________________13.5 sec._______________13.1 sec._______
100 m.p.h.__________________16.3 sec._______________16.1 sec._______
1/4 mile time & speed_______14.8 sec. 95 mph._________14.8 sec. 96 mph_

Modified ??? vs SRT-6_____13.18 sec. 107 mph.______13.3 sec. 107.5 mph___

 

My guess is that car "a" is a Porsche Boxster (non "s"), and car "b" is a Crossfire Limited...

 

2nd car is crossfire, 1st car is???

 

pontiac solstice and the mx-5 miata.

 

Actually i did not pay any attention to the recirculating ball steering, so i guess its the clk 320 and crossfire, which is the shorter one.

 

Ahhh who the heck knows what the first one is.

 

Google wants to tell me that the first one is a 1961 Chevy Corvette C1, and from just looking at the 2nd I'd say it's the crossfire.

**Edit, all the stats still don't match.

**Edit #2: Now it says 1968(1/2) AMX 2-door.

http://www.socalamx.net/AMXinfo/
http://www.amxfiles.com/amx/motor_trend2.html

 

I just noticed your username...makes sense now, haha.

 

The AMX was a nice looking car. I believe it had the 390 cu. in. motor, didn't it?

 

Congratulations "On the Wings of Crossfire" great detective work. I should have said this wasn't an open book quiz...LOL...but that's OK. (I am surprised my user name didn't give it away)
Actually I had reservations about starting the thread, because I wasn't sure if the good people of the XF Forum would be receptive to such a controversial analogy. But thanks to an astute observation made by "JUDDZ" in a post #30 from another thread, (I hope Chrysler drops the XF soon) I decided now was as good of a time as any to let the cat out of the bag, and stir things up a bit. Besides, everybody on the forum seems to be pretty "open minded" so I figured, "what the heck".
The most significant point that stood out to me in this comparison, (even though they're over 35 years apart) is how so very similar these two cars still are, "statistically" speaking that is.
I mean except for its length, every other vital statistic of these two cars is practically duplicated, right down to it's braking from 60 mph. and its acceleration to 100 mph. But what is truly amazing is that the Crossfire accomplishes the very same performance as the AMX, using an engine 1/2 its size.(195 cu.in. vs 390 cu.in.) and does so without the help of Forced Induction! On the other hand, even though the XF is currently one of the quickest stopping cars on the planet, the AMX was able to nearly match it in a 1970 M.T. road test using an archaic disc/drum arrangement, on narrow E-70-14" "hard rubber" tires, without anti-lock!
Even though there are only a few shared styling cues between the two cars, neither car will ever be confused for the other. But there is no denying the Crossfires fastback roofline is a throw back to a classic AMC design. Albeit, not that of the AMX, but AMC just the same.
Now since Chrysler has owned the AMX logo ever since they purchased AMC back in 1987, I personally don't understand why they didn't just call it the AMX in the first place. After all, essentially that's just what it is, an AMX for the new Millennium. Besides, Chrysler never hesitated at using other former AMC name plates in the past, like SST, EAGLE, SPIRIT or Concord. AMX originally stood for, American Motors eXperimental. If Daimler Chrysler had used it instead of Crossfire, it could have stood for, A MOPAR eXperimental, or A MERCEDES eXperimental just as easily.
Now I know this entire thread is simply going to be dismissed by some forum members as the "rantings" of a misguided old guy, and that's OK, I can live with that. But I do hope some of you see it as the way it was intended, just to point out some remarkable similarities between two cars, built decades apart. Now is it really that hard to imagine that the Crossfire just might be the very car the AMX could have turned into, especially if you take into consideration, evolution and corporate inbreeding?

 

I worked on a george barris amx from some old tv show called Banacek. It was quite a cool car.
It was also called the amx-400.

http://www.amx-perience.com/motor_trend_december.htm

The one at the bottom of the page. I must say fixing the hood was a pain in the as*.

 

You wanna type that all again? ROFL. Just kidding!

 

here is one from our shop.

http://www.totallyautoinc.com/cars.html

 

Stryfox...Thanks for listing the web site showing the Banacek custom AMX. I missed it when it made it's television debut, but I finally got to see it for real at an all AMC car show held in Livonia Mich. during Woodward Ave. weekend.
Is that your restoration shop (Totally Auto's Shop) or do just work for them? All I know is the car really looked good when I saw it. You guys do really nice work.

 

Great thread! I owned a new 1969 Javelin SST with the 390/4 speed (Bittersweet Orange). I ordered it from AMC through the Navy Exchange in Taiwan and had it delivered to my next assignment in Italy. I still have the photos with my wife standing next to it, near the beach. Thanks for reminding what a fun car it was, especially in Europe.

John

 

Thanks, I am the shop foreman, I do most of the body and paint also, we did not restore the amx-400 just fixed it up. If memory serves me I had to reshape the hood due to some old transportation damage and repaint the lighter color on the car. I think I still have one of the wiper delete panels from it. Which was nothing more than a painted fence bolt with masking tape wrapped around it to stay in the cowl. Then again barris built them to Look good!
I was a unique car, it had to be at least 5 years ago.

 

I'm surprised the 60-0 braking performance was that strong on the AMC. I figured cars back then didn't brake nearly as well.

 

Oh they made some good stoppers back then but they would fade much quicker than today's performance brake setups.
Mopar even had some 4 piston setups.

 

Slaps76, You're absolutely right, "most cars" back then didn't, the AMX did. Actually in 1969 or 1970, the only American car that stopped quicker was a Boss Mustang, and the magazine road test attributed it to the fact that the Boss had F-60-15s vs the AMXs E-70-14s.

 

Stryfox, If you go back to "On the Wings of XFs" #7 post and punch up the AMX files web site, the first thing you will see is a reprint of Motor Trends
debut road test of the 1968 AMX. In it there is an interesting paragraph that specifically addresses the fade issue.
The AMX came with "twin" piston disc brakes, is that what you meant when you said some Mopars had 4 piston?