http://www.automotivetraveler.com/in...503&Itemid=166

http://www.pil.net/~ted/images/AMXConvert1.jpg

Like my Crossfire, (with a "steel" AMX hood) it's the only one.

Jim (AMX1397) made a very good point. I too wasn't that crazy about the Crossfire during the first year it was produced because the roof looked like the Marlin (my least favorite AMC). But after driving by one daily for several months while it sat on a raised platform on a car dealers lot, I realized it wasn't the roof line of the Marlin I didn't like, It was the fact that AMC put it on too "long" of a car. On a "Sports" car it looked great.
That's when I decided to go back and do some research in several old car magazines (that had articles on the Crossfire) and I discovered how "statistically" close the Crossfire was to an AMX. That piqued my interest enough to actually go out and drive one, and like most everyone on this forum, I was hooked.
But for me, (and probably Jim too) driving a Crossfire is so reminiscent of driving an AMX, that it was like rediscovering an old friend, only better.
Interestingly enough, since I bought my AMX brand new, I kept it mechanically "stock" for all the years I've had it, because I was perfectly satisified with its performance. So it's no wonder I purchased a "NA" Crossfire, because they perform exactly the same as the AMX.
But Jim (who raced AMX's) was more accustomed to "faster" versions of the AMX, so naturally he owns a SRT6.
Also like Jim, if Chrysler had called the Crossfire an AMX from the start, I know I would have purchased one at "sticker" price when they first came out. So actually by them not doing so, it saved me over $14000.00.