1961 Ferrari 250 GT
vs.
1967 Chevy Camaro
1962 Chevy Corvette
vs.
Mazda Miata
I vote for same as Aaron.I vote for same as Hectic.
But if someone were to offer me a Miata or a mint condition 62 Corvette, the choice would be obvious.
Oh how wrong you are, Miata breath. Solid rear axle: yes. Only 250 hp: no. All '62s had a 327 ci with up to 360 hp. Over 3,000 lbs/fiberglass body: that's every Corvette; what's your point?63 was nice, but the 62 Corvette was a piece of junk. Solid rear axle, 250 hp, over 3,000 pounds and a fiberglass body.
If someone offered me a mint 62 Corvette I would accept it, but I'd immediately sell it, buy a Miata (if I didn't already have one) and invest the remaining $100k+.
Wikipedia says:Oh how wrong you are, Miata breath. Solid rear axle: yes. Only 250 hp: no. All '62s had a 327 ci with up to 360 hp. Over 3,000 lbs/fiberglass body: that's every Corvette; what's your point?
View attachment 4026
The 63-67 was a more advanced car, with mechanical fuel injection and other stuff. But if advancement is the only criteria, just buy a '90s model for cheap money, and be done with it. I think the 60-62 is the best blend of classic looks and capability.
In 1962, the Chevrolet 283 cu in (4.64 L) Small-Block was enlarged to 327 cu in (5.36 L). In standard form it produced 250 bhp (190 kW).
Nice selective quoting. Do you moonlight for Jeff Sessions?Wikipedia says:
In 1962, the Chevrolet 283 cu in (4.64 L) Small-Block was enlarged to 327 cu in (5.36 L). In standard form it produced 250 bhp (190 kW).
Nice selective quoting. Do you moonlight for Jeff Sessions?
If you go down a few more lines, you'll see this.
View attachment 4027
Oh, and I was wrong. Fuel injection was actually introduced in the 62.
Where does it say we're voting on the base model?The Madness said 1962 Corvette. It didn't specify which engine size. Base model was 250 hp, as your post shows.