We need a definition of a street car to fairly determine which is the Fastest American Street Car-
Is it price? An argument could be made for reasonable pricing, but that doesn't define what a street car is. So price is too narrow a criteria for our "street car" definition.
Is it construction? Again, too narrow a criteria. Who cares if its got a carbon fiber tub, (Enzo) or a bird cage tube frame,(old Maserati) square tube steel, (Viper) aluminum, (ZO6) aluminum tube and cast nodes, (Ford GT) etc. If it can run on the street legally, its a street car regardless of the construction method.
Is it the model run quantity? Some would argue that if its not mass produced, its not a real street car, practically speaking. But if thats a criteria, then where do we draw the line? Restrict models made in quantities of less than 20,000 a year? You would have to rule the Viper out. How many are made can't be the criteria. As little a model run as a few hundred seems to qualify in the publics' mind, as in the Enzos' and McClaren F1s' case. A car stands on its merits, aside from its numbers.
I think the only useable definition for the Fastest American street car would be if it is street legal in the USA, and is made here. That would include uncomfortable, loud, rough riding cars with little or no creature comforts, and even poor build quality. Comfort for the driver is subjective, and not quantifiable, and has no bearing on top speed. What is comfortable or quiet for one person could be despised as cushy, or comprimised by another. Anyway, factors like comfort, build quality, noise, etc, are not what makes a car the fastest. So to exclude any American car because of factors like noise, or a rough ride is not allowed.
Its not a contest of which car is the best all-around performer, or which has the best combination of comfort and power, nor does it have anything to do with which car looks the best, has the best quarter mile time, 0-60 time, etc...
Its simply which car is the fastest in a straight line.
And when you look at how narrow a criteria that is, you begin to realize that the highest top speed is not exactly what you need in a great sports car.
And by the time you realize this, you've probably got at least a couple of gray hairs.
Edmunds took a bashing for evaluating the ZO6 higher than the Ford GT and the Viper. They had a very specific way of evaluating the cars, (price was 20% weight), and the overallwinner was chosen because it excelled in the widest possible range of parameters. But does that make you want to buy one? No, it doesn't.
Which brings me to my last point.
There is another way to evaluate a sports car, and that is its emotional appeal, its street presence, its sensuality. A fine sports car can't be driven by everyone, because its too provacative, like having a **** date by your side in public, some guys just can't stand being looked at. There is a very elemental human desire to be the center of attention, and attract women. This criteria never seems to show up on evaluation forms. So buy what you want, whatever will make you happy, and screw the reviews!
