Intersting that the Storm has a 1.6 DOHC motor yet is an ITB car. If it is well and truly based on the venerable 4A-GE Toyota motor, it's even more interesting.
Doing a little reading of the ITCS yields the following
Geo Storm GSi
1600 DOHC, 31.0/28.0 I/E, 9.8:1, 96.5", 14" or 15" wheels, 5-spd, disc/drum, 2380#
Toyota Corolla FX-16
1600 DOHC, 30.7/26.0 I/E, 9.4:1, 95.7", 14" wheels, 5-spd, disc/disc, 2445#
Both cars are FWD.
If I looked at the specs lines of these cars, there's no way I'd figure one for an ITB car and the other for an ITA car. Especially when the ITB car has: bigger valves, higher compression, can run 15" wheels (albeit 6" wide), and weighs less.
I know people that tried to get the MR2 (same engine as the FX16) bumped down to ITB, and I'm sure the same thing was tried w/ the Corolla GTS. I also know that the request fell on deaf ears.
I can't understand how on earth the Storm got classed in ITB when it is so close in almost every aspect w/ an ITA car.
Just read a MotorTrend article from 1990 on the car. 130hp Isuzu engine (also shared by the N/A Lotus Elan
). Overall review was that it was a fun, well-mannered car that did well in the twisties.
It was only slightly slower in 0-60 than a CRX Si (9.1 vs. 8.9), and over a full second quicker than a Suzuki Swift GTI (10.2).
On paper, the Storm looks like it should be a great ITB car. Can't say as I've ever seen one at the track though. Sure can't understand why it's an ITB car and the Toyota is an ITA car. Just one more example of why there needs to be a clearly defined process for classifying cars!!!!
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI