OOH. Thanks for the education. (Saving all those back issues of Motor Trend sure comes in handy, huh?) However, some of your "facts" require correction.
1. "In fact" the Mustang was "meant to be" a way to get suckers to buy a piece of junk Falcon by putting a "sporty" body on top.
2. The ponycar breed didn't begin to improve until Chevy/Pontiac jumped in and forced the blue oval guys to evolve the Mustang into some semblance of a performance car.
3. Every Mustang guy I run into considers his car a sports car (hence, make-believe sports car).
4. I guess the Porsche 911 (4 seats) and McLaren F1 (3 seats) aren't sports cars. (Please, let's not get into the whole "GT Car" nonsense either.)
5. Cobras were powered by Ford, but they certainly weren't Fords. You certainly couldn't just go to your local Ford dealer and buy one off the floor. And the engine got a lot of help from Carroll and the boys before it went in.
6. If you want to talk about REAL HORSEPOWER, the street version of the Cobra's small block 289 had 271 horsepower while the big block 427 had 425. The '65 Vette had several engine options, but the big block 396 also put out 425 bhp and the top of the line small block 327 put out an amazing 360 horses.
GAME OVER
Yes the rating of the Ford 427 was 425 horses, but the real output was substantially higher. It is also common knowledge that Carrol Shelby reworked all the 271HP 289's supplied by Ford to a 306HP configuration in the 65-66 years. Now let me correct your 'facts' regarding the horsepower of the 65 327 Corvette...it was actually 365 HP with fuel injection. And yes they ARE awesome. BTW I've owned Corvettes, my favorite being my 66 with a 350 horse 327 (normally aspirated) but it certainly wasn't a great 'sports car', it handled like poo-poo and the front end starts to lift off the ground at around 130...
Maybe before you get so condescending with other posters you should check your 'facts' first.
You signed up today, just to be a total ass? Piss off...