I did a similar essay in the fall, only i compared and contrasted 1000cc V-twin motorcycles and 750cc four-cylinders (for those of you in the know, those are the regulated maximum displacements for World Superbike competition). i like to think i kept it interesting. just throw in lots of humor, and explain everything on it's SIMPLEST terms. or example:
The SN-95 is a horrible fattening of the foxbody. outwardly they look completely different, but internally the only differences between the two are a few new frame peices and crossmembers. naturally, the SN-95 is heavier, in the same way the 1971 mustang was heavier than the previous years (1971 was the shinoda mustang—big, heavy and boatish). The SN-95 built on the Foxbody, but not in a good way. it handled only marginally better because of the foxbody being older and subjected to more wear and tear. with some $50 polyurethane bushings the foxbody is just as good.
or something. maybe compare/contrast the 4.6 to the 5.0? you could turn it into sort of a class conflict too. the venerable 5.0, the performance car of the working man, being replaced by the faceless advancement of technology, taking high-performance out of the realm of your average working stiff and into the hands of some high-dollar technophiles. or something. hell, i don't know. it's your damn essay!
