That thing is STILL faster than a 4 cylinder Fox body Mustang.
I think the term 'cheating' needs to be defined here. I could be wrong, but I would think Tony means, and I would agree, that slapping a powerglide behind a high power 335 would be cheating if the only goal is to claim the quickest E.T. as a vendor. If vendor X has a fully prepped drag car and says, "look, our turbos can do 9s, while vendor Y is stuck in the 10s", then I would be less partial to vendor X.
In the same vein, while I know Tony has said he won't do stock motor testing any more, I hope he doesn't begin to make HP @ boost level claims using his motor. I think vendors should follow GAPP - generally accepted performance practices - i.e. HP @ boost claims should be on a stock head/cam motor. Figured that's a good enough term since everyone loves that freakin term when racing now. :barf
I don't necessarily agree with part of this. A vendor can test their products on whatever car or engine build they want. I don't think it's the vendors job to spoon feed a community common sense knowledge that gains would be less in a stock unmodified engine compared to a built ported and etc engine.
The community/consumer has a job to do too. And research and learn a bit for themselves.
Now, what I do agree with is no vendor should hide mods of a build for advertising purposes.
This here is just a general statement. And not directed towards anyone. But, this also goes inline with people tending to feel they are entitled to having certain information about certain things when it's truly none of their business