This is one of those rare occasions when I don't agree with you
Henry. No doubt deliberate shifting is the answer to longevity, and
no doubt the cost of not shifting deliberately should modify
behavior. But it doesn't. There are those folks that can get around a
track pulling everything out of a car without grinding a gear. And
those that can't. You see it at every level of racing--the people
with mysterious mechanical sympathy that never break anything but
still stand on podiums, and the mid-pack folks that can break the
ears off a brass donkey. It's a talent, it's not a conscious decision.
The TR gearbox is painfully fragile and very expensive to optimize.
There's fewer of them every day (it's like COBOL programmers--
thousands will die this year). Even when you have a really superbly
assembled TR box it's life-span in even a 140 HP TR is relatively
short, and there's no useful new parts.
IMNSHO the idea is to keep racing these cars, not to price that
foolish act beyond the means of the average folks. I'm all in favor
of the compromises that do that. And for what it's worth, my Hardy
Prentice-built CR box shifts at least as fast as my dog box, and
snicks into gear like a Ferrari transmission. But you need to wait
months for Hardy to watch enough television to build one (he stones
the gears while he watching TV) and when you crate the transmission
you might as well use ten dollar bills for packing material instead
of newspaper, 'cause that's about what it will take. The dog box is
an economy measure (at least that's the story I told Diane, and I'm
sticking with it).
On Sep 21, 2007, at 4:21 PM, Henry Frye wrote:
> When I first realized SVRA was allowing alternate gearboxes I did a
> little nosing around and found the concept was not universally
> accepted.
>
>
> I can sympathize with those who do not build their own gearboxes, it
> would be expensive to send your box out to a specialist every time it
> needs attention. But once you get it set up right, with the right
> syncros, and DRIVE IT RIGHT, there is no reason it can't last a couple
> seasons or more. Mine does.
>
> To the guys running non-Triumph gearboxes, I do feel you have a
> performance advantage. If you want to keep the regular (non-dog box)
> Triumph box alive, you must shift much slower than modern stuff.
> Tell me
> with a straight face that doesn't effect lap times.
>
> While I applaud SVRA for their intent, I feel they have just removed
> another layer of "Vintage".
>
> And to those thinking the Toyota box conversion is the answer, do your
> homework on spares availability...
>
> Happy shifting.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Of Jack W. Drews
>> Subject: [Fot] gearbox legality
>>
>> I didn't realize until this thread started that some
>> organizations allow other gearboxes if 'functionally
>> equivalent".
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.team.net/donate.html
>
> billb@bnj.com
> Fot mailing list
> Fot@autox.team.net
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/fot
_______________________________________________
http://www.team.net/donate.html
Fot mailing list
Fot@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/fot
|