Subject: | [Healeys] Frame torsional rigidity - was: Working on door gaps |
---|---|
From: | glemon at neb.rr.com (Greg Lemon) |
Date: | Mon, 5 Sep 2011 12:21:43 -0500 |
References: | <001601cc6bdc$972eddf0$c58c99d0$@gmail.com><000001cc6be5$58f2c610$0ad85230$@com><CA+QDXmB88cEb7b7gQBq1oH8rWPwiPmJBA3TE6HfFepT7WxCW6w@mail.gmail.com> <003301cc6be8$a7c65740$f75305c0$@gmail.com> |
>From seat of the pants feel the Healey frame/structure is stiffer than a TR2-3, but less rigid than an MGA. The 100 was pretty good for its day, as I believe Geofrey Healey noted in one of the Healey books the whole thing was weakened/compromised by adding the length and weight for the 6 cylinder motor. The Healey was good to maybe even ahead of its time for its design time in the early fifties, but auto technology grew by leaps and bounds from the early fiftes to the mid sixties, and the 3000 was certainly not state of the art in its final days. Greg Lemon |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | [Healeys] BN1 rear springs zinc interleaves, Rich C |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [Healeys] BN1 rear springs zinc interleaves, John Sims |
Previous by Thread: | [Healeys] Frame torsional rigidity - was: Working on door gaps, Derek Job |
Next by Thread: | [Healeys] Frame torsional rigidity - was: Working on door gaps, ATIGHTPROD at aol.com |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |