Thanks to all who replied to my original post on this subject and gave me
some unique points of view to consider. This is definitely a community of
diverse interests and the more talented people there are doing creative
things with their cars, the better.
Dan Masters wrote:
>I couldn't agree with you more, and nothing says character to me quite like a
>honkin' OHV, pushrod, V8, with multiple carbs and dual exhausts. To some,
it's
>a DOHC, 32 valve, variable timing, computer controlled fuel injection,
V10. To
>others, it's the little 4-bangers that came in the Spitfires to begin with.
>But you're right, the engine has about as much to do with a car's
character as
>anything else.
I see what you are saying. This is definitely a hobby for individualists.
We all have our own ideas of what is "cool," etc. I can understand and
appreciate how just about any kind of automobile configuration can be the
greatest thing in the world to the right person, and I love to meet people
who absolutely adore their cars, no matter what it is. you can really tell
when someone is just nuts about their ride, and that's really what we are
all in this crazy hobby for anyway.
>What if your starting point is a TR6? where do you go from there in the
>Triumph family? Not the TR8, because it has only a few more ponies than the
>TR6. About 137, compared to the 106 of the TR6, compared to about 300 with a
>Ford 302.
Right. Triumph doesn't give us many options for serious power. Starting
with a Spitfire 1500, all I see is bigger and faster Triumphs. But from the
perspective of a TR6 owner, you're pretty much at the top once you make a
bunch of performance mods on your car -- and even then you still don't have
the fastest car on the road by a long shot.
To me, though, I didn't buy my Spit for its power, or even its power
potential. Sure, I will probably hop it up sooner or later, but what really
drew me to the car was its looks, its uniqueness in the world of cars in
general, and the way it sticks to the road like nobody's business (at least
in my experience). More zoom off the line would be nice, and I will
probably do what I can to improve that one of these days... but I'll
probably retain the four-banger under the bonnet.
>In my opinion, my
>Ford powered TR6 will have every bit of the character it had when new, and
>then some. It'll rattle just as much going over bumps, leak around the top
>just as much, and in general, exhibit all of the traits we know and love -
and
>tolerate - about these cars, with two big exceptions - it won't leak oil as
>much, and it'll go like stink!
Ha ha. I think it's funny how your priorities for building your car include
retaining the British car idiosyncracies. I love all those little
annoyances too! What is it about these cars? They are just so damn much fun.
>When you get right down to it, that's the only reason we own
>Triumphs in the first place - personal opinion.
>Don't ever try to apply objective criteria to our choices.
<snip>
>Legitimizing our judgement is un-necessary.
I couldn't agree more. This is totally true. The only truly logical reason
I had for getting into Triumphs was the cost. They are definitely cheap
compared to many collector cars. And Spitfires... they're practically a
dime a dozen!
>Some folks prefer to drive their Miatas with the top
>up, rather than down, and I say more power to them.
I'll bet 90% of the Miatas I see on the road have their tops up. When I
drive by in my Spit with the top down, they gaze at me through their window
glass like a fish trapped in an aquarium. The seem so sad to see me having
so much fun. Why don't they drop their tops? Who knows.
Thanks for the reply,
Eric.
---------------------------------------
Eric A. Yates * eyates@earth.nwu.edu
1978 Spitfire 1500 * FM 71614 U
Chicago, IL USA
|