Last summer at Mid-Ohio race course they held a Vintage Sports Car Classic.
Although 35-40 cars were on the track, the race for first place was between
a TR6 and a Spitfire. These were both competition prepared cars both driven
by professional drivers. The TR6 would mount a lead in the straight-aways
but the Spit would be ON his ass AND challenging for first about half way
through the turns. This was a wheel to wheel demonstration of two things:
First; any fool with enough HP and a heavy foot can win in the
straight-aways and secondly, the Spitfire IS superior in the handling
department (assuming the rear suspension modifications have been made).
So, if speed in a straight line is someone's definition of a sports car, he
should be driving a "nitro burnin' Hemi".
Spits have always been looked down upon by the type who measure
their manhood by how much they spend and how fast they go. The truly
knowledgeable sports car fan will acknowledge a car's strengths as well as
it's weaknesses. Forget about trying to change this guy's mind. However,
you might want to compare the Spitfire's racing victories (particularly the
U.S. wins) with whatever he is driving.
Terry Banbury
Mk III
> ----------
> From: Terry L. Thompson[SMTP:tlt@digex.net]
> Reply To: Terry L. Thompson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2000 6:40 PM
> To: spitfires@autox.team.net
> Subject: Beating a dead horse
>
>
> Recently at work, I had a brief debate with a co-worker regarding the
> saving graces of British 2 seat roadsters.
>
> I tried to explain that it was somewhat generally excepted that, what the
> spitfire lacks in a smooth elegent ride and wheel-peeling g-force
> inducing power, it made up for in it's ability to corner and tame the
> winding country roads. To punctuate my discussion, I provided for him a
> list of contemporary "sports cars" and their relative road holding index
> (as acquired from Edmunds.com).
>
> My argument was wasted on his deaf ears. He still calls my car "the
> shi?fire"
>
>
> Although not side-by-side imperical evidence (and G-ratings tend to vary
> slightly), here's the break-down of the road holding index ratings of
> several 2000 model year "sports cars" and "convertible compacts" along
> with that of the Spitfire. (The percentage of 1g-force that the car can
> generate before losing traction in a turn).
>
>
> '00 Porsche Boxter S .91
>
> '00 Honda S2000 .91
>
> '00 BMW Z3 .89
>
> '00 Mazda Miata MX-5 .89
>
> <bold>'73 Spitfire Mark IV .87
>
> </bold>'99 Mitsubishi Eclipse Syder .86
>
> '00 Mercedes Benz SLK230 .85
>
> '00 Pontiac Firebird TransAm .85
>
> '00 Ford Mustang GT Conv. .85
>
> '00 Volkswagon Carbrio GL .81
>
> '00 Chevy Camero Coupe .81
>
> '00 Saab 9-3 SE HOT .80
>
> '00 Chevy Cavalier Z24 .74
>
> '00 Pontiac Sunfire GT .74
>
>
> Note that the Spitfire rating was taken 27 years ago, on tires that are
> probably not
>
> as "advanced" or wide as what you might be running today.
>
>
> As a printed advertisement from 1973 that hangs on my wall boldly states:
>
> ".87g's for only about 3G's*." (*$3,295)
>
> "This performance puts the Spitfire in the same league as the $5,000
> Datsun Z-series, the $6,300 Alpha Romeo 2000 GTV, even the $10,000
> Porsche 911. And the Spitfire gives you .87g's while getting 23 miles per
> g... Gee."
>
>
> Terry L. Thompson
>
> '76 Spit 1500
>
>
|