> It appears that Vettes have a downside as well -- but isn't the
>same true of Tigers? Ackermann problems, insufficient traction,
>overheating, modest horsepower? The aftermarket, a few specialty outfits
>like Dale's All British, and the efforts of indivdual owners, have gone
>a long way towards overcoming these problems. I can readily imagine that
>there are ready opportunities to transform a Vette into a car with as
>much handling and/or power as you can afford.
Just my impression, but it seems like Corvettes are being brought back to
some kind of "vintage" condition -- stock, or vintage racing, etc., and that
the older ones are not being upgraded for road use other than cruising. It
seems a shame to be penalized (at sale time) for bringing an older car
tastefully into the 90's. If a later suspension would fit under a '62 to
make it handle, you get a much better, more usable car. Why leave skinny
bias ply tires on a car you're actually going to use?
My limited exposure to Tiger owners seems to indicate they are more willing
to tweak here and there to keep them usable under modern conditions. I
suppose market value for show cars of the two respective breeds is driving
this to some degree. No flame war bait intended.
> Just a thought. Comparing Tigers and Vettes could arguably be a
>twofold process; the capabilities of the cars as-bought and what they
>could reasonably become. .
Interesting!
Duncan
|