Malcolm Walker wrote:
> Neither the Cobra nor the Tiger can handle corners all that well,
however.
Mmmm, I dont agree. Both will handle in a far more predictable manner than
a TR6, and I consider the TR6 a mighty-fine handling machine. The AC,
even with a lot of cast iron up front (the Ford 289 weighs less than the
Triumph 2.5) is also a wonderful machine. A sorted Tiger is a demon to catch
on the track (ask me how I know!). Cobras and Tigers did very well in
A and B classes of 60s SCCA, and do well today in club events.
I had the opportunity to drive a 427 side-oiler Contemporary Cobra (plastic
kit car) in a spirited manner last August, and despite the physical
effort required to steer the monster, it was perhaps the finest
handling (in terms of g-forces and predictability) of any open-sports
car I have driven. Intensly fatiguing and uncomfortable, yes, though
vibrantly satisfying.
FWIW, I would stick with the original motor in a LBC. Triumph makes
wonderful motors that suit the car, make wonderful noises, and is a
delight to work on.
I agree with the adage "there ain't no substitue for cubic capacity".
Never belittle the American V8. Some of their V8s are among
the most brilliant engines conceived, their only nod to "lo-tech"
being their use of cast iron and their predigree of being used in
station wagons and trucks. Eg, I believe that the Cleveland 351 is one
of the finest motors ever built, and deserves a place alongside other
fine motors from England, Italy and Germany.
Shane Ingate in San Diego
|