Ah! That makes sense!
A good friend of mine here is Akron (and, coincidentally, the PO of my
Bugeye) made himself a 60 Bugeye fitted with a 2.2 liter turbo motor from a
Dodge Daytona. 175 hp in a Bugeye is seriously dangerous, but also loads of
fun. The car was stock looking on the outside, too, except for the wheels.
A delicious little sleeper until the light turned green. This particular
buddy can basically craft anything for anything -- the 2.2 was mated to a
Mazda 5-speed he had used when he put a rotary motor in a previous Bugeye.
Both installations looked factory -- I have pics of the 2.2 turbo Bugeye if
anyone would like to see them! Alas, the car had to go to make room for a
new, non-British project, and has been shipped to a new, very fortunate owner
in Washington State.
And yes, the turbo Bugeye was, to be polite, perhaps several large butt-loads
faster than the TR3A.
Interesting that your mentor described the TR3A as "bad." Seems like almost
every Brit car gets that rep at one time or another, but I remain convinced
that basically all of them can be made reliable with enough time, effort and
skill. Oh, and also through the consistent tactic of keeping me out from
under the bonnet.
Chris
59 Bugeye
59 TR3A
71 Midget
93 Audi S4 TQ
In a message dated 11/30/00 11:05:46 AM Eastern Standard Time,
grbyrns@ucdavis.edu writes:
> Allright Chris, I confess. The only reason I can whup the beautiful TR-3
> driven by the local brit car club pres. is I have a turbocharger fitted to a
> hot 1275 motor. Otherwise he'd be kickin my tail big time. I confess that
> I've always admired the look of the TR-3 and lusted after one when I was a
> teenager. My mentor when I was a lad, and now the PO of my bugeye, just
> told me they were 'Bad" but never said why.
|