spit engine not an option really , I have two good condition 2000-6's both with
o/d gearbox.
I was hoping to find a late gt6 owner with the spit IV supspension that would
tell me it was ok and that i should leave well alone, really though, in my
heart i know that i 'should' put the rotoflex on, wife, wallett and small
children permitting.
..
----------
From: Peter Mchugh[SMTP:Peter.Mchugh@faa.dot.gov]
Sent: 11 March 1997 13:29
To: Return requested; Return requested
Subject: Re: GT6 rear suspension.
The rotoflex is a significant improvement over the other GT-6 and Spit
rear suspensions...your conversion to the six would particularly
benefit from having the rotoflex.
On the other hand, overhauling the rotoflex units is an expensive
proposition...requiring hard to obtain parts and special tools.
A nice competition Spit engine might be a better option...
PMcQ
73 TR-6
72 GT-6
69 GT-6+ (2)
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: GT6 rear suspension.
Author: rback@env-comp.devon-cc.gov.uk at Internet
Date: 3/11/97 7:42 AM
Hi everyone, I have a 72 spitfire tub / chassis with the front end and interior
of a GT6-III (Engine gearbox, suspension, steering, brakes etc), I wanted to
swap the GT6 rotoflex over as well but there are two brackets missing on the
spitfire chassis and two locating holes blanked on the bodytub, I could have
these measured / made / fitted but .... i was reading the other day that
towards the end of the GT6-III BL ditched the rotoflex because of cost and
fitted the last 4000 odd cars with the spitfire IVswing spring suspension.
Has anyone any experience of this setup, should i bother ( the rotoflex is in a
bit of a state and needs much work ) or is the gain of little consequence and
i
should leave the existing swing spring (overhauled only two years ago) alone?
Rik Back
rback@env-comp.devon-cc.gov.uk
72 GT6/Spit
|