[Top] [All Lists]

Re: mgb vs spitfire

Subject: Re: mgb vs spitfire
From: Dave Quirt <>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 20:27:22 -0600

I gotta disagree with you. What you are describing (with respect to a
driver's entire body view) best describes a TR3, not a Spit!! Yes, Spits
are a 'poor man's E-type' and are smaller, but they are actually quite
roomy when compared to a Spridget. Perhaps not as roomy as a MGB or
TR4/5/250/6, but roomier than a MGA and similar to the TR3 in that

Dave Q.
Neuhorst, SK

As & Bs
former Spit owner ('70 & '78)

> From Trevor Boicey:
>> Max Heim wrote:
>> I have a buddy that is also fascinated by the look of Spitfires. He has the
>> excuse that one was his first car (that wasn't a hand-me-down from his
>> parents). They have a curvaceous, mini-E-Type shape -- I can see how it
>> would be appealing from a visual standpoint.
> ...a point raised very often though is that the Spitfire looks very 
>unproportioned when it has a rider.<
> The still pictures of the car kind of have a "poor man's mini e-type" look, 
>but the car is in reality a lot smaller in ways that become evident when a 
>person sites inside.<
> Anyone riding in one tends to look like a giant from another planet and the 
>poor car is about to snap in
half beneath them.<
> If the driver is even slightly big, it's just comical. You can see their 
>entire body from the belt up above the tiny doors. ;> <

/// mailing list
///  (If they are dupes, this trailer may also catch them.)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>