My understanding was that the car was almost impossible to drive in
competition events because of it's short wheelbase. I raced in SCCA for 14
years and within certain parameters the longer the wheelbase the more stable
and predictable it is. The problem of predictability became worse when we
all went to slicks in the late sixties. It is very difficult to drive
competitively if you do not have a "feel" for when the car is going to swap
ends on you.
Dave McDermott
At 11:21 PM 4/2/97 -0500, Rob Hogan wrote:
>Allan Connell wrote:
>> As an aside, I joined a TVR thread to help a friend out with some tech
>> questions.
>
>On the subject of TVR's, particularly the Griffith (Vulcan?), an article
>in Classic & Sportscar, Sept. '86, lists the Griffith's performance as 0
>- 60 in 7.2 sec and a top speed 2 mph greater than the Tiger of
>comparison. With less weight and slightly better acceleration, why has
>the Griffith been seldom seen in racing events where its attributes
>would be demonstrated? I've been to many SCCA road races and Solo I and
>II events in the Midwest and have never seen a Griffith in competition,
>certainly not to the extent of even the few Tigers that have been
>raced. The vehicles are sparse, but their exposure is probably much
>less than the number of cars in this country. Does anyone know what the
>289 C.I. powered TVR's strong and weak points are? Some have described
>the car as a twitchy handful to handle and keep pointed in the direction
>of intent.
>
>
|