On Thu, 26 Nov 1998 DANMAS@aol.com wrote:
> The point is, you are happy with your car, others are happy with their Spits
> just the way they are, no mods at all, and others, like Tim and myself, get a
> great deal of joy from modifying them...
Absolutely! Opinions and tastes are what this discussion is all about.
> Yes, you can count HP/$, but that's irrelevent. If you insist on making
> such factors part of the equation, then we all lose....
I have to ever-so-slightly disagree here. Cost really IS a factor in some
cases. It's one thing to blithely say "drop in a pair of SUs and a header
/ Triumph 6 / Ford 302 / Mazda Rotary / Allision V-16 /Pratt & Whitney
Turbine...." But the hard fact is that one has to be mindful of the costs
or each swap itself AND the associated costs of drivetrain, chassis, body
and other modifications -- and benefits -- as each decides what might be
done and what each of us is capable of doing or paying someone to do.
In my original comment to Laura, I meant absolutely no disrespect to Tim
and his rotary Spitfire project or to anyone else who has ever done or
might yet contemplate any such enhancement. In short, I think it's great
to see the ingenuity and craftsmanship and engineering that go into such
projects. (Although I flat-out admit that I personally cringe when I hear
of such a car, OR a "completely restored from the ground up" car, that
started out as "a clean, low-mileage original"! :-) But it's more a
quantum leap than a mere step from adding headers to effectively
re-engineering the entire car.
As a teenager, I read _Rod & Custom_ almost as faithfully as I read _Road
& Track_ and _Motor Trend_. Back then (1960s -- gasp! He's OLD!), I was
just as fascinated by the creations of George Barris, Gene Winfield, the
Alexander Brothers and the like as I was by new or old "stock" cars. Not
to mention the classic "hot rodders" and endless variations on T-bucket
roadsters and Deuce Coupes. Apparently I wasn't alone back then; it's as
prevalent today as ever, with new legends such as Boyd Coddington and, of
course, the major manufacturers doing a bit of hot rodding themselves AND
putting those products right out there on the Plymouth show room floor
(just one example).
On Fri, 27 Nov 1998, Ken Bertschy wrote:
> ...Who's right? Technically, the snootiest original owner is. So
> what? What a dull world this would be if we all had to drive or even own
> "stock" spitfires in order to be on this list. I say "viva la difference"....
And as Dan had noted:
> There's no argument here - you're right, I'm right, Tim's right, we're ALL
> right. We're speaking of personal opinion here, not facts.
I think that pretty much covers it! Mostly, we've got anywhere from 30-40
years of hindsight now, so it's easy to say "they coulda/woulda/shoulda
done this, and that, and...." "They" didn't (except for Carroll Shelby and
a few others!) for a lot of reasons. Fortunately, we CAN if we choose to!
It doesn't make Tim wrong for envisioning a well-engineered and very quick
"updated" car based on a shape he truly loves. Nor is Laura wrong for
keeping her car pure UK (more or less) under the bonnet. Nor am I wrong to
enjoy a bone-stock Mk.IV wheezing its way up a steep hill. :-)
Hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving (or a great Thursday to those
outside the U.S.)!
--Andy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Andrew Mace, President and *
* 10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant *
* Vintage Triumph Register <www.vtr.org> *
* amace@unix2.nysed.gov *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|