Having owned three Mustangs, 68 Conv, w/302, 69 fastback 351W and a 69 Mach I
with a converted 351CJ I have to state for the record that a well tuned 8
cylinder is a joy to the ears and blast to the seat of the pants. And to some
folks they do look pretty.
But my little LBC - GT6 MkIII is much more fun on the twisty bits and offers
many more smiles per mile. The mustangs offered a K-Mart kinda mechanical
complexity, the LBC offers more of a british enigma, wrapped in riddle. Makes
you want to think about and appreciate what the designer was trying to achieve
and how.
Sure they both have humble beginnings, but the brawny Trans Am 302's were world
class competition proven racecars. And let us not forget that the Le Mans Spits
were world beaters just as well.
My $.02
Ken
Ron Roach wrote:
> I dunno, I have a hard time defining mustangs, etc. as "sportscars". Were,
> or are those things really built for primarily driving? Or are they
> comprimising somewhat with cushy accessories and ride, but have a "sporty"
> feel? The power issue doesn't mean squat! The fiat 850 was a turtle, but it
> was built for driving, and that was it, as was all the great barebones
> sportscars of past. The first generation miata is a sportscar. I don't
> think it was created for anything else than having fun driving it.
>
> ron
> '78 spit
|