> Hmm, I wouldn't say a Spitfire is any more "primal" (in the sense of
simple
> or primitive) than an MGB... they're really almost perfectly comparable in
> terms of technology. If anything the Spit is more advanced -- it has IRS.
It
I believe that the Spit has swing axles, not the fully independent
suspension
like the TR6.
> does give an impression of being more connected to the elements, with the
> low door sills, and even more noise and rattles (therefore "primal" in the
> sense of direct or unmitigated). Whether one prefers them to the Spridgets
> is mostly a matter of taste, and whether one is over 5'9" in height (the
> Spitfire having about 12" more seat travel/leg room)..
You are right, of course. I was speaking of the emotions I feel
between the two cars. Triumphs, and I love 'em, always feel much
more primitive where the MGB feels and looks more refined. Emotion
only, not technology. Then again, any Miata would humble any of
these cars in technology. That's not our goal. :-P
> I really don't think that old Triumph tractor canard applies to the tiny
> engines used in the Spitfire (1100, 1300, 1500), unless Standard made
riding
> mowers... <g>
LOL! Again, only emphasizing the simplicity of a pushrod,
bathtub head little motor.
best,
rick
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|