Ok, some points well taken. But let's say the engine transplant was a
lighter AND more powerful engine. Say the same weight but four times the
horsepower. Would that be OK? They exist. It should handle just as well.
Would that be OK?
I used to think of a sports car as being an open roof, great handling and a
good power to weight ratio. Let's face it a stock Bugeye has a terrible
power to weight ratio. And the square bodies aren't much better. Does that
make them a bad example of a sports car? How many of us have souped up our
cars or swapped engines for more power? At what point does that make it no
longer a sports car?
I have also owned a car that I considered a "sports car", but more
accurately a "GT" car (a 240Z). Is a "GT" car a separate classification or
I'd be interested to hear other's definitions of a "sports car".
Let the battle begin!
From: "Billy Zoom" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 5:36 PM
To: "Larry Daniels" <email@example.com>; "'Spridget'"
Subject: Re: [Spridgets] Another British Engine
> Billy, out of curiosity, what defines a "sports car" and what did the
> addition of the Ford power do to transform the Midget out of that
It transformed it into a Hot Rod that was only good for burning rubber in a
straight line, or annoying Big Healey drivers at stop lights. The latter was
kind of fun, but the car was no longer nimble nor well-balanced. It did not
corner well compared to real sports cars, and although admittedly each
corner was a hairy sideways adventure, it was not fast through the turns.
It was also no good at the drags because it made lots of smoke, but never
really hooked up.
Suggested annual donation $12.75