spridgets
[Top] [All Lists]

[Spridgets] Spitfire in 73

Subject: [Spridgets] Spitfire in 73
From: grunthaner at gmail.com (Linda Grunthaner)
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2011 19:28:56 -0500
References: <AANLkTinzjMuuDA5wGvnykwuoktCuquf_h8ydTe+hqAwO@mail.gmail.com> <4D27771B.4070809@comcast.net> <AANLkTinMKuqo0UeJ3ocd_b2SpF_FM1MMFNQ7e2rVBYXx@mail.gmail.com> <254419.53336.qm@web36805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <AANLkTinSd=FFtwX5en4hMEfxWo8AYhf+b1uWXyK-qRD=@mail.gmail.com>
Too bad we can't put all Spridget parts in a Spitfire ; )
Would that make it a Spridgetfire?
Lin

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Kirk Hargreaves <khargreaves2 at 
gmail.com>wrote:

> Pretty cool info. .  the Mark III's being the model to look for if one were
> to buy one of these. . .  ?
>
> I have read that they never really got the independent rear end thing
> worked
> out correctly prior to building the cars for public consumption. . but
> still
> a nice feature to have especially with the strapped half shafts then.
>
> Thanks for the info. .
>
> Kirk
>
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 5:09 PM, David Booker <tncarnut1 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Kirk said: "Thanks. .  I appreciate the warning."
> >
> > And now for a slightly different take...
> >
> > Frank - You are the last person in the world I would ever question any
> LBC
> > quote from, and I'm not suggesting that you didn't have a really bad
> > Spitfire experience, but wasn't a '73 Spitfire powered by the 1500? and a
> > relatively early one at that? That was not a drivetrain exactly known for
> > it's excessive robustity or racelyness... (yeah I know, but they kinda
> got
> > the idea across, didn't they?) The MK IV Spitfire was quite a step down
> from
> > the MK III in other ways too - higher suspension to meet minimum bumper
> > height, bigger & heavier bumpers, smog-pumps and other emission garbage,
> > etc.
> >
> > I restored a 1970 MK III many years ago that was as reliable as a Midget
> > and an absolute blast to drive. I believe this was about the end of MK
> III
> > production and probably the most desirable of all of the 18 or so years
> of
> > production. The '70 was powered by the hot little 1296cc.  They also have
> > independant rear suspension and a gorgeous curvy body by Michelotti. Mine
> > had twin SU's mounted in place of the original single Stromberg. I built
> the
> > engine with a hot cam & valve springs, added a header, had a little bit
> > shaved from the head, then smoothed up the rough-looking parts with my
> > Dremel and did few other other little trick bits. The place that made the
> > cam told me the modifications should have put me somewhere close to 100
> HP
> > but I never dyno'd it so have no idea. It sure felt fast, though.
> >
> > The really earlier Spitfires tended to get tail-happy in a hard corner -
> at
> > least till you strapped the half-shafts to make the equivalent of a
> > home-made rear sway bar. Anyway - my point is that I personally think
> some
> > Spitfires are better than others. I really got enjoyment from mine and
> never
> > broke too many things in the process. Of course if you don't break
> something
> > at least occassionally on a sports car, you probably aren't having enough
> > fun, are you?
> >
> >  - David
> > Long Island
> _______________________________________________
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe/Manage <http://www.team.net/forums%0AUnsubscribe/Manage>:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/spridgets/grunthaner at gmail.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>