The Charltons wrote:
>
> > It appears that Vettes have a downside as well -- but isn't the
> >same true of Tigers? Ackermann problems, insufficient traction,
> >overheating, modest horsepower? The aftermarket, a few specialty outfits
> >like Dale's All British, and the efforts of indivdual owners, have gone
> >a long way towards overcoming these problems. I can readily imagine that
> >there are ready opportunities to transform a Vette into a car with as
> >much handling and/or power as you can afford.
>
> Just my impression, but it seems like Corvettes are being brought back to
> some kind of "vintage" condition -- stock, or vintage racing, etc., and that
> the older ones are not being upgraded for road use other than cruising. It
> seems a shame to be penalized (at sale time) for bringing an older car
> tastefully into the 90's. If a later suspension would fit under a '62 to
> make it handle, you get a much better, more usable car. Why leave skinny
> bias ply tires on a car you're actually going to use?
>
> My limited exposure to Tiger owners seems to indicate they are more willing
> to tweak here and there to keep them usable under modern conditions. I
> suppose market value for show cars of the two respective breeds is driving
> this to some degree. No flame war bait intended.
>
> > Just a thought. Comparing Tigers and Vettes could arguably be a
> >twofold process; the capabilities of the cars as-bought and what they
> >could reasonably become. .
>
> Interesting!
>
> Duncan
Duncan,
Since I own a Mk1 Tiger and a '61 Vette I'll throw my 2 cents in. First
of all the '61 is not stock in the power train dept w/ a warmed over 327
and a M20 transmission, rear end is 4:11 posi.Suspension is stock
(recently rebuilt) and I am running 225/70s on the 15" wheels. The Tiger
has worn suspension and is running the stock 13" with I believe 195/70s
(the car is not easily accesible for checking). The power train on the
Tiger is a very warmed over 289 and has the stock open 2.88 rear end.
For Straight line acceleration, the buttometer says the Tiger is
slightly quicker although it is close. For how the cars corner, I give a
slight nod to the Vette. Now before everyone comes up out of their
chair, let me say I evaluate the steering feel separately from the
cornering and this is where the vette really loses out. As someone
already said, the steering is like a truck and that is not surprising
since it was based on the late '40s early 50s suspension. I tend to look
at the how the car handles in the turn as a little different than the
steering feel and in this area (steering) the Vette comes up way short.
This is also aggravated (IMHO) by the 15"flat steering wheel that always
seems to be in the way of shifting and braking. Personally, If I were
going to spend Vette kind of money I would look closely at a '66 or '67
Shelby. You would get an excellent balanced package of handling (may
have to lower the a-arms) and power and wouldn't have to pay Corvette
prices for items. For those wondering, no I didn't spend vette money on
mine as it was brought home on a trailer and in the back of truck and
resurrected from there, but it may be time to send it down the road for
another Shelby or Tiger;-).
Jay Peterson
|