why not just drop a 260 or 289 V8 in, and call it a Tiger?
The difference with the Alpine is that you have a unitary construction
(stiffer), and a beam back axle.
As Barry has said, you can't feed the paower of the V6 through the spit
back end (and have it last that is).
I'm actually not against engine swaps, if you want to do it go ahead. I
just enjoy making something "standard" looking, but goes like hell, and
when you come to sell it will hold it's value better, and the new owner
will be able to get "standard" parts to fit.
Bill and Sal Birney
'70 GT6+ (RHD)
'67 Spitfire MkII (Sal's)
'69 Spitfire MkIII (for sale)
birneybs@onaustralia.com.au
----------
> From: User208391@aol.com
> To: birneybs@onaustralia.com.au
> Subject: Re: spit engine swap?
> Date: Tuesday, 30 September 1997 21:44
>
> If you take time ,effort and money to make all these modifications why
not
> make the switch to another engine such as a 2.8L v-6 Ford with a t-5
> transmmision? Sure there are bugs to be worked out but going with the
> modifications problems will also arise. As the saying goes there is no
> substitute for cubic inches(or cubic centemeters).
> I myself have a project where I am putting a Ford 2.8L v-6 in an
Alpine
> with a T-5 tranmission. I know of three of such switches and the owners
are
> more than pleased with the relibality and performance. This change was
well
> thought out and not just jumpped into.
> I owned a Spitfire for several years 1979, and I two was going to make
an
> engine swap, but living in California I was limited to the engines and
smog
> equipment to be used. I did the next best thing which was trade the
Spitfire
> for the Sunbeam Alpine which is a 1961 register. I also own a 1962
register
> Rover sedan which will also receive a Ford engine and transmission.
> I love British autos( styling and handeling) but I use my cars as
> everyday drivers and for trips,modern updates on enhances the pleasure of
> driving them. Thanks TC
|