Subject: Re: [Healeys] Healeys

From: Mike MacLean <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2014 03:43:58 -0700

A two seater 100-6 with a BJ8 engine is what they should have made. B It would be a nice balance in my opinion for whatever that is worth.
Mike MacLean
56 BN2 with the heavy transmission.
60 AN5

<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Larry Varley <[email-masked]> </div><div>Date:07/06/2014  00:57  (GMT-08:00) </div><div>To: [email-masked] </div><div>Subject: [Healeys] Healeys </div><div>
</div>I think it's time that the list had a healthy debate, and some fun. I 
would propose that the only real Austin Healey was the BN1, designed by 
Donald Healey and Gerry Coker. Everything after that was BMC, who never 
made a decent car after the 50's, just using what they had to keep 
producing the cars, that were for some part good ideas, but bad design. 
The mini was a great idea, but mix the gearbox oil with the engine? Oh 
dear. The BN2 with a extra gear in a much heavier gearbox that really 
added no extra performance, then the 100-6 with that horribly heavy 
engine and no more grunt. Why would anyone do that, and just ruin the 
balance of the car? Ok after that they added the 12 port head to it, but 
the sixes at their best are really ponderous in the steering department 
relative to the BN1, which is a nibble well balance car. I'm going so 
far as to use an alloy block in my BT7 to turn it back into a descend 
handling car and restore the weight balance. BMC basically self 
destructed, while the rest of the world moved forward, what a shame.
Cheers
Larry Varley
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys

_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys