I admit, with apologies that my statement, "As far as anything I can think
of that would be against the 1500 is that they are quite slower than the
1600's and 2000's", was based on complete ignorance. The only reference I
based my statement on was a post from some time ago about a group ride,
where the poster (a 1500 owner) complained that he wished he had more ponies
to keep up with the 2 liters. I have never had the honour to drive a "real"
Fairlady. Please believe me when I say that I think the SP-310 style is
very beautiful. The unbroken trim line adds something that our later cars
lack.
I must further admit that I had similar wrong ideas about the 1600 until I
drove Gary Griffin's 67 during our SoCal Pala run. With it's lower gearing,
the 1600 is quite quick and "POPS" up to speed with much satisfaction. The
whole truth is that I can find no wrong in any roadster, I want them all!
----- Original Message -----
From: <BARTERDUDE@aol.com>
To: <vlaury@earthlink.net>; <datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 6:44 AM
Subject: Re: 64 1500 Fairlady
Victor:
I beg to differ with the speed thing, especially with a single carb 1500
that
really surprised (and blew by) a humming '70 1600 in our first WyCROC outing
(think the speedo said around 90). I know that there is about 20 ponies
more
in the 1600 than my car (rated at 77). The dual carb 1500 is rated at 85
HP,
so there is only 11 difference. I have had 3 Fairlady's of the 7 Roadsters
I've owned and use to autocross and gymkhana race in several categories and
the 1500 came out a good share of the time with better times that the D
production 1600's.
Judge not the 1500's, for which your car evolved. If it wasn't for the
1500's you may not BE ENJOYING THE RIDE.
Gary Lasater
'63 Single Carb 1500 Fairlady
'70 1600 (new and number 8)
|