On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, at around 14:06:24 local time, William Davies
<bill@rarebits4classics.co.uk> wrote:
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Michael Hargreave Mawson <OC@46thFoot.com>
>>
>> That is my experience too. Mind you, I've yet to meet an owner of a
>> wire-wheel-equipped car who would happily be without the feature either.
>
>Well you've met one now!
>Wire wheels are an absolute maintenance nightmare.
My point exactly! <g>
> They were a real pain to clean on my MG BGT, the added weakness of the
>short Triumph splines makes them quite undesirable on an everyday car.
>And yes, I do currently have a Triumph equipped with wires - I'm
>debating at the moment on whether to keep them.
They do look attractive on some cars, but that's about their only good
point. They look very wrong on a Herald, and almost as wrong on a
Spitfire.
>
>> What I am getting at is the fact that overdrive was (and is) an optional
>> extra (however desirable), and that when one is trying to run an old car
>> on a tight budget, spending money on optional extras is possibly not the
>> most far-sighted decision one could make, even if these extras didn't
>> add to the list of potential problems.
>
>If it's a choice between making a Spitfire more driveable as an
>everyday car versus buying an additional vehicle (or even a REPLACEMENT
>vehicle), then it makes perfect budgetary sense to spend a few hundred
>pounds on the overdrive conversion.
In those circumstances, I would agree wholeheartedly.
> In real terms it will make the car more economical which is another
>budgetary offset.
Not according to the official mileage figures, surprisingly enough.
There is practically nothing between the fuel consumption figures on a
1500 in O/D fourth and fourth - and what there is, is in favour of the
non-OD car...
>
>> I also have a theory that
>> within, say, ten or twenty years, there won't be a single example of an
>> original, non-OD, Spitfire left on the road, which would be a great
>> pity.
>
>Indeed, but by the same measure there will be no pre-1964 cars left
>without the (optional) seatbelts fitted, because owners felt the need
>to make their cars more practical :-)
Ouch. You got me! (Although in my case it is more a case of the
owner's wife feeling the need to make the car more practical. <g>)
>I like original cars, but I would rather see them being used than being
>laid up because their owners considered them unsafe or impractical,
And on that I think we are all agreed.
ATB
--
Mike
Ellie - 1963 White Herald 1200 Convertible GA125624 CV
Connie - 1968 Conifer Herald 1200 Saloon GA237511 DL
Carly - 1977 Inca Yellow Spitfire 1500 FH105671
/// spitfires@autox.team.net mailing list
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|