Fred Krampits wrote:
>
> Even though I would never modify my Midget, excluding Bugeyes and MK II
> Sprites and MK I Midgets because of the rear springs serves what
> purpose? Are the 1/4's an advantage over the 1/2's or vice versa?
>
> Fred
> 1963 Midget MK I 1098CG Fred,
There is a school of thought that with a 1/4 eliptic spring car
AND modifications to shock absorbers AND wider wheels AND sticky
"racing" tires AND panhard rod AND anti-sway bar, an advantage is gained
over a similarly equipped 1/2 eliptic spring car. The guidelines for a
Spec-Sprite racer call for no modifications to the rear suspension other
than lowering kits and addition of a rear anti-sway bar (if desired).
Factory rostyle wheels of 4 1/2" width and over-the-shelf tires from
your local Firestone or Goodyear dealer are also specified. It is felt
that either spring (1/2 or 1/4) won't make much difference if the
Spec-Sprite rules are adhered to, and because of this, a recent change
has been added to the rules to allow 1/4 elliptic cars. Check with Dan
Racine with Mini Mania and he will verify. The reason Roger Williams
initially excluded 1/4 eliptic cars was a personal preference reason.
Roger told me that since the value of Bugeyes were going up, while the
number of remaining Bugeyes is relatively low, he initially excluded 1/4
eliptics to try to preserve Bugeyes from hitting the track. He reasoned
that "squarebody Sprites" (and Midgets) were more expendable, at 1/2 the
value of Bugeyes, handled equally well, and had the advantage of factory
equipped front disc brakes. Safety (such as good brakes) is of primary
importance to Roger's way of thinking. He has since relented on the
"preservation of the Bugeye" line of thinking, because he decided that
no one put him in charge of protecting an "endangered species".
However, he does urge conversion of the front drum brakes to disc brakes
before going out onto the track (which of course equates to an added
expense that the later Spridgets do not have to incur).
Cheers,
Rick Doig
|