On Thu, 23 May 1996, Ross Vincente -- TransAmer. Financial - Los Angeles wrote:
> > Andy -- are you sure of the VIN number relative to the date?....
> Andy replies:
> Ross, I'm confused as to your source of information and its >
> accuracy. What is your source?...I think it needs to be
> corrected if it reads as you stated!
>
> and Ross runs for cover, saying:
>
> UH OH! Looks like a "new" controversy is abrewing on the horizon.
> Who's data is more accurate?
>
> Don't laugh, but I pulled my info. straight from John Thomason's
> book "Triumph Spitfire and GT6 - A guide to Originality." Look at
> page 105, where it lists the specifications for the Spitfire 1500.
> As to the "FM" nos., he lists those as the prefix for the engine
> serial nos. only, not the chassis nos. However, I certainly
> concede that the book lists everything in British measurements and
> the prices in pound sterling, so I am pretty sure you are correct
> about the "FM" prefix for U.S. spec. Spits.
I can't be too harsh as I have not yet seen this book. However, I stand
by what I've said before about so many Triumph books (and undoubtedly
this applies to octagonally oriented tomes as well). Despite the fact
that we 'murrkens bought the vast majority of cars such as Spitfires,
the U.S. spec. cars often are not well documented -- if at all -- in
reference materials. The bit you quoted above is, sadly, prime evidence
of that.
Andy then kiddingly quipped:
> > Regardless of all that, you and I know the late Spitfires are
> > junk anyway, right? :-)
> And by God, YES, those later Spits are junkyard dogs (at least
> compared to the early Spits). BTW, I stand ready with nomex fire
> suit and Bosch (okay, LUCAS) "flame" extinguisher to hold off all
> of the comments I will no doubt receive from the owners of late
> model Spits on the list. Okay, okay, I repent. "Gee whiz, those
> later Spits are really terrific cars, wouldn't you agree Andy?"
Yes, Ross, if only to keep Bob Sykes and a few hundred other square-tail
Spit fans from storming my compound offering to demonstrate where best
to conceal a Stromberg CD150 carb on my person. ;-)
> Oh, one more thing Andy. I dropped my shortblock off at a nearby
> LBC specialist to do the internal motor work and he is putting
> together for me a list of potential modifications w/ prices for
> each task (e.g. - match ports; magnuflux crank; lighten flywheel,
> etc). I'll do everything else of course. What have/are you
> done/doing to your Spit motor for racing purposes?
Sadly, I can't take credit for much of anything inside the engine
compartment of the famed HardlyBoys RaceSpit4, save for the new rings and
rod bearings. It was fine when Rik and I bought the car in 1983, and
what's there might well date as early as 1966-70! What I can see, though,
is milled head and decked block, lightweight pushrods, undoubtedly some
sort of cam, porting and polishing, parts obviously lightened and likely
balanced, pistons knurled on lower part of skirt, carburetor throats and
pistons smoothed and reshaped, etc. In short, pretty much what the
original Competition Preparation Manual would have suggested. It
works just fine for autocross, so we've not tried to improve on it.
> I would be
> curious to learn what state of tune you expect it to reach (that
> way if I turn my Spit into a vintage F production racer I will
> know your secrets so I can beat you at Lime Rock) Cheers!
A WAG would be in the 75-80hp range, maybe a bit higher. It's not at all
"peaky" though, and it probably would be a fine street motor. Of course,
if I ever score one of those eight-port head/dual Weber DCOEs setups,
watch out!
> Ross D. Vincenti
> 64 Spitfire (undergoing surgery)
--Andy Mace
64 RaceSpit (ever closer to "outpatient" status)
|