John,
I see nowhere in your very impressive list of vehicles any Spitfires.
Again, I implore you to purchase one and see for yourself what the
attraction is. Don't assume that because there are many people who are
asking questions about the 1500 engines that they are all "rotten pieces
of junk". In doing that you also imply that the GT6 and TR6 engines are
also in that same category since they are derived from the same
development continuum. But then, you didn't list either of those cars
either.
Engines are not the only parts of a vehicle. The body is the most
visible part of the package and a car with no engine but a beautiful
body still attracts favorable attention. The MGB with its none too
radical design is pleasant enough to look at, but since they are so
numerous, there is nothing unusual about seeing one. An early Spit (and
perhaps even a later one) on the other hand is rare enough these days to
attract attention. With all the Spits that have had engine transplants
from other modern vehicles, there is no real concern about the
reliability issue. If you want a daily driver and are concerned, put a
different power plant in it and retain the good looks while gaining the
reliability you are after. Or have one of each, one for driving, one
for working on!
Regards,
Joe Curry
John McEwen wrote:
>
> '57 AJS Model 20
> '67 BSA Spitfire
> '70 Norton Commando
> '71 Triumph TR6R
> '49 Austin A40
> '50 Standard Vanguard
> '54 Jaguar Mk.VII
> '55 TR2
> '57 Lagonda 3 Litre
> '58 Wolseley 6/90
> '61 Jaguar Mk.2 3.8
> '62 Sunbeam Alpine
> '65 Austin A60
> '66 Austin A60
> '66 Rover 2000TC
> '70 MGB
> '70 MGB
> '73 MGB
> '76 TR7
>
--
"Thanks to the Interstate Highway System, it is now possible
to travel across the country coast to coast without seeing
anything." -- Charles Kuralt
|