--part1_cba0d5b5.24aee806_boundary
--part1_cba0d5b5.24aee806_boundary
Content-Disposition: inline
Return-path: DWhitesdJr@aol.com
From: DWhitesdJr@aol.com
Full-name: DWhitesdJr
Message-ID: <cba0d5b5.24aed6bc@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 23:00:12 EDT
Subject: Re: Race Engine Rebuild Frequency
To: derek.lola@sympatico.ca
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 13
In a message dated 7/2/99 9:24:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
derek.lola@sympatico.ca writes:
<< What engines [and/or cars] give best value for money in terms of how
frequently engines need to be rebuilt.
Lets assume that car/engine/driver are capable of consistent 2nd
quartile results - ie mid-pack or better.
How frequently do you rebuild your engines? >>
The Coventry Climax FeatherWeight engine win hands down. In 1992-1993 I ran
every SVRA and HSR event, including all the enduros, plus the Jefferson 500
and many other events, for a total of 24 races in 1992 and 20 in 1993. The
car won the Jefferson, both SVRA endurance championships, the Dunlop Cup, one
HSR championship and one runner up (with the most overall wins the runner-up
year). At least 5 different people drove the car during this period and there
were no DNFs. The engine was rebuilt at the beginning of the 1992 season and
"freshened" after the 1993 Jefferson 500. The rebuild cost under $3000 and
them freshening was about $1500. Both were done by a top-line engine
rebuilder with no corners cut.
I have always maintained that Coventry-Climax powered sportsracers are some
of the most economical racers in terms of maintenance, tire & fuel
consumption. A primary reason for this is the lack of "modern" development
compared to other vintage and historic racers.
EDITORIAL: Could there be a lesson here? Perhaps running racing cars in the
configuration to which they originally were built is much less expensive and
results in a much more rewarding experience?
David Whiteside
1959 Lotus 17
--part1_cba0d5b5.24aee806_boundary--
|