Spyder shape

Found it: 1967 Corvette 427/435 top speed as tested: 143. Original MSRP: $5,629

Vs 1965 XKE 4.2 liter (257 CI) 265 hp top speed as tested: 153.

Original 1967 Jag MSRP · $5,580

As for differences in roads and topography... I don't see a good argument why Europe, with smaller countries, narrower roads and functional passenger rail lines, would develop faster cars than the USA, which had and continues to have the opposite of all those things. I-80 was basically all done in 1968, I-70 in 1970 (with a few Colorado mountain passes still on the drawing board). There's a good reason Moon Trash II set out for adventure when it did.

We got what we wanted, but there's no logical case to claim it was what we needed, let alone what was possible.

It's kind of crazy that Detroit could so easily make those engines so strong and reliable but just declined to create a chassis/brake system capable of using them. That's all.

1967 Corvette 0-60 4.7 sec

1965 XKE 0-60 7.0 sec

How often can one use top speed vs 0-60? Game over!

@DannyP posted:

The other thing that is "common knowledge" aka "lore" or even better "BS" is front end lift in a Spyder.

Speedsters(especially replicas) do have a lift problem. I've never experienced this in either one of the two Spyders I've had.

The front of my Spyder is always under control and planted. I've no idea what other's experience or what alignment settings they use, but mine simply works. I've been to an actual speed of 125 mph(GPS speedo verified). I run 1/16" total toe-in, 1.5 degrees negative camber and a very slight rake forward(maybe a 1/4" lower in front versus back).

Your speed and experience may vary...

I don't think I'd ever go faster than that, and certainly nowhere near Annie's achievement, but I don't think a Spyder would have ever hit 143 mph if there was lift at the 100-110 mph everyone bandies about.

I hadn't known that particular speed(143). I have read many times of 138 mph down the Mulsanne straight.

My Spyder gets pretty scary 85<. But my car sits lower in the back so the flat underbelly is kind of like a wing. I’m thinking of adding these like your splitter, but I’m going to raise my rear end one spline first to see if it still needs it.

@Sacto Mitch posted:

.All I know is when I turned my first corner in a BMW 1600 in 1968, after driving the '61 Galaxy in driver's ed class, I knew I wasn't in Kansas any more.

Yep - a Galaxy is nothing at all like an old BMW.

... but let's say it's 1981, and you're 17. Let's say you and 2 friends want to go to Estes Park from the cornfields of Central Illinois. For the sake of discussion, let's say you have a 1963 Galaxy with 250K mi your friend bought for $50. Let's say that you ARE in Kansas (or someplace very similar).

Would you be able to take the back seat out of your BMW and unfold a lawn-chaise back there? Would you be able to stash your buddy's RD350 in the trunk? Would you be able to haul 3 barefoot guys in cut-offs, all their luggage, 4 spare tires, a tool-stack chest, and 25 gallons of extra fuel?

Would you be able to put the axle back in the pumpkin on that BMW with nothing more than a jack and a 12 lb sledge hammer?

Nay. Nay, I say - no you would not.

That little feller would have crumpled at the sight of a 12 lb hammer and a couple of cornfed, mop-headed white boys wielding it, but that Galaxy just took it and asked for another.

It would not go 153 mph, nor would it go from 0-60 in 4.7, 7 , or 17 seconds. What it would do was to continue running on a steady diet of used motor oil and 87 octane. The cost per mile was unrivaled. I'd even venture that the smiles per mile were as high as anything I've driven since.

I loved that car like I've loved few others. It was vague like Sylvester Stallone dialog in a movie, immediate as a tree-sloth, and as pretty as Janet Reno.

It was perfect in its application.

I've had BMWs, and they were wonderful. I've also had minivans, an Acura, countless full-sized domestic vans, A Daihatsu 4wd, a Suzuki 4WD pick-up, a tallboy Sprinter, a 4WD F150 with 33s, an E350 PowerStroke dually, a '67 Firebird, two tiny little work vans (domestic and asian), a '75 Cheby Monza with a built 350, a Ford Taurus wagon, a Cadillac limousine, a Mazda 626, an Opel Manta, a string of $50 domestics, and an unfortunate turn in a Renault Alliance.

I've also had a Speedster for 22 years.

The point? Every one of them (except maybe the Renault) was good for something, though none were good for everything. I'm not sure what this proves, except what Grandma Meyer always used to say,

"It takes all kinds to make the world go around".

@LI-Rick posted:

1967 Corvette 0-60 4.7 sec

1965 XKE 0-60 7.0 sec

How often can one use top speed vs 0-60? Game over!

If your happiness in life is going straight for 1/4 of a mile, then trying to stop, then I guess so.

Not so for many of us.

I think the tale of your road trip is on point, Stan.

For a long time, Detroit was very good at finding the exact center of the bell-shaped curve and building something that was a perfect fit. For almost forever, it seemed the curve would never move, that the Galaxy and Impala would maintain their rightful places in the firmament.

But in July, 1967, I got a peek at a little crack starting to form in the firmament. I tagged along with my brother and his girlfriend on a drive from Philadelphia to California. We weren’t sightseeing. They just needed to get back home, neat and quick at minimal expense, and I would help with the driving.

We drove her new car - something foreign I had never heard of (and kept mispronouncing). It was about half the size of a Galaxy, two-thirds the cost, got twice the gas mileage, and had one-eighth the chromium ornamentation. One of those funny cars that looked tiny on the outside but was somehow perfectly OK once you got in. It wouldn’t hold the brass section of a high school marching band and all of their instruments, but for the three of us and our stuff, it was perfectly OK.

It had a tiny little four cylinder, three on the tree, but hummed along without a sputter for 3200 miles over four days. Nothing rattled or shook. No door handles fell off. The temperature gauge stayed glued on its spot right through Death Valley. You could take it up to 80 for an hour or three and it didn’t flinch.

Driving it didn’t make you feel like the pilot of a jet fighter, but it delivered us from one coast to the other without incident, which was a bigger deal in 1967 than we’ve come to expect today.

The car was a Toyota. Nowadays, everyone seems to know how to pronounce it.

The thing about the bell-shaped curve is that it’s always moving. If you build cars and want folks to buy them, you have to keep that in mind.

Toyotas... turns out those puny little L-6s could be made to do OK on the strip too.

The Spyder I put together feels rock steady at 100 mph. I don't know how it feels at 110 or 120, but I am certain it could exceed the latter figure if the driver wanted to chance it. Its 0-60 time feels like under 7 seconds.

The other day some kids asked me if it's "fast." I said nah, but by 1950s standards it sure is...and 1960s, 70s and 80s and even 90s standards too. It won't beat a Viper or a ZR1 or a Turbo Supra but an SVO Taurus or an Impala SS or an NA Supra? Maybe!

@dlearl476 check your toe-in, front especially but really both.

@Bob: IM S6 posted:

If your happiness in life is going straight for 1/4 of a mile, then trying to stop, then I guess so.

Not so for many of us.

I think you missed my point.  Touting top speed is pointless.  Who amongst us ever does that?  

Well...  Some of us go to the track once in a while

@LI-Rick posted:

I think you missed my point.  Touting top speed is pointless.  Who amongst us ever does that?  

Point taken.  But it's not just acceleration in a straight line that makes driving fun.

Hell, a Miata is slow as molasses, but take it on a curvy stretch of road, and  you won't have much more fun than that.

For many drivers, it's the strength of the car's handling that is important, and many American cars don't always do well in that regard.  In vintage racing, the Minis beat the Vettes every time.

On a winding road, I would take the XKE over the Vette any day.

On a stoplight to stoplight road, the Vette would be the choice.

One man's meat, etc...

Cheers.

@edsnova posted:

@dlearl476 check your toe-in, front especially but really both.

Yeah Ed, I did first thing I did after sorting my mismatched tires/wheels cured the wandering, but not that. I took it in for a four wheel alignment.

I drives and handles 100% better after that, but it still wants to take off about 85-90.