NMNA near Indianapolis
NMNA near Indianapolis
THAT is awesome. I wonder how much the flathead stuff, transmission, and "two speed rear end" are worth to swap in miata stuff instead...
The other car in the driveway isnt too shabby either.
In reply to stroker :
That's not too far from me, if someone wants me to swing my and check it out....
That thing with any modern V8 would be as bananas as a cyclekart with a hayabusa motor.
Robbie said:THAT is awesome. I wonder how much the flathead stuff, transmission, and "two speed rear end" are worth to swap in miata stuff instead...
The other car in the driveway isnt too shabby either.
I'd be happy to help you get rid of all that.
Very cool, though I’m not sure it is Challenge eligible.
nderwater said:That thing with any modern V8 would be as bananas as a cyclekart with a hayabusa motor.
I’d put a Dart engine in it. The Hemi.
Daimler of course, the 2.5 liter. Not the bigger 4.5 liter. Probably the same weight as the Flathead. Those V8 60’s are surprisingly heavy.
In reply to stroker :
Wish I had the cash sitting around. But getting something like that up and running reliably would be north of $5000 just for the parts.
Wouldnt be eligible because it’s supposed to be production based.
In reply to frenchyd :
Maybe, maybe not.
The rules actually say you only have to retain production frame rails.
If that thing is built using production frame rails from any make or model of any year, it is Challenge legal.
The ad doesn’t tell us enough to know.
All I can say is that racers in the 30's were much crazier than racers today. That thing is awesome but also pretty scary at the same time!
frenchyd said:In reply to stroker :
.......
Wouldnt be eligible because it’s supposed to be production based.
An email to the GRM staff could overcome this problem. It did for the Scoobie Van on the Dwarf chassis a few years ago.
SVreX said:In reply to frenchyd :
Maybe, maybe not.
The rules actually say you only have to retain production frame rails.
If that thing is built using production frame rails from any male or model of any year, it is Challenge legal.
The ad doesn’t tell us enough to know.
If I had a vote I’d say heck yeh! Let it run. But that’s my nature.
If the ruling is it has to use production frame rails you could just tie wrap a couple of 2x4’s down and call it a Morgan frame? Big silly grin
Indy-Guy said:frenchyd said:In reply to stroker :
.......
Wouldnt be eligible because it’s supposed to be production based.
An email to the GRM staff could overcome this problem. It did for the Scoobie Van on the Dwarf chassis a few years ago.
Again, only partly true.
The Scoobie van MEETS the current rules.
frenchyd said:SVreX said:In reply to frenchyd :
Maybe, maybe not.
The rules actually say you only have to retain production frame rails.
If that thing is built using production frame rails from any male or model of any year, it is Challenge legal.
The ad doesn’t tell us enough to know.
If I had a vote I’d say heck yeh! Let it run. But that’s my nature.
If the ruling is it has to use production frame rails you could just tie wrap a couple of 2x4’s down and call it a Morgan frame? Big silly grin
Much as I love the idea, Morgan’s have never had a wood chassis. They have always had a steel chassis. 
In reply to SVreX : yes a thin steel stamping supplemented by ash timbers hence the comment big silly grin
I suppose to be technically correct Id have to call it a Marcos and probably only the early ones at that.
Wonder if the seller wants to talk about the Plymouth....
I’m not usually that guy, but this one deserves to be put correct and not hacked up
In reply to Patrick :
I'm with you on that.
You'll need to log in to post.
