1 2 3
Rubasu
Rubasu New Reader
7/13/09 3:18 p.m.

In reply to BrettM: Me too. Nothing against a TVR at all. I have never thought of buying one because in that price range I would rather have something faster. But still I think they are great cars.

Carl Heideman
Carl Heideman
7/13/09 3:38 p.m.

I have a TVR 2500M and I wrote a quick blurb about it for CMS over a year ago. Haven't done much with it since because I've moved on to my Fiat and Alfa (and had to finish the Midget). But we love TVRs, too. Sooner or later, you'll probably see more about the TVR.

--Carl "too many cars too little time but most of them run and drive"

David S. Wallens
David S. Wallens Editorial Director
7/13/09 3:39 p.m.

I was just going to say, "Carl has a TVR." I have seen it. Maybe we can get him to write about it again.

ronbros
ronbros New Reader
7/13/09 6:30 p.m.

for the guys who know daytona area. back in 1976 a friend just bought a new Fiat X1/9 (he run a head shop on Main street) we visited some folks over in Deland, well comin back across Volusia ave.(ISB) at midnight I said lets see how fast it goes, 93MPH,thats it for 5minutes steady. cute car but not a performance vehicle!

KaptKaos
KaptKaos Reader
7/13/09 9:23 p.m.

Tim,

Saw you on XWeb. Classic lurk. =)

Dpvog
Dpvog New Reader
7/13/09 10:27 p.m.
ronbros wrote: for the guys who know daytona area. back in 1976 a friend just bought a new Fiat X1/9 (he run a head shop on Main street) we visited some folks over in Deland, well comin back across Volusia ave.(ISB) at midnight I said lets see how fast it goes, 93MPH,thats it for 5minutes steady. cute car but not a performance vehicle!

You are absolutely correct. The X1/9, in stock form, is very underpowered, but the platform has extraordinary potential. It is also very easy to double the power with modifications to the top end of the motor that improve breathing. Once that has been done, you will have a hard time finding anything in its class that can catch it on a twisty road, even with half again as much power. -Doug

ddavidv
ddavidv SuperDork
7/14/09 5:38 a.m.
ronbros wrote: 93MPH,thats it for 5minutes steady. cute car but not a performance vehicle!

If that's the criteria for a sports car, then most of the stuff covered in this magazine would not qualify. If top speed is the criteria for a 'performance' car, then you may want to read Musclecar Monthly or something. Performance comes in many shapes and sizes. I think momentum cars are every bit as satisfying (and possibly more challenging) than bigger HP cars.

BrettM
BrettM Reader
7/14/09 7:32 a.m.

In reply to ronbros:

What the top speed of an emissions choked, new car in the 70s does not mean much to me today. I simply look at it as more room for improvement an the chassis responds well to it. Hmmm, wonder what the top speed of a midget or MGB was, about the same I suspect.

My Euro tuned X1/9 (when stock) would do an indicated 115 in stock form. (no claims on speedo accuracy though)

Tim Baxter
Tim Baxter Online Editor
7/14/09 7:47 a.m.

Oooh, I know! Top speed on a pre-75 MGB was about 102 (give or take a mile or so various years). Midget I'm not sure about, but it was less.

Top speed on a post-75 MGB? We're still waiting for it to reach it.*

*Note: I "know a guy" who has personally had a '77 B up well past 100, but you have to dump that awful intake/exhaust manifold to even think about it.

BrettM
BrettM Reader
7/14/09 7:51 a.m.

In reply to Tim Baxter:

And that was with 1.8 liters... the X only had 1.3 to get there at the time. These cars were never about top speed, more about road feel and how they make YOU feel when driving them.

ronbros
ronbros New Reader
7/14/09 6:07 p.m.

HEY!! this is fun,, my 1949 Oldsmobile Rocket 88,, 2dr coupe would make the speedo read 110 mph, and needle go past that. didnt like corners or stopping much. but goin to the races from Boston to NY, the Glen, or Conn. Lime Rock, it was a lot better than most cars, did i mention smooth and quiet.

1 2 3
Our Preferred Partners
Ikcwl2oni35t17HkYdavcorWwJUEx7CwS5AqasKgKgY7Q8g2WqRtqLXWrGEuEV7U