For those interested in old cars.

[PhilJ W]

3 hours ago, APOLLO said:

My mate said he can tighten up nuts and bolts with his butt.

 

Personally I think he torques out of his arse

 

Brit15

[Rugd1022]

This just in from our man Sandy Gall at News At Ten....

 

 

[Kickstart]

On 16/12/2020 at 13:02, johnlambert said:

I also wish manufacturers or road testers would show the cascade graphs that show tractive effort versus road speed in each gear (plus a rising plot for the cumulative rolling and aerodynamic resistance with speed); these would be much more informative than power and torque curves.

I agree, but not sure how many people would actually understand it. Few understand what torque is, let alone thrust and drag. It gets me a bit that it seems power is often quoted at a specific rpm (when power is torque x rpm, that almost seems like double  accounting), while many seem to quote torque without rpm as some kind of proof how flexible their engine is.

 

Years ago I knocked up a web site to display thrust graphs (against an estimate of drag). Did it to play around with gearing when I was doing top speed runs. Quite a lot didn’t understand the concept.

 

On 15/12/2020 at 21:28, MrWolf said:

Are you seriously attempting to create a valid experiment and consequently score points out of something said in jest between friends??

 

Reminds me of when weekend wobblers ask questions like

 

"How fast does that dinosaur go then?"

 

The answer being:

 

"Fast enough to lose your license or kill yourself, which would you like to do?"

 

 

Sorry, maybe I was being too dry. But the reply was intended to be regarded in a similarly light heartedly manner.

 

On 16/12/2020 at 08:22, MrWolf said:

I plan on still being as daft when I hit that age. What else do you do? Give up everything to "act your age" and just sit around waiting for the undertaker?

Sometimes better to act our shoe size. None of us are getting out of this alive.

 

All the best

 

Katy

[PatB]

I'm at Royal Perth Yacht Club today (not a member, just making the place look untidy), and found this in the adjacent car park. I probably wouldn't have bothered with the more common MG Midget with the usual wire wheels, but an A-H Sprite on its original steelies is unusual enough for me to pause for a snap. Those more expert than I may be able to fix an approximate date via the shape of the rear wheel arches and the lack of external door handles. I neglected to look underneath to see whether it had 1/4 or 1/2 elliptic springs. 

 

[PatB]

On 16/12/2020 at 17:47, alastairq said:

 I'm avoiding an undertaker altogether....my family have been told.....can o' petrol behind the garage, matches in kitchen drawer, and a shovel in the shed....Sorted!

Mind, that could always end up , by being stuffed into the brown bin?

I was planning a sky burial on the shed roof, but the council got a bit funny about it when I asked them. 

[MrWolf]

Well spotted with the Sprite. Most over in the UK seem to have minilite wheels or similar, much rarer than the MG version too. Although here 60s versions of either are thin on the ground due to filling up with rain and breaking in half.

That's probably almost as rare as a MkI Ford Capri still fitted with bumpers and hubcaps.

[alastairq]

Mk 2 Sprite?

Sprites are my favourites of the joint marques....Midgets have too much bling for my tastes.

 

I wonder if this one has a 948cc engine, or an early version of the 1098cc motor?

 

I shall l be controversial, and say, BHP isn't everything for a ''driver.''

[MrWolf]

8 minutes ago, alastairq said:

 

I shall l be controversial, and say, BHP isn't everything for a ''driver.''

 

You can enjoy driving anything that has character, I learned to drive round a neighbour's garden in an Austin 7 that was nearly 60 years old then. I still enjoy driving my other half's Herald 1200 when she lets me!

They feel very close to the ground for a saloon car.

[alastairq]

4 minutes ago, MrWolf said:

You can enjoy driving anything that has character,

Indeed...but my experience is, UK owners are in love with BHP. For whatever reason. 

[Enterprisingwestern]

6 minutes ago, alastairq said:

Indeed...but my experience is, UK owners are in love with BHP BMW. For whatever reason. 

 

FIFY!

 

Mike.

[PatB]

Given that the Sprite was cheaper than the Midget. by a few quid (iirc), I've always been surprised by their rarity. 

 

Given the lack of ghastly, tasteless modifications that are often a feature of classics in Australia (interior seemed completely standard too), I'd hazard a guess that it's still A-Series powered, rather than a bodgy Nissan transplant. My guess would be 1098 or an aftermarket 1275, as I suspect the 948 wod be regarded as just too much of a tiddler here. 

 

I agree with Alastair about power (or otherwise). It's far more fun to drive a slow vehicle fast than a fast one slow. One of the most memorable few minutes I've ever had in 35 years on the road was a good natured dice between my MZ TS250 motorcycle and a Lomax 223. Not that we were racing, of course, for that would have been naughty and dangerous, but it was interesting to see how evenly matched we were and fun attempting to squeeze that last 1/4 mph out of the machinery. 

[alastairq]

I have a real sense of forboding driving the Dellow over 60 mph...mainly, is it going to suddenly launch itself into the ditch? The steering is so darned quick, and prone to following ridges on the tarmac...But, it never does get ditchwise....and even if it did, I'd need to remember to keep my foot down, and drive back out again.    Somehow one doesn't get that sense of insecurity when driving an Audi over the speed limit?

One feels relaxed and safe, Safe in the knowledge the car and it's undoubted technology will keep things from becoming dramatic...

 

 

 

Which is probably why I see so many Audis in the ditch??  

[Hobby]

3 hours ago, alastairq said:

Indeed...but my experience is, UK owners are in love with BHP. For whatever reason. 

 

Give me torque any day, more relaxed driving…

[Kickstart]

4 hours ago, MrWolf said:

 

You can enjoy driving anything that has character, I learned to drive round a neighbour's garden in an Austin 7 that was nearly 60 years old then. I still enjoy driving my other half's Herald 1200 when she lets me!

They feel very close to the ground for a saloon car.

Yep. We all probably have different aspects that we appreciate. One persons character is another persons unliveable flaw.

 

We have a ~1990 Maserati. They have a contradiction of a subtle exterior, tarts boudoir interior and bonkers engine. Many would hate this, to me it adds character.

 

All the best

 

Katy

[Northmoor]

Pleasure without performance...... 

I've driven both of my Dad's Minors; the 1098 isn't exactly quick while the MM would watch a 2CV clear off into the distance.  But driving one down a country lane at even 25mph with the exhaust echoing off walls is a joy.  I went out a few times with a late friend in his Westfield.  Even before he uprated the engine from about 85 to 170bhp (still flippin' quick though), it was the nearest thing I can imagine to the sensations of riding a motorcycle but with four wheels.

[MrWolf]

I've been lucky enough to drive all sorts of weird and wonderful vehicles over the last thirty years or so, weird things like a Volga taxi, an AC Petite, DKW Sonderklasse. Exotica like a Maserati 3500GT, Iso Grifo, Bristol 403, Lancia Aurelia. Once common cars like Minor 948, Renault 10, Ford 100E, Vauxhall 101 as well as forgotten cars like the Talbot 10, Jowett Javelin and an Austin 8.

 

They all have one thing in common and that is character.

 

Something that modern cars don't. No matter how hard the marketing department tries to tell you that they're exciting, modern cars have more in common with your mobile phone or your refrigerator than any sort of connection with the fantasy of the open road.

 

Unless of course you like driving around in something with all the character of a motorised takeaway carton.

[40152]

Driving my 72 RWA Midget is still a joy that no-one can take away. Remember that even a wee streak of p*ss like me can lift/shunt the back end round by hand if need be. Translate that to being out on the road, accelerating hard out of a bend in 2nd and trying to keep the back end from drifting sideways is something (and a skill) most Eurobox drivers will never appreciate. Plus the sound of an A series working hard.....bliss.

[PhilJ W]

19 minutes ago, 40152 said:

Driving my 72 RWA Midget is still a joy that no-one can take away. Remember that even a wee streak of p*ss like me can lift/shunt the back end round by hand if need be. Translate that to being out on the road, accelerating hard out of a bend in 2nd and trying to keep the back end from drifting sideways is something (and a skill) most Eurobox drivers will never appreciate. Plus the sound of an A series working hard.....bliss.

Its surprising what you can achieve with regard to cornering with a live rear axle. The last car that I owned with that arrangement was a Vauxhall Chevette which would corner better than many front wheel drive cars. Mind you the Chevette rear end with its five link location and coil springs was a good deal better than most other rear drive cars.

[MrWolf]

23 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

Mind you the Chevette rear end with its five link location and coil springs was a good deal better than most other rear drive cars.

 

I remember Nissan trumpeting that features on the wrong wheel drive Almera (sounds like a skin disease) and me thinking, "Just like a 1966 Vauxhall Viva - that's progress!"

 

Then there was Honda I think, with an advert extolling the virtues of the uneven length double wishbone front suspension they were using.

 

Obviously they were pretty certain that prospective buyers had never been underneath a 1947 Buick or a 1952 Vauxhall?

[40152]

38 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

Its surprising what you can achieve with regard to cornering with a live rear axle.

Agreed. Going to sound like an old git here, but so many folk on the road can’t balance a car though a corner, just depend on braking then flooring it. 

[PatB]

I have long been of the opinion that, under most real-world conditions, a torquey* engine can do a pretty good impression of a powerful one, whereas the converse is not necessarily the case. It can certainly be much less effort to "make progress" than with a screamer that needs to be constantly kept on the boil (not that that isn't fun too, under the right circumstances). 

 

As for the whole FWD/RWD thing, I'm also of the opinion that the primary reasons for the move from one to t'other were more about production techniques (I strongly suspect installing the average FWD power train involves fewer operations than an equivalent RWD system) and liability lawsuits (FWD handling characteristics are less likely to bite the incompetent in a manner calculated to delight Ralph Nader), than about any inherent superiority of either. 

 

*"Torquey" being used here in the widely used colloquial sense, rather than any strict, engineering definition. 

Edited December 20, 2020 by PatB

[Enterprisingwestern]

8 hours ago, 40152 said:

Agreed. Going to sound like an old git here, but so many folk on the road can’t balance a car though a corner, just depend on braking then flooring it. 

 

Especially at night when there is a car coming the other way, I often wonder whether to report the drivers for an eye test as their night vision is obviously abysmal.

 

Mike.

[Jol Wilkinson]

7 hours ago, PatB said:

I have long been of the opinion that, under most real-world conditions, a torquey* engine can do a pretty good impression of a powerful one, whereas the converse is not necessarily the case. It can certainly be much less effort to "make progress" than with a screamer that needs to be constantly kept on the boil (not that that isn't fun too, under the right circumstances). 

 

As for the whole FWD/RWD thing, I'm also of the opinion that the primary reasons for the move from one to t'other were more about production techniques (I strongly suspect installing the average FWD power train involves fewer operations than an equivalent RWD system) and liability lawsuits (FWD handling characteristics are less likely to bite the incompetent in a manner calculated to delight Ralph Nader), than about any inherent superiority of either. 

 

*"Torquey" being used here in the widely used colloquial sense, rather than any strict, engineering definition. 

There were a variety of reasons for moving to FWD, which can generally be covered by "manufacturing economies". 

 

FWD cars tend to understeer (racing Mini's displayed this wonderfully), which is an inherently safer characteristic than oversteer in the hands of the "average" driver, i.e. someone who doesn't understand what is going on when a car is at the limit of it's handling/performance envelope.

 

I learned to drive in a 61 Mini but my first own car was a tired MG VA 1500 Tourer. Not a lot of power but I drove it in all weathers, including snow and ice when I learned how to control rear wheel slides, locking front brakes, etc. I also learned how to change gear without using the clutch, to double declutch, etc. The limits of performance and road handling were generally lower, so you could have 

fun at quite low speeds. 

 

Modern cars don't provide the need or the opportunity to learn how a car "works". PAS, ABS, etc. remove the feel and feedback, while automatic gearboxes make the need to think about "effective" use of the engine redundant. Even changing a wheel usually results in a call to the AA, RAC, etc. 

[Northmoor]

1 hour ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

Especially at night when there is a car coming the other way, I often wonder whether to report the drivers for an eye test as their night vision is obviously abysmal.

Night vision is another issue altogether and one I've become very aware of local to me.  Almost all roads around here have street lighting and it is really noticeable how people drive very differently once on the roads that don't have it.  I used one such single carriageway road near here on my commute until recently; it's largely straight with a couple of kinks and in daylight, most drive at or near the 50 limit.  In winter, travelling at the same time of day (so presumably the same commuters) most people don't seem to want to exceed 35 (and are braking when anything comes the other way).  I am all for driving to the conditions and not to the limit, but it does suggest to me that a significant proportion of drivers suffer from night blindness.

[gr.king]

Is there a statutory standard for night vision that can actually be tested in a practical way so that any such law can be enforced? 

 

Perhaps a lot of the trouble, increasing in amount, is actually due to the number of cars now with sizzlingly bright, blue-white, LED or xenon discharge type headlights, with bulb-fitting or beam adjustment carried out by incompetent oafs so that any driver coming the other way is blinded on the approach and then blinded again on passing due to additional glaring side-illumination from some light designs. I know my driving vision is fine, as it is a matter of professional knowledge and concern to me, but I find the standards of maintenance and of law enforcement relating to vehicle lighting are abysmal these days. Any of the millions of drivers out there with early-stage cataract, who are perfectly entitled to continue driving, will suffer far more disability-glare than the rest of us when dazzled by idiotically bright, badly-aimed headlights.

 

Blaming bad headlamp aim on your vehicle's design, on those who service it for you, or on its automatic beam adjusters just isn't good enough as an excuse. Get something done about it.