Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Shifty, I need your help!

245

Comments

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,615
    What did he mean "Ford-related"? Did he mean Ford powered? If so, the only car I can think of from that era with a Ford engine (but certainly not an ohv V-8) would be an Allard.

    MODERATOR

  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    What's that French car with the flathead?
  • lokkilokki Posts: 1,200
    With a Chrysler engine?
  • stickguystickguy Posts: 14,295
    wasn't a Cobra (I mentioned that). I'll run an Allard past him and see if that rings a bell. Or maybe he's getting foggy upstairs, who knows.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,615
    Yeah, you know, these guys over 50 can barely think anymore :)

    The French car was a French Ford, I think called the Vedette, and later became the Simca Vedette. But they didn't make any roadsters that I'm aware of.

    MODERATOR

  • stickguystickguy Posts: 14,295
    simca Vedette (at least the Simca part) seemed to ring a bell. He is going to try and find the original article.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,615
    This car came out right after WW II, but of course with a V-8 engine in postwar France it was not a popular car, being too expensive to run. Eventually Simca bought out Ford France and continued to make the car, but I don't think it was ever very popular in France.

    MODERATOR

  • That is was a 260 V-8, not a 260HP V-8?
  • It was probably a Ford Flathead V8-60. This was the smaller version of the famous flathead known as the V8-90. When I say smaller I'm not sure if it was a different block, it may have been. My father-in-law bolted a V8-60 into his MG-TD after the MG engine blew up and parts were scarce. He raced that car in So. Cal. through the mid-50's. He put an overhead valve conversion on it with 3 carbs. The V8-60 is what Ford of England used as well.
  • carnut4carnut4 Posts: 574
    at the local Sprint car races. They had a "Golden Wheels" feature, with a bunch of old vintage racecars from the 30s, 40s, and 50s. Three of them were little midget racers from the late 40s with Ford V860 Flatheads, with finned heads, multiple carbs and other old speed eqipment. They actually got out there and raced-carefully! Talk about parts that are hard to come by now!
    Another one was an old Gilmore Special racer from the 30s that had a hopped up engine from a 1923 Chevy!
    These are the kinds of cars you usually only see in museums.
  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    That OHV conversion was probably from Ardun.

    "Ardun" comes from Zora ARkus DUNtov, the guy who made the Corvette interesting.

    Modesty forbids me from asking for credit for post #33.
  • Shifty, I have a 03 GT with manuel transmission, and I notice when shifting that when I let off the clutch there is a clinking sound, as if the transmission is absorbing something or coming back on itself. If I give it extra gas this does not happen but then I feel like I am slipping the clutch. Is this normal, or is there a way to compensate? Thanks.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,615
    What kind of car is this?

    If it's a modern car (new Mustang?) you may need to post this in our Repair & Maintenance Board, in "Transmission Traumas" topic.

    This Board is only for "classics", in the loose sense of "old cars".

    MODERATOR

  • judasjudas Posts: 217
    Realized I never posted the pics of the Mustang I ended up with.


    http://home.mchsi.com/~nkloper/P0003369.JPG

    http://home.mchsi.com/~nkloper/P0003372.JPG


    On a related note, I didn't realize what a pain it was to import a car from Canada to the US. :)

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,615
    I didn't realize that either. Tell us about it.

    MODERATOR

  • is that the GT is not the most desirable quite the opposite is true. The GTs weigh the most, other than verts, and other than the body cladding are no different than the LX 5.0l stangs . I think the seats might be different to but everything else is the same. The LX coupes are the most desirable with the enthusiasts anyway since they are the lightest and have the stiffest chassis. If you want to find a reasonably priced one stick to www.autotrader.com . You are right the ones on the enthusiast’s sites are overpriced a lot of the times. Should be able to find a nice one for around $4k.
  • ndancendance Posts: 323
    It would suprise the heck out of me if the coupe is much stiffer than a fastback (the single exception being a police package car, as that is about the only major difference). I'm pro-LX mostly because they don't have that godawful gingerbread that the GT's have. I think the guy that masterminded the louvered taillights went on to design the rear end of the new Impala.

    It is a pity that GM never built the late-model Camaro equivalent of the '93 and prior Mustang coupe. It seems to me that they have a superior drivetrain (even now) but the Ricky Racer styling is really grotesque (and don't get me started on Firebirds with that hideous scoop deal).
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,910
    ...that the notchback coupe would be a bit stiffer than the hatchback model of the Mustang, simply because you don't have that huge opening in the back for the hatch, so there's more room for bracing.
  • but it is stiffer. I agree about the GTs looks though. The LX hatch is the best looking of the three.
  • ndancendance Posts: 323
    From the few I've driven (actually all coupes, now that I think of it) even those seem a bit on the flexi-flyer side. I suppose there are subframe connectors and the like to improve that, but I'll bet a properly fabricated cage would be a miracle worker in this department (the extreme of that I've driven have been V8 Vegas with and w/o).

    I'll tell you one thing...if I ever get one of those cars (not a bad idea really, I like the looks and parts availability), I'm going to see about improving the brakes.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,615
    I hear if you WELD in, not bolt in, frame stiffeners, this really helps. I think all the 5.0s are pretty poor chassis out of the box--but infinitely workable.

    MODERATOR

  • Shifty...you might want to be careful saying that. Sure, welding will make for a stiffer structure, but when you weld, you screw up any heat treatments of the steel, and you introduce brittleness and other unpredictable behaviors because of the way the localized welding heat affects the steel around it. Post welding(that is after production) has proven to have some serious consequences in terms of safety.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,615
    I think a really professional welder with good equipment would avoid that, but yes, you're right, you do have to be careful who you give your car to, for something as critical as frame-welding.

    In any event, it's a risk you'll have to take if you want the frame to really be stiffer and don't want a less than satisfactory result from the bolt-ins. I've heard and read about lots of disappointment with the bolt-in approach.

    I've had only two cars strengthened by welding and I was happy. One was to make the steering box mounts more rigid, another to strengthen differential mounts. But I went to a race car builder, I wasn't taking any chances with some back alley welder.

    MODERATOR

  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHPosts: 16,602
    Shifty can you enlighten me on a couple of things about these cars that aren't clear to me
    tho I've long admired them (in another life I nearly bought one).

    1-Occassionally I see descriptions of them including BN-followed by a number, BN7 seems most common.
    Can you give us a rundown of the significance of these BN numbers?

    2-Did all 3000 Mk IIIs have the curved windshield
    and permanent convertible top as opposed to the roadster top which had to be erected each time
    and did all MkIIs lack both these features?

    Thanks for the help.

    2000 BMW 528i, 2001 BMW 330CiC

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,615
    BN is just a chassis designation

    BN1 1953-55 Model 100-4
    BN2 55-56 Model 100-4
    BN4 56-59 Model 100-6
    BT7 59-62 3000 Mk 1 2+2
    BN7 59-61 3000 Mk1 2 seater
    BT7 62-62 3000 Mk II 2+2 (triple carbs)
    BN7 61-62 3000 Mk II 2 seater (rare) (triple carbs)
    BJ7 62-64 3000 Mk II (first roll up windows) (twin HS6 carbs)
    BJ8 64-67 3000 Mk III (Phase 1 and Phase II)

    There are also the 1955 Model 100S, a very valuable car, and the 1955-56 100/M Le Mans, which is more common and not as valuable by a long shot.

    The first convertible model which you refer to was in january 1962, starting with chassis number BJ7/17551. This had the wrap-around windscreen. the BN7 two seater was discontinued two months later.

    The Mark III was introduced in October 1963, lots of new stuff but basically the same car. Phase II came out in 1964 and this had the best ground clearance (finally!!)

    Last Big Healey was March 1968, a BJ8 chassis # 43026

    MODERATOR

  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHPosts: 16,602
    That cleared a lot of confusion in my mind. Evidently the last MkIIs (BJ7)were the first to have the curved glass and roll-up windows.

    I saw a Healey Mk.III for sale in Hemmings with a Cobra 289 (271 hp?) engine. I wonder how that would work? Any thoughts, Shifty?

    2000 BMW 528i, 2001 BMW 330CiC

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,615
    I have driven a couple of V8 Healeys and they were all unpleasant to drive, heavy-nosed, brutal, cramped, noisy, hard to control.

    I suppose someone who was quite brilliant might be able to engineer a very elegant conversion, but so far all I've seen is a nice and valuable Healey ruined forever. You have this nice, big torquey six in there with the sweetest sound, so filling the engine bay with a clattering lumpy American V8 just doesn't do it for me. A mis-match of identities and purposes.

    You want a Cobra, that's great, but can't afford a real one? Then go buy a nice Cobra kit to build. Don't mess up a $30K Healey.

    MODERATOR

  • carnut4carnut4 Posts: 574
    back in 1965, at Carmel, Ca. It was a total conversion, with lots of fiberglass over the wheel well, etc. Someone had put lots of money in it. May have been just a Sprite body on a custom chassis, I don't know. Anyway, it certainly caught our eye-in a bright yellow. We were down there skipping highschool for a day at the time.
    Only one I've ever seen. Imagine what that was like to drive.
  • Mustangs were lighter than the GTs, talking about the Fox bodies. The notchback is the lightest followed by the hatchback. Some people like the notchbacks for drag racing because they are lighter. Some people like the hatchback for higher speed driving because it is a little better cheating the wind.
  • judasjudas Posts: 217
    "I didn't realize that either. Tell us about it."

    Apparently, if you're going to do it the right way, you first have to get a letter from the manufacturer stating that the car, although made for the Canadian market, met all US safety and emissions specs in the year it was made. Once you get that you go buy your car, when you bring it over the border you present that letter to customs and they give you another letter. Then you take those two to your local DOT or DMV or whatever and you're good to go.

    I, of course, didn't do that. So I had to get the letter (By paying some Ford dealer in Canada a hundred bucks) and then send it to a customs broker who'll get me the other letter (Again, for about a hundred bucks).

    The main pain in the keister came from Ford corporate. I called them, they told me I had to contact a Ford dealership in Canada, so I look one up on the internet, call them, and they say they don't do that. I call Ford back. They say that I have to call a Ford dealer in Canada. But then he says I don't have to, because due to running my VIN # he realizes that my cars seatbelts don't meet US spec and there's no legal way to get them up to US spec. So now I think I have a 3500 dollar 3000 pound lawn ornament. With the gun to my head, before I pull the trigger, I call Ford back and the lady I talk to says the previous guy was full of crap. She says that what he said would be true if my car was made after 1990, which it ain't, and she gives me the # and name of a Ford service manager in Canada that she know does the letters.

    So, everything turned out okay, but it was a little more of a pain than I thought it would be. I figured I'd just take my Canadian title down to the DOT and they'd set me up.
Sign In or Register to comment.