Lets see a picture of your classic(s) [Vol. 2]
Discussion
Doofus said:
Yertis said:
illmonkey said:
Sounds epic for a London cruiser, a big finger up to the establishment!
In the late ‘80s and early ‘90s I knew a graphic designer - Malcolm Garrett, famous for record sleeves - who IIRC used a ‘71 Barracuda as his London runabout. I thought this was cool and also crazy. Back then a Barracuda was huge compared to most other cars on the road. But 15 years ago found myself using a Monaro in the same way, and somehow having far too much V8 than necessary does improve the London driving experience.
This turned up as my Facebook memory today, surprisingly, I've covered way more miles in the Chevy this past year than I have in the NG.
These two are so different to drive...
Just moving the Chevy about on the drive is hard work, and quite physical - no power assistance, fat tyres. The little TF feels almost like it's assisted, squeezing past the various obstructions on the drive is a doddle; the Chevy has massive blind spots and can feel intimidating and all the while, easing past the sticky out bits of wall I'm listening for that horrible scraping noise of metal on blockwork. The TF goes everywhere accompanied by a jaunty, farty exhaust note that sounds like it could have come from "Carry on pretending it's 1955"! The big six in the van is in a different league entirely, hailing, as it does, from a 1960s muscle car.
Out on the open road, the TF is so much livelier than the Chevy, despite having an engine less than half the size with under half the power. The lovely light weight means it's remarkably sprightly, and the steering, after the box on the Chevy, is beautifully direct. Stirring a gearbox is also fun, although the Turbo 350 auto' in the van makes life a lot easier...
Ahh, the joys of the classic car world.
Which do I prefer? Thankfully, there's room in my life for both of them.
These two are so different to drive...
Just moving the Chevy about on the drive is hard work, and quite physical - no power assistance, fat tyres. The little TF feels almost like it's assisted, squeezing past the various obstructions on the drive is a doddle; the Chevy has massive blind spots and can feel intimidating and all the while, easing past the sticky out bits of wall I'm listening for that horrible scraping noise of metal on blockwork. The TF goes everywhere accompanied by a jaunty, farty exhaust note that sounds like it could have come from "Carry on pretending it's 1955"! The big six in the van is in a different league entirely, hailing, as it does, from a 1960s muscle car.
Out on the open road, the TF is so much livelier than the Chevy, despite having an engine less than half the size with under half the power. The lovely light weight means it's remarkably sprightly, and the steering, after the box on the Chevy, is beautifully direct. Stirring a gearbox is also fun, although the Turbo 350 auto' in the van makes life a lot easier...
Ahh, the joys of the classic car world.
Which do I prefer? Thankfully, there's room in my life for both of them.
spoodler said:
This turned up as my Facebook memory today, surprisingly, I've covered way more miles in the Chevy this past year than I have in the NG.
Great photo, and really interesting to hear how the NG TF drives, from the horse's mouth as it were. As a teenager I was determined my first car would be an NG, ideally a TC V8 (dream on!). When it came to it I had neither the money or the skills to make it happen, so I ended up in a Triumph Spitfire instead. There'd be an NG in my lottery-win garage, that's for sure.
FerrousOxide said:
spoodler said:
This turned up as my Facebook memory today, surprisingly, I've covered way more miles in the Chevy this past year than I have in the NG.
Great photo, and really interesting to hear how the NG TF drives, from the horse's mouth as it were. As a teenager I was determined my first car would be an NG, ideally a TC V8 (dream on!). When it came to it I had neither the money or the skills to make it happen, so I ended up in a Triumph Spitfire instead. There'd be an NG in my lottery-win garage, that's for sure.
NGs are definitely a cut above many of their contemporaries, quality wise, and in the main, work really well. They evoke "old car experience" whilst still being easy to drive, cheap to run and sprightly enough to keep up with traffic.
A TC V8 is still on my want list... but one of my favourite cars, and I've owned fifty or sixty oddities, was my previous NG TA on its "B Series" running gear. That was a car that suited me very well, took loads of abuse and covered a huge mileage (for this type of car) without ever complaining.
CKY said:
droopsnoot said:
Love it 
In my youth I was strangely indifferent to the droop snoot Firenzas and shovel-nose RS2000s preferring the standard bodies instead, but they've certainly aged well and your car looks lovely.Escorts were more numerous and easier to buy parts for, so I went in that direction for my sideways fun.
CKY said:
Love it In my youth I was strangely indifferent to the droop snoot Firenzas and shovel-nose RS2000s preferring the standard bodies instead, but they've certainly aged well and your car looks lovely.
Thanks. Moved on to another gathering with slightly longer grass, and parked alongside an RS2000 (which had been at the first one, but further away from my car). In my youth I was strangely indifferent to the droop snoot Firenzas and shovel-nose RS2000s preferring the standard bodies instead, but they've certainly aged well and your car looks lovely.
Hol said:
Escorts were more numerous and easier to buy parts for, so I went in that direction for my sideways fun.
Parts are still an issue - stuff like wings and so on can be tricky to get, even taking into account that they're Viva wings with the front cut off. Edited by droopsnoot on Monday 4th September 18:41
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff