COOL CLASSIC CAR SPOTTERS POST! (Vol 3)
Discussion
dinkel said:
Last year I drove a 208GT4 (1200 kgs) and it's an absolute riot.
Think an Alfa 105 series GTV 2000 on acid > you will like it.
Unless you're in for torque and can't manage the odd dogleg of course...
Makes sense to me: a car like that needs to be seen in the context of it's original launch, might not have the quoted BHP of todays cars, but doesn't have the weight either.Think an Alfa 105 series GTV 2000 on acid > you will like it.
Unless you're in for torque and can't manage the odd dogleg of course...
The power to weight ratio of both Alfa 105 GTV 2000 and Dino 208 GT4 are identical, so same performance. Obviously one is front engined and RWD and the other mid engined and RWD. We used to have one of those Alfas and I now have a Mondial T, but even with 300bhp it’s not a fast car. God knows what 155bhp feels like: I’d definitely be avoiding any traffic light Grand Prix!
Again: I drove one and it's an event!
The V8 needs to boil between 5000 and 7500 to make it go.
Maybe choose a modern SEAT Ibiza to go fast
These 70s cars are slow. I had a go in an LP5000S and any GTi will out run it for sure.
The thing is: I fall asleep driving a modern GTi and will remember every mile in a Countach...
The V8 needs to boil between 5000 and 7500 to make it go.
Maybe choose a modern SEAT Ibiza to go fast
These 70s cars are slow. I had a go in an LP5000S and any GTi will out run it for sure.
The thing is: I fall asleep driving a modern GTi and will remember every mile in a Countach...
dinkel said:
Again: I drove one and it's an event!
The V8 needs to boil between 5000 and 7500 to make it go.
Maybe choose a modern SEAT Ibiza to go fast
These 70s cars are slow. I had a go in an LP5000S and any GTi will out run it for sure.
The thing is: I fall asleep driving a modern GTi and will remember every mile in a Countach...
Seconded - I'd rather drive a 155bhp Ferrari than a modern shopping trolley. Average speed cameras don't discriminate what they pick up.The V8 needs to boil between 5000 and 7500 to make it go.
Maybe choose a modern SEAT Ibiza to go fast
These 70s cars are slow. I had a go in an LP5000S and any GTi will out run it for sure.
The thing is: I fall asleep driving a modern GTi and will remember every mile in a Countach...
Interesting comments on the "155b.h.p." Ferrari...
Funny how times change and how everybody gets so used to so much more, all of the time... Thinking about the cars I've owned, and thoroughly enjoyed, very few of them have had much more than a hundred brake (a few have have had many times that). Many have had less than half of that and rarely have I found them to be particularly lacking... Thirty five brake leaves a 2CV a little lacking when hacking up and down motorways, but I doubt that Ferrari would be destined for the M25 commuter run. Eighty five (or so) in a much modified Spitfire was exciting and a hundred and fifty in a Herald was positively scary. A hundred and fifteen in an early MX5 (which could be thought of as similarish to the Ferrari) also seemed plenty for going places and having fun on U.K. roads.
Our current vehicles are a forties style roadster with just under a hundred brake, enough to make it wag its tail and to feel spritely enough; a hatchback derived van with just over that, which has been plenty to exploit the local roads and take us touring round Scotland, and an old van with about twice that, which has the ability to outperform its chassis at the merest prod of the "Go" pedal, so tends to trundle about on a quarter throttle at around the fifty mark...
Funny how times change and how everybody gets so used to so much more, all of the time... Thinking about the cars I've owned, and thoroughly enjoyed, very few of them have had much more than a hundred brake (a few have have had many times that). Many have had less than half of that and rarely have I found them to be particularly lacking... Thirty five brake leaves a 2CV a little lacking when hacking up and down motorways, but I doubt that Ferrari would be destined for the M25 commuter run. Eighty five (or so) in a much modified Spitfire was exciting and a hundred and fifty in a Herald was positively scary. A hundred and fifteen in an early MX5 (which could be thought of as similarish to the Ferrari) also seemed plenty for going places and having fun on U.K. roads.
Our current vehicles are a forties style roadster with just under a hundred brake, enough to make it wag its tail and to feel spritely enough; a hatchback derived van with just over that, which has been plenty to exploit the local roads and take us touring round Scotland, and an old van with about twice that, which has the ability to outperform its chassis at the merest prod of the "Go" pedal, so tends to trundle about on a quarter throttle at around the fifty mark...
spoodler said:
Interesting comments on the "155b.h.p." Ferrari...
Funny how times change and how everybody gets so used to so much more, all of the time... Thinking about the cars I've owned, and thoroughly enjoyed, very few of them have had much more than a hundred brake (a few have have had many times that). Many have had less than half of that and rarely have I found them to be particularly lacking... Thirty five brake leaves a 2CV a little lacking when hacking up and down motorways, but I doubt that Ferrari would be destined for the M25 commuter run. Eighty five (or so) in a much modified Spitfire was exciting and a hundred and fifty in a Herald was positively scary. A hundred and fifteen in an early MX5 (which could be thought of as similarish to the Ferrari) also seemed plenty for going places and having fun on U.K. roads.
Our current vehicles are a forties style roadster with just under a hundred brake, enough to make it wag its tail and to feel spritely enough; a hatchback derived van with just over that, which has been plenty to exploit the local roads and take us touring round Scotland, and an old van with about twice that, which has the ability to outperform its chassis at the merest prod of the "Go" pedal, so tends to trundle about on a quarter throttle at around the fifty mark...
In the late '90s, 118bhp was still enough to make the Lotus Elise a spectacularly good road car. Funny how times change and how everybody gets so used to so much more, all of the time... Thinking about the cars I've owned, and thoroughly enjoyed, very few of them have had much more than a hundred brake (a few have have had many times that). Many have had less than half of that and rarely have I found them to be particularly lacking... Thirty five brake leaves a 2CV a little lacking when hacking up and down motorways, but I doubt that Ferrari would be destined for the M25 commuter run. Eighty five (or so) in a much modified Spitfire was exciting and a hundred and fifty in a Herald was positively scary. A hundred and fifteen in an early MX5 (which could be thought of as similarish to the Ferrari) also seemed plenty for going places and having fun on U.K. roads.
Our current vehicles are a forties style roadster with just under a hundred brake, enough to make it wag its tail and to feel spritely enough; a hatchback derived van with just over that, which has been plenty to exploit the local roads and take us touring round Scotland, and an old van with about twice that, which has the ability to outperform its chassis at the merest prod of the "Go" pedal, so tends to trundle about on a quarter throttle at around the fifty mark...
Sticks. said:
Down a country road a 70s Mini 1000 left me for dead recently. I bet they were having more fun too.
Not having a dig....When driving an older car and having a car with modern laser beam lights behind which just happen to be at the same height as the mirrors is quite irritating. I used to either let them go past or drive with a bit more spirit to give myself a couple of bends space.
But yeah, they were also probably having fun.
Only problem with 2L Ferrari V8's is existence of 3L Ferrari V8's. Parts are basically same price or when they are different possibly more, purchase price is nearly same and restoration is same. Therefore 2L really do not make sense. Now if they were 1/2 price then yes but they usually are more like 3/4 or more of equal 3L car.
LotusOmega375D said:
It’s not just a choice between a 155bhp Ferrari and a modern shopping trolley though, is it? 
Style-wise, usability-wise and age-wise: no, of course it isn't. But some of us occasionally drift into a parallel universe where we can buy something for £xxxxx and not care what it is.The cheapest 308s on Pistonheads / Car & Classic at the moment are about £65K, so is it reasonable to assume a 208 non-turbo (if you could find one) would be about, say, £50-55K?
That's what Honda wants for a Civic Type R, and a lot less than Mercedes wants for an A45. Are they better cars? Course they are, if that's what you want. I don't want one. I want the Ferrari. Your view may be different.
theadman said:
Dapster said:
Very early single exhaust 308. Could be a vetroresina.
Just for info, the fibreglass cars have the reversing lights in the rear bumper rather than the indicator lenses. So that looks like a steel car, but it should have the dry sump engine.Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff