Classics dwarfed by moderns

[MarshPhantom]

dandarez said:

MarshPhantom said:

He he.
One problem.

That is not a Ginetta G3.

The base shell was indeed made by Ginetta founders the Walklett Brothers, but it was simply a body marketed for the home builder to find (usually) a Ford chassis to put the shell on, its name was the 'Fairlite'.

So, whoever put that together didn't really know what they were doing! However, rare as hen's teeth.

Here is an advert for it. 49 quid!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/23885771@N03/9475003...

Edited by dandarez on Tuesday 22 November 13:58

Interesting, thanks. I googled the G3 and this was pretty much all that came up.

[dandarez]

Here is Ginetta's first car, the G2 pictured (bottom) a few years ago at the Historic Specials day in Burford Oxfordshire (held every year one Sunday in August).

Owner travelled about 130+ miles to get there from Essex, mostly in very heavy rain (hence he still wearing the yellow raincoat!) and with that low front nose cowl.
My pics, and later I even got to have a drive in it. Amazing.

Not anywhere as neat as Chapman's Lotus 6 above, but this was the Walklett's first real effort and they sold quite a few. Caused much interesting chat that day.

[dandarez]

Even modern Ginetta (G40) can be easily dwarfed by moderns! LOL

http://images.car.bauercdn.com/pagefiles/19609/104...

(someone else post the pic up, for some reason I couldn't)

[MarshPhantom]

What was the obsession with tiny, lightweight cars? Did they struggle to get decent power from the engines?

[Huntsman]

MarshPhantom said:

What was the obsession with tiny, lightweight cars? Did they struggle to get decent power from the engines?

I think that was a major factor back in the 50's when Lotus/Ginetta etc were messing about, then an American V8 got put in an AC Ace and times changed.

[austin]

Huntsman said:

MarshPhantom said:

What was the obsession with tiny, lightweight cars? Did they struggle to get decent power from the engines?

I think that was a major factor back in the 50's when Lotus/Ginetta etc were messing about, then an American V8 got put in an AC Ace and times changed.

Lots of stuff made with Austin 7 parts, not a huge amount of power from them so adding lightness was the key.

Most of the people building cars then started with Austin 7s, see Lotus etc.

[RichB]

MarshPhantom said:

What was the obsession with tiny, lightweight cars? Did they struggle to get decent power from the engines?

It was after the 2nd world war, no one had any money. The government encouraged every manufacturer to export by the use of punitive purchase taxes and fibre glass had just become popular as a means of making cheap bolt on bodies. if you weren't well monied one way to get a sporting car was buy one of these bodies, of which there were many, and bolt it onto a pre-war light chassis. It's hard to comprehend now but that's the way it was just 10 years after WWII.

[dandarez]

Classic dwarfed by modern

...or in this case could also be modern dwarfed by modern!

[FelixP]

Classic dwarfed by classics



And just about dwarfing a another.



The Corvette has a 244cm wheelbase, shorter than the MK1 Capri and an Audi TT to name a few.

[Kawasicki]

FelixP said:

Classic dwarfed by classics



And just about dwarfing a another.



The Corvette has a 244cm wheelbase, shorter than the MK1 Capri and an Audi TT to name a few.

Bonkers! An E30 is 257cm!

[Kawasicki]

FelixP said:

Classic dwarfed by classics



And just about dwarfing a another.



The Corvette has a 244cm wheelbase, shorter than the MK1 Capri and an Audi TT to name a few.

Bonkers! An E30 is 257cm!

[Andrew Gray]

[Bustedmattress]

My car today in the car park at Donnington. I never thought of it as a small car. When young 5 of us used to go on hols the 290 miles to Trevino in Cornwall every year in Dad's GS Special. My Club looks very slight along side those two though.

[Silver Smudger]

Nearly 30 years on, does this count?

[Butter Face]

Silver Smudger said:

Nearly 30 years on, does this count?

And supposedly only 100kg or so difference (hard to believe!)

[robemcdonald]

Butter Face said:

Silver Smudger said:

Nearly 30 years on, does this count?

And supposedly only 100kg or so difference (hard to believe!)

How come the new cars space looks 25% larger than the mk1s?
They both seem to have similar distances from the doors to the white lines.

The new car is only 60mm or so wider, 5mm taller and actually 35mm shorter than the mk1.
It's a slightly dodgy camera angle/lens or something.

Edited by robemcdonald on Monday 1st May 08:14

[RichB]

5mm taller? Someone's not telling the truth, either Mazda or Wikipedia!

[robemcdonald]

[RichB]

Although the image of the original car appears to show the width including the mirrors whereas the new is clearly without mirrors so add on another 125mm each side and it's more like 310mm wider (1 foot).

[robemcdonald]

The 1675mm doesn't include wing mirrors. It's not a great drawing.