here are a couple of mine the green one is a 1936 austin 7 special i used to have most of the body was done when i bought it but i made the belly pan which i won a tech week with a few years ago , and i made the cockpit cover it was a great car it was raced used in hill climbs and trials the second is an amilcar it started life as a doctors coupe and the body was removed years ago chassis shortened and bulkhead cut and shut and this body made,
I really like both of those. However, I sometimes lament how many interesting closed bodies have been discarded in favour of sports or touring bodies. I think of Bentleys, and specifically a beautiful 4½ supercharged fhc that later became just another Le Mans replica. Still, that this tends to happen does tend to support my contention that the cars we'd be likely to find in a scenario where there are a lot fewer cars will not be practical commuter-cars but enthusiast cars.
Ned on the VSCC forum there are many people up in arms about touring bodies being removed from cars to make sporting specials , but the problem is a sporting special is often worth more than its less glamours touring brother espcialy Rileys ,, but it is sad this is still being done, you can often find good Riley touring bodies on ebay or prewarcar for sale , i would feel bad cutting up an original car that has survived 80 years a world war , , to make a sporting special , but there are many who dont i should add it wasnt me who did first built the amilcar, after i bought it i found more about its history, it was imported into the UK as a doctors coupe , a fabricator form F1 bought it chopped the chassis and built the sports body , then used it in a couple of VSCC trials broke the crank, and sold it with a broken crank for twice the price he bought the original car, it went through a number of owners had the engine rebuilt , i bought it tidied it up and made a belly pan , ran it for a couple of years i then swapped it for a 37 hudson as i needed a family car , the amilcar has since had an engine change and been through a couple of owners and was last for sale at a stupid amount of money double what I sold it for
I think I'm less concerned about "originality" than discarding the rare and unusual in favour of the obvious and ubiquitous. Thus I have no problem with cannibalizing a mass-produced saloon body back into the restoration community in order to build a special, especially if the body is a bit tatty. But given the chance I'd be the first to rebody any given UR6571 clone as a quirkily rakish three-quarter landau-coupé that never was.
I like that approach to the need for a family car. I'd heard of one fellow who bought a Daimler limousine when faced with that situation. I've thought that some sort of serious turbo-diesel in an Austin FX4 might be an option if I ever find myself there.
i have always wanted a Taxi , i once chopped one up on scrapheap challenge to make it into a railroad racer
Thanx for posting these, McKee! I don't think I've ever seen this car and it's just wonderful. I'd like to see more if anyone has them. Gary
I've looked at all the pictures, carefully and as a kid in the late 50's I remmber seeing a car alot like this except it had a Jag 6 the fuel tank behind the driver was an old tractor, oval shaped, from a Massey Ferguson which caused a lot of comment. anyone know the full story on it? is it a recent build?
foolthrottle, I wonder if you are talking about the Parkinson Jaguar Special. Built by Don Parkinson in Los Angles in 1951 from his wrecked (Pebble Beach) XK-120. All stock Jag chassis (and gas tank) but engine moved back about a foot, down 4", right 2". I've owned it for about 40 years and vintage race it in Northern Calif often.
Very cool! Please post more pictures of it! I'm building a Jag based special using 1960 MKII pieces http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=339315&highlight=roofus
Flipper, Here is a link to an on line article about the car. Lots of photos, and well written; both better than I could do! http://www.britishracecar.com/TerryBuffum-Jaguar-ParkinsonSpecial.htm
Just FYI, I was over at my bud Guy's garage yesterday and took some shots of a Stalker II he is wiring. It is, of course, a Lotus 7 clone but very well done. The owner has an earlier Stalker, with the 3.8 GM supercharged V-6. The new version is just as light! With an aluminum 5.3, T56 and a Caddy based IRS the dammed thing still only weighs 1470, less fuel and driver. I've been taking notes to see how I can adapt key aspects of the chassis, especially the IRS into my model A build. As it sits, there is 7" ground clearance with 25" tall tires and the main horizontal truss is only 13" high. The subframe for the diff is only 22" wide and about 14" x 12" (less A arms) - very compact and clever with the rocker coil overs worked into the roll cage for stiffness. As a test, I sat on a board to see how I might fit in a more proper seating position in a taller car. Yes, that's fat old me... Even with a wheelbase shorter than an A or 32, using some of these ideas on my "special" A coupe seem pretty doable. Basic chassis widths at key points like the cabin, firewall, etc. are +/- an inch or two from an A or 32, so building a perimiter frame using Ford rails and some the crossmembers / tunnel ideas in the Stalker would seem to be a very easy meld. I think I'll keep a beam or tube front end, though and a light weight live axle would be a back-up, but I really like the IRS idea because the driveshaft doesn't need any extra room to travel. I hope to be able to talk the Stalker folks into helping me with my chassis, as they just live on the other side of the bay. Gary PS what really, really makes me mad is this aluminum 5.3 is 30lbs lighter than the iron block 3.8 V-6 with supercharger in my 27 truck! http://www.bruntonauto.com/stalkermspec/stalkermspec.htm
The main architectural difference I see between an A or Deuce and a Lotus 7 clone is the structural width at the firewall. Early Fords describe a continuous taper in frame width from front to rear; the Lotus has a taper up to the firewall, distinct "shoulders" at that point, and parallel rails rearwards from there. That allows the (front) seating to be much lower in the Lotus than in the Fords, because feet can drop comfortably between the rails. On the Fords one always has an offside foot outside, or rather on top of, a frame rail.
I suppose that there were more than a few similar sports specials running flathead V8's in cut-down Ford frames built back in the '50's. Maybe not so many that looked this good. Does anybody know if this was raced at the Chimney Rock Hillclimb in western North Carolina? It looks a lot like one that I looked at in a junkyard in Haywood County. It was bought and restored by someone from around Chattanooga in the early '90's, then displayed at one of the final races at that park. Later, Kinky6
I tried to cram some Lotus 7 in my build for those same reasons. Low seating with a chance at foot room. Foot room would be a lot better with the bell housing slid forward (inline 6 is not the easiest thing to build around). but I curved the outside frame rails
1926 Amilcar Special located in Autstralia. Supercharged 2 litre AC engine,Alvis transmission,and Riley steering.Not sure how much Amilcar remains. On offer through www.PreWarCar.com
Damn... That thing sits "just right" for a special or a hotrod or anything else. Do you have any more angles?
I gotta 2 litre Alfa Romeo engine and 5spd trans, I been trippin' over, in the shop, for about a year. I also gotta couple of 40DCOE Webers and some very cool, but useless, 16 x 4 vintage style aluminum wheels...... I'm thinkin, about a 50s style ALFA SPL....... ?????? mac miller in INDY
I have always wondered about the origin of the Brooklands dual aero screen windshield. They were probably first used on the Specials. Seems to be the UK first designed them. Did some searching here and only found a couple members cars with the Brooklands aero screen. Several sellers offer them on eBay. Is there a "rule of thumb" on what there application is? Is it strictly track? How do DMV state inspection centers regard them?
Special? Not so special? I've seen this car before. It was apparently American built. A wing tank for the road. One was found and featured on American Pickers last season.
They were in evidence at sports-racing events from about 1925 on. For instance, photos of Le Mans 1923 show few if any, but they were quite common by 1926. I suspect that the "aero" bit comes from an aircraft origin, during or shortly after WWI. The idea is also that one can fold them flat, so that they add virtually no frontal area; and even when upright add no more than one's head already does. Of course this does not consider drag coefficients at all. The general rule for cars with side by side seating is, a curved-top screen for the driver and a straight-top screen for the passenger. If there is a foldable full-size screen, the aero screens go behind it, so they can be used when the full-size screen is folded down.
Dr. J ,follow the link to PreWarCar ,then see if there are more images.It seems to me I saw some more of it on Facebook. BanjeauX Bob
I think many state DMV's require some sort of a wiper; plus safety glass and perhaps a size minimum. The glass on mine doesn't appear to be safety glass; but, tempered glass. I've seen a lot of cars, that have a fold down windshield; fitted with Brooklands, mounted on the cowl, behind the folded shields. The Brooklands shield on my car, will fold down by itself at speeds higher than about 110 MPH.
The Jalopy Journal
