Lightning and E-Type

a friend had a 67 goat !! it wasn’t so much the brakes that scared you so much as it being a big wallowing dog of a thing no denying it was fast with the original tri power and hurst shifter

just don’t bank on getting round corners or stopping once you get there !!:diablo:

I’ll agree that many American cars of the period were “under braked” for their power/size/weight. It’s most noticeable (and commented on) in the “muscle cars” (mid-size cars with large engines) and “pony cars” (high performance Mustangs, Camaros, Challengers, etc.) of the period.
But they were normal for production cars at the time.
As a driver, you learned to anticipate stops sooner (not a bad idea today, IMHO). It’s hardly a problem. I have several cars and I drive each one differently

Yeah, tell me about it, I had a Challenger with no brake servo/booster but front discs, a Charger with drums all round but with a servo, and a Challenger T/A, Satellite Sebring and Ranchero with servo’d discs up front.
I agree though it was never a problem, in fact having these old cars did instil a predictive approach to driving.

I’ve driven almost every car from the ’60’s, I still cant think of one that had decent brakes; the big problem with drum brakes, was brake fade, compounded by an almost weekly requirement to adjust them, leaky wheel cylinders, and no telling which way they would pull the car (on the first application).

I’ll agree that many American cars of the period were “under braked” for their power/size/weight. It’s most noticeable (and commented on) in the “muscle cars” (mid-size cars with large engines) and “pony cars” (high performance Mustangs, Camaros, Challengers, etc.) of the period.
But they were normal for production cars at the time.
As a driver, you learned to anticipate stops sooner (not a bad idea today, IMHO). It’s hardly a problem. I have several cars and I drive each one differently.

But I’ll disagree about the maintenance issues. American drums of the 60s were pretty foolproof and remain so today. I’m not aware of alot of adjustments being necessary for normal driving. As a child back then, our family cars never had an issue with brakes and required no special servicing.
Likewise, a few years back, a restored 1977 Jeep CJ-5 was my daily driver, and I had no problems with the brakes.

My current “modern” vintage car, a 1963 Studebaker Avanti, has discs up front (Dunlops under license by Bendix) and stops well. Most of the system was replaced during its recent restoration, but thats hardly unusual for a car approaching 50 years of age.

[I]You were right about the Trumf Spit/Herald/etc gear swinging inwards when ‘raised’ by the suspension system – damn near had a nasty in mine!
Awful car – haven’t had a drive in an E-Type or a Lightning, although I fancy the ‘E’ handled a tad better than a Herald 😮

i had the 948 , 1200 and 12/50 if pressed to hard cornering they whipped you into the verge or gutter ( straight towards ) a idiosyncracy caused by the single leaf spring mounted transverseley

the herald had bottom edge inwards rear wheels

the spitfire retained the same suspension but the problem was greatly reduced by having the rear wheel bottoms edge outwards

so when trying to corner fast the inner rear wheel still tried to tuck under but stayed verticle instead leaving the tread on the road instead of the sidewall

but strangely the e type and herald share more design ideas than most realise

I’ve driven almost every car from the ’60’s, I still cant think of one that had decent brakes; the big problem with drum brakes, was brake fade, compounded by an almost weekly requirement to adjust them, leaky wheel cylinders, and no telling which way they would pull the car (on the first application).

Rover P6, discs on every wheel from the start and very effective aswel.
P5 wasn’t bad either, just a lot more weight to haul up!

Triumph Spitfire, stays truthful to the original concept in at least one area, it retains the inward retracting U/C……

Knifeedge: I know that the REAL Spitfire had outward retracting gear (called undercarriage in my pre-C130 days!)

You were right about the Trumf Spit/Herald/etc gear swinging inwards when ‘raised’ by the suspension system – damn near had a nasty in mine!
Awful car – haven’t had a drive in an E-Type or a Lightning, although I fancy the ‘E’ handled a tad better than a Herald 😮

Yes your right about the “real” Spitfire’s undercart, I could have said Hurricane, as a company called Hurricane made a very nice body to replace the spitfire’s own, but it seemed more appropriate to link the two “spitfires”.

A road test at the time said that it had the unique ability to go from negative camber to positive camber almost instantly, having driven them I can concur.

I’ve driven almost every car from the ’60’s, I still cant think of one that had decent brakes; the big problem with drum brakes, was brake fade, compounded by an almost weekly requirement to adjust them, leaky wheel cylinders, and no telling which way they would pull the car (on the first application).

Quite a few harsh comments here r.e the Etype, I suspect those who drove it, and didn’t like it, expected far more than could be bought for £2k, had they have driven an Aston or Ferrari, they would have reached the conclusion that, the Etype was much the same, in terms of speed, stopping and rusting, but a fraction of the price; those of us that still have one, will have to content ourselves, with very reasonable resale prices, should we be too disappointed……

I chose roadster.

It leaked like a sieve and the carpets smelt musty. Noisy at speed with roof up or down.

Put me off flappy-top cars for life.

Moggy

Agreed. The only real choice should be coupe or roadster… though if someone offered me the low drag E-type, I wouldn’t say no!

Only on the first series cars Moggy!

Of course. The only body style worth having.

Moggy

Only on the first series cars Moggy!

By the time they revised the E-type – for series 1.5 – they had realised their **** up and got rid of the Dunlop discs, pathetic two pot brake calipers and the Kelsey-hayes brake booster (which was most of the problem, as it reduced the pedal assistance the slower the car was going) and replaced the whole set up with Lockheed Girling components.

This comprised of proper vacuum assistance and three pot calipers with greater pad area… coincidentally a lot of the same system is used by Lotus cars of the era, and some Aston Martins. This set up was then used on the E-type S1.5, 2 and 3, the 420, and the XJ6. It was (and is) still more than up to the task.

If they had used the set up as used on the Mk2 they wouldn’t have had a problem… but a lot of the development of the E-type came directly from the D-type, and the brake system was similar. It was of no problem to racing drivers who often asked for their competition E-types to have the assistance removed altogether.

Rich

Very few.

Most had drums that were actually more effective (other than in very wet conditions) than the dreadful Dunlop discs fitted to the XKE

Moggy

Lotus Cortina apart, of course.

And the E-Type brakes were dreadful by the standards of the day, not just by modern standards.

But they did look so cool

Moggy

Moggy, how many other cars had disc brakes fifty years ago?

Hey, there’s lots of truth about the unreliability of the E-Type ….. the trunk would pop open on every other bump in the road, it needed a new clutch after only 6.000 miles (would you believe that the engine had to come out in order for the clutch to be replaced?), the distributor would flood out in the wet (usually while in the passing lane at 110 with oncoming traffic closing in) … the middle latch for the convertible top would blow open with one hell of a bang and roar of wind noise while running at 135 (scaring the sh*t out of me) ….. yeah, the list goes on, but hey, when it was good, it was great!

What a blast it was to cruise around Trafalgar square (LHD) with the top down, and three beautiful, young gals half in and half out of the car! Only in an E-Type.

I believe it was Road & Track that called it, “The greatest crumpet collector known to man.”

Hmm, I’m tempted!! Could do with a decent car mag!

Triumph Spitfire, stays truthful to the original concept in at least one area, it retains the inward retracting U/C……

Knifeedge: I know that the REAL Spitfire had outward retracting gear (called undercarriage in my pre-C130 days!)

You were right about the Trumf Spit/Herald/etc gear swinging inwards when ‘raised’ by the suspension system – damn near had a nasty in mine!
Awful car – haven’t had a drive in an E-Type or a Lightning, although I fancy the ‘E’ handled a tad better than a Herald 😮

This bit!

Mission time 25 mins without drop tanks.

That was the secret!

…….just hope the Russians don’t read this forum:rolleyes:

Upon which bit?

I’m an ex pat now and can’t talk about such stuff on net or phone, as I believe some aspects of the EE L are still classified.

I’ve just choked on my cider!

As a car nut, I have to say the E type was not a great car to own in terms of the reliability and safety etc. All the problems listed above are on every car, more or less.
But it was and (I think) still is, the best looking Sport ever made.

As for the Lightning, it was used for 1 job in the RAF in the main. Climb to intercept the “Bears” asap. Invite them to naff off, then return to base. Mission time 25 mins without drop tanks.
This it did with outstanding success.
And, last time I discussed it with peers (2 years ago) the vertical climb rate of the shiny beauty had not been beaten. Typhoon lags behind it a little. I’m an ex pat now and can’t talk about such stuff on net or phone, as I believe some aspects of the EE L are still classified.

Funny, never looked at the E Type as beautiful at the time, had the chance of owning one back in the 70s but preferred the standard Cortina family everytime.

I cannot remember anyone raving about them, amongst the 3,500 personnal at RAF Cottesmore at the time I cannot remember any around the station. There was one that languished in the garage, for sale, nearby at £400, didn’t look bad but refused to start on the 2 occasions I looked at it.(I ended up buying another Cortina for £200) The engineer in the the garage said they were a pile of cr@p and I had no reason to argue with him.

A couple of years ago I talked to a retired garage owner in Newquay (from London) and in that conversation I asked what was the worst secondhand selling car you experienced in your career, the words had not got out fully when he retorted “E Type!!”
He then went on to tell me what a dreadful car they were.

They are rare for a reason.

I’m not saying they are an ugly car, but at the time you didn’t look twice at it, unless it was being driven by a kn*b.

Baz