Re: [diesel_mercedes] Re: I was supposed to be driving a Morgan by now.

 

On 1/18/2012 9:15 AM, Chip wrote:

 



Nate,

I am surprised that you class a Morgan as a little British car. I have never driven one but as I think about them compared to the Metropolitan, MG or Austin I think of them as a big step up. Wood frame no less, as best I remember.

Chip

I'm not sure about the newest ones but wood frame refers to the body.  Metal was bent around a wood frame to form the body as was done in the 20's and 30's.  The chassis was metal.  One of the major distinguishing features of Morgans was a sliding pillar front suspension in  which the spindle slid up and down on a steel column which provided constant camber.  The chassis went under the rear axle and was suspended on leaf springs.  Without getting into the technical benefits/ downsides, the car handled beautifully on relatively smooth roads.  This info was based on my 1960's four seater.  I'm not sure what they are doing on the latest models.  They have recently brought back their three wheeler.  This time with a Harley engine.  A friend of mine had one with a Matchless V twin mounted between the front wheels.  It had a total loss oiling system to the exposed rockers which meant that the front of the car, driver, and passenger received a fine oil mist.  Whatever else you could say about Morgans, the company always went its own way.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

No comments:

Post a Comment