Old School Photos

[260DET]

You make it sound as though I don't think the S30-series design and engineering was good (???). Of course it was good, and in some markets it was deliberately sold at an artificially low price that made it very attractive to buyers - so it sold in great numbers. But to just lump the vast majority of "Euro cars" into one group, and to write them off without any subjective discussion is absurd.

 

.........................................................

 

Alan T.

 

The reason why 'Euro cars' were lumped into one (inferior) group Alan is because I can't think of a single one that came close to the S30 as an all round package. One that was priced somewhere near and was mass produced.

 

Cars like the Lotus Elan, Triumph TR6 and Alfa Romeo 1750 GTV had their good points (I'd happily have all three parked in the garage) but all lacked something compared with the S30.

 

There, I've moved from the general to the specific

[johnc]

BMW 3.0CSL is still the car I lust after the most.

 

[rxsleeper]

Seeing the other photo of Laguna Seca reminded me of this photo: From 1993 and the "checkerboard" car is mine. It was driven by the builder at that time. The car was sold to traveled to Missouri where it was raced in the "middle" division. I now have it in SeDiv. BTW Kudo's to the archivist of the SF region for the photo.

[260DET]

You want BMW's John?

[HS30-H]

The reason why 'Euro cars' were lumped into one (inferior) group Alan is because I can't think of a single one that came close to the S30 as an all round package. One that was priced somewhere near and was mass produced.

 

Hmmmm,

I like the "inferior" comment. Just chucked in the there for effect, or do you really believe it? This is exactly the kind of blind, sweeping generalisation that I am talking about. I think real life situations demand a little bit more pragmatism than that. Inferior on what terms? I think a lot of it is linked to the original retail price - which was hugely different across all the original markets. We should not forget that.

 

Cars like the Lotus Elan' date=' Triumph TR6 and Alfa Romeo 1750 GTV had their good points (I'd happily have all three parked in the garage) but all lacked something compared with the S30.

There, I've moved from the general to the specific [/quote']

 

Interestingly, you chose two English cars and one Italian car to illustrate your "inferior" "Euro" products. All three of them predate the S30 by some years - so they might have a good excuse to be lacking in certain respects. The ALFA 1750 GTV was a later incarnation of the 105-series coupes which debuted in 1963 - so I find it hard to compare like-with-like against a car that was almost a 'clean page' design debuting six years later. Even so, I think it is worth mentioning that in 1963 the ALFA Giulia Sprint GT ( from which the 1750 GTV derived ) had an all-alloy DOHC engine, 5-speed trans and four wheel servo assisted disc brakes. Compare that to the HLS30U's spec.

 

You also cited the Triumph TR6 - which debuted in 1968, but was itself a derivative of the TR5 ( 1967 ) and the TR4 ( 1961 ). TR6 was not a 'clean sheet' design was it? Worth mentioning that the TR5 had fuel injection, disc brakes, IRS, rack and pinion steering and optional Overdrive by '67. The design was also based on an open cockpit brief - so we would have to decide whether this was truly an "inferior" attribute from the point of view of market appeal, as opposed to the structural integrity of a coupe. There was no convertible S30-series Z was there?

 

Lotus Elan? That's a design that debuted in 1962 ( built just four miles from my present home funnily enough ), with a very interesting backbone chassis and an FRP body. It too featured a DOHC engine, all independent suspension and four wheel disc brakes. Available in FHC and convertible versions too. Again - what part of that do you find "inferior"? The likes of Gordon Murray still regard it as a landmark in design and driving appeal.

 

 

 

The 'elephant in the room' is that the USA domestic manufacturers did not design and market a true like-for-like competitor to the HLS30U, and could not hope to compete with the price level that the HLS30U was pitched at anyway. Nor could the Australian domestic manufacturers come to that. The situation in mainland Europe was somewhat different, with a lot more choice at similar prices.

 

So it's not as simple as 'S30-series = superior, everything else inferior' - is it? We all like / love these cars, but let's not be blinkered about where they fit into the Big Picture.

 

Alan T.

[johnc]

US manufacturers designd and built cars for the US market, exactly like all the other worldwide OEMs. Back in 1970 I would argue that the global automotive market we have now was just barely getting off the ground. Manufacturers adapted (instead of designing) cars for foriegn markets.

 

In 1970 the US Interstate system was nearing completion and we had tens of thousands of miles of wide, fairly straight, and free roads across the country. Large, V8 powered cars are ideal for that environment and can cruise comfortably at 80 to 100 mph all day long. As a kid we made many multi-day driving vacations in my Dad's 1968 T-Bird and 1970 LTD.

 

No car is "better" then another car IMHO. Cars are all different, meet various needs, stir different emotions, and work as well as can be expected given their complexity and cost limitations.

 

BTW... Here's a picture of a Dodge Charger competing in an edurance race at Monza this year:

 

 

And here's what is sounds like when the Hemi is fired up:

 

http://www.olympia-charger.com/2007/09/3-2-1-ignition-.html

[srgunz]

I took these this past July.

 

L&M Lola CanAm Car

Rare Plymouth CanAm