Modern safety & security rules for 428's ?

[Classicus]

[Paul and Chuck - posted this last April sometime before you joined so wondered if you perhaps had any thoughts on this ? [:)]]
   
   Googling around a bit last night when I found this interesting item for a security key fob being marketed by GM for their latest cars, plus some other new ideas too ! [8D]
   
   

quote:Volvo is planning a keyless entry system that can detect a heartbeat and alert the driver if someone is lurking inside the car.

   http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2006-11-15-remote-usat_x.htm
   
   It also started me wondering what other, if any, modern safety and security solutions such as anti-theft devices etc. 428 owners might have already fitted to their cars, as well as what additional official requirements their particular country might or might not insist on before being passed as legally roadworthy.
   
   Obviously here in the UK we've a massive number of rules for our official MOT Test though how they might be relaxed for a pre 1973 (is it?) 428 I haven't a clue. And I've often wondered how different and difficult it must be for 428's built after this date ? Bit unfair too really !
   
   Either way I suppose some of the latest security and safety regulations in different countries are bound to eventually raise some awkward problems of originality and subsequent market values later on ?

[cmaddox3]

quote:Originally posted by Classicus
   
[Paul and Chuck - posted this last April sometime before you joined so wondered if you perhaps had any thoughts on this ? [:)]]
   
   Googling around a bit last night when I found this interesting item for a security key fob being marketed by GM for their latest cars, plus some other new ideas too ! [8D]
   
   

quote:Volvo is planning a keyless entry system that can detect a heartbeat and alert the driver if someone is lurking inside the car.

   http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2006-11-15-remote-usat_x.htm
   
   It also started me wondering what other, if any, modern safety and security solutions such as anti-theft devices etc. 428 owners might have already fitted to their cars, as well as what additional official requirements their particular country might or might not insist on before being passed as legally roadworthy.
   
   Obviously here in the UK we've a massive number of rules for our official MOT Test though how they might be relaxed for a pre 1973 (is it?) 428 I haven't a clue. And I've often wondered how different and difficult it must be for 428's built after this date ? Bit unfair too really !
   
   Either way I suppose some of the latest security and safety regulations in different countries are bound to eventually raise some awkward problems of originality and subsequent market values later on ?
   
   

   
   It occurs to me that some of the best security devices are the simplest and often the cheapest...
   
   I remember back when I was a teenager a friend of mine who had moved out of state was working on an late 1960's Pontiac (or some other GM iron - he was always more of the GM bent than I was, I seem to remember it had a 421 or 422 c.i. plant...).  Well, we had known each other since the summer between Kindergarten and 1st Grade, his father got promoted and transfered two states away mid-way through 7th grade, and we always kept in touch and tried to visit one another during summer vacation.  So I was visiting that summer and of course I got drafted into helping with the restoration of this GM car.
   
   Aside from minor "to-do" list items the thing that we had the most trouble with was getting the motor to start.  The plant had been [I forget] either replaced or overhauled with new starter, battery, starter solenoid [¿sp?], battery cables, etc. but we couldn't even get the motor to crank, the lights worked, the radio worked, the horn worked, everything worked, but it wouldn't crank.  Finally after a day and a half of searching, and repeated comments by me of "It's a GM, whaddya expect?" we decided to track down the guy my friend had bought the car from.  It turns out that he had installed a small black push-button that cut-off the starter circuit.  He had hidden this switch well in a location on under the black dash where it could easily be pressed non-chalantly by the driver without anyone noticing, but if you didn't know exactly where it was, you could [and would] sit there for days trying to hot-wire the car.  Cost of the switch?  I don't know, probably under two or three bucks at Radio Schlock.  Effectiveness?  Well, it wouldn't stop someone with a trailer or a tow-truck, but it thwarted us for a day and a half!
   
   Another inexpensive security feature that one can choose to install is a battery on/off switch.  This is more of a problem with the AC's battery location being under the floorboards of the truck (at least on the Fastback, I'd assume a similar location on the ragtop).  With a conventionally located battery, one could position the switch near enough to the dipstick or radiator that one could disguise one's activating it with the familiar motions of someone checking the fluid levels of their vehicle.  Of course, you'd lose your clock and radio presets if you had a modern car radio, etc. with such a cutoff, but...  Might be a good idea.
   
   Another trick which is surprisingly effective, and even more effective now-a-days with modern ignition systems is simply pulling the coil-wire off the car and putting it in your pocket.  The engine will crank but it won't start and thieves won't get very far even with a manual transmission using the battery/starter motor to make their getaway.  This was less effective back in the day, as nearly every car on the road had a coil wire and the thieves could simply appropriate a coil wire from another nearby vehicle.  but as most modern cars have ignitions which dispense with the coil wire, sourcing these in the average parking lot is decidedly more dicey.  Of course one could also pull the rotor (which is less visible, and has the same effect but also more work).
   
   And last but not least, installing a hidden fuel cutoff switch is also fairly inexpensive and relatively inexpensive.  Of course the car would still start and be drivable but the thieves would only get a mile or two before the engine would starve for lack of fuel.
   
   Those are the inexpensive, and relatively benign security measures that come to my mind.  Considering the relatively well hidden nature of the door  handles, hood release and battery [at least on the Fastback] a couple of these methods would probably be very effective against most thieves.
   
   Of course, as I said earlier, a trailer or tow-truck would easily over come all of these, and these would not prevent property damage, but there are some effective, inexpensive steps one can take to prevent theft.  I'm not sure of the advisability of putting a high-tech modern alarm system on these cars with the resulting damage to the car's originality.
   
   But I'd love to hear of other ideas.
   
   --  Chuck

[cmaddox3]

quote:Originally posted by Classicus
   
[Paul and Chuck - posted this last April sometime before you joined so wondered if you perhaps had any thoughts on this ? [:)]]
   
   Obviously here in the UK we've a massive number of rules for our official MOT Test though how they might be relaxed for a pre 1973 (is it?) 428 I haven't a clue. And I've often wondered how different and difficult it must be for 428's built after this date ? Bit unfair too really !
   
   Either way I suppose some of the latest security and safety regulations in different countries are bound to eventually raise some awkward problems of originality and subsequent market values later on ?
   

   
   Sorry, but I just noticed I hadn't addressed this part of your query about safety regulations.
   
   I can't speak to MOT requirements for Safety, security and emissions equipment as I have no first hand knowledge of them here some 4,000 miles away, aside from remembering the friends I visited in the UK 20 years ago said that the MOT standards were pretty stringent.
   
   I know/remember that back in the day, the U.S. DOT and the EPA [especially THE EPA] were like unchained ravenous pit bulls when it came to anything that they felt they had jurisdiction over from getting into the country and possibly driven on THEIR ROADS.  [yes, this was their attitude]   It was the ƒüçk€n EPA that prevented us from importing the "Oakville, Ontario" AC 428 Fastback into the US in the 1977-1978 timeframe.  They had stated with no uncertain terms that there was NO WAY that it would ever pass EPA guidelines for it's year of production.  Since CF 7 was a 1967 it wasn't issue with them because it was before their (foolishly granted) federal mandated jurisdiction took effect, we just had to sigh a paper release and we were free to motor.
   
   Now a days, in most US jurisdictions safety regulations are surprisingly not as stringent as I remember them being as a kid.  Because the family business was a business established in Florida, most of the vehicles we had were registered and plated in Florida and they had safety inspection stations in the state.  One would have to visit one of these facilities once a year and pay for a sticker which was affixed on the inside of the windshield.  For the most part the tests were fairly rudimentary, were the lights working, at the proper height, brightness, etc.  did the turn signals work, etc. and if your vehicle was out of state you didn't have to bother returning into the state to get your vehicle tested, but if you didn't within like 10 days of returning you could get fined, etc.
   
   I don't know of any state which has that sort of testing these days, but I'm sure it's possible some do.  What's replaced them in some areas of the country are Vehicle Emissions Testing facilities.  In most urban jurisdictions one has to take their vehicle to a local testing facility every two years and have their car tested, they take a peek under your car to make sure you haven't pulled the catalytic converter and stick a probe in the tailpipe and they sniff your car's pooper [as it where]...  For the most part it's a formality for most modern cars, although they didn't appreciate when I had a tail pipe rust off on my 1992 Explorer and my solution was to just "metal fatigue" it off the car just after the muffler and I had to put about 7" of flex tubing on the arse end of my exhaust system so they could stick their nosy probe "somewhere".
   
   There are two or three points of relief from this obsession with car's tail pipes...  1] Each car has three chances to pass the test, and if the car improves with each test it can get an exemption as a "good faith effort" was made to get the car in compliance with the standards.  2] I believe [at least in my part of the country] that a vehicle only has to pass pollution standards in effect the year of it's manufacture.  In other words, if you have a 1987 car, you only have to meet those standards.  3] Any car 25 years or older classify as a "classic" or "Antique" car and are in some respects exempt from testing.  4] I have no idea how Kit-Car's or custom cars are handled, other than most "Street-Rods" which were my father's favorite hobby were registered as the year and make they were a replica of, so a 1932 Ford Street-Rod would be registered as a '32 Ford and hence wouldn't be subject to much [if any] emissions testing.  5] Most diesels seem to be exempt from testing because there is absolutely no way they could pass any sort of emissions standards.
   
   Now I know that the standards are much tougher in certain places [especially California, the Denver Metro area and certain eastern US cities] but for the most part it's not much [if any] of a problem to pass the standards for any modern vehicle as long as it's exhaust system is intact or if the car is older than a certain age.
   
   I know that custom cars are very much in vogue these days, and indeed, Carroll Shelby has been making new Cobra's and Shelby Mustang's in recent years.  I'm not 100% up and running on how they manage to produce these vehicles and be able to title and register them for operation on the street, but I believe what happens is something like this...  Mr. Shelby makes everything for the car save for the engine in one facility and the motor in another facility and have the twain mated in a third place avoiding the single manufacture legislation.  But that's simply my speculation.  Perhaps someone can either affirm or clarify that for me and the peanut gallery.
   
   I think that pretty much covers it.  Oh, actually, the reason why I sold my [carburated] 1984 Bronco II 4x4 was I couldn't get it to pass the emissions requirement to the Government's satisfaction.  Despite spending several hundred dollars on tune-ups and remedies, I could only get it into compliance on two of the three standards required at any one time, if I did anything to get the third one under the limit, one of the others would move up.  The Government wasn't satisfied and I ended up selling the car to a family friend's daughter who lived about 10 miles west (and out of the six county testing area), where it wasn't tested.  Goes to show the foolishness of such legislation as that vehicle was still on the road and polluting the same amount 10 miles West of my driveway.
   
   The quality of air (aside from Southern California, Denver and possibly certain Eastern US cities) is better today than it has been probably since the middle to late 1800's.  In 1989, Ford's less fuel efficient and most polluting passenger car (A Crown Victoria LTD) was more fuel efficient and polluted less than Ford's most fuel efficient and least polluting car (the Pinto) some 20 years earlier.  The the cars (when equipped with non-High-Performance drive train options) have only become better since then.  Has some benefit come from pollution controls?  Sure, the air is better today (in most places, see above) and there are probably twice as many cars on the road today.  But it's my belief, borne out by the reading I've done on the topic that as much if not a significant amount more benefit has come from stricter regulation and enforcement of pollution by Industry/business sector.
   
   The smog in LA is as bad today as it's ever been.  I first visited LA in 1974, made several trips out there in the 1994-1997 timeframe and a visit out there this February, and it's as bad or worse than ever.  Between a dearth of rapid transit [which aren't extremely dirty diesel buses] the mountains which ring the metro area and the sheer mass of vehicles, short of everyone driving an electric or at least a hybrid car, there isn't much that the CARB [California Air Resources Board] can do that wouldn't prevolk a massive taxpayer uprising.  In Denver, an additional problem (other than the mountains and volume of cars) is wood burning stoves (I kid you not).  If one looks south from Boulder (about 25 miles away) towards the south east you can see the smog over Denver most days.  These cities have more stringent standards than most of the rest of the country.  In fact in the Denver Metro area it's often difficult to find some grades of (high octane) fuel.
   
   [boy has this become a long post too!]
   
   Hope this answers the portion of your query I neglected to address with my previous post.
   
   Cheers!
   
   Chuck

[Classicus]

Sorry for the delay in replying Chuck, I'm still trying to take it all in ! I'd also like to hear of other people's ideas on 428 security devices too but the simplest and cheapest ones seem to be the best as you say. Also your suggestions are definitely very "period" so it must be extra points for keeping the car "original" ! [:)]
   
   And the USA's safety regulations are so different and lax compared to ours (!) so perhaps our being such an overcrowded and small island is something to do with it ? I mean can you imagine what it would be like if each of our counties were autonomous as well !! Still it's a shame that all the States can't get it together in the general public's interest and agree on a nationwide safety and emissions standard's policy, as I think on the whole our MOT's despite their stringency have definitely been a good thing when it's so easy for anyone to cut financial corners and risk other's lives. Especially when I remember my very first car, no driving licence naturally, was a beaten up late forties Riley Pathfinder with no floorboards yet was still perfectly street legal ! Even father was on my side on this one (mother fortunately was still oblivious), because I remember him saying that it was no big deal and he'd soon get it roadworthy for me to practice on despite woodworm having always been a major problem for that particular model. Unfortunately he never did get around to it but as I never knew in those days when he was joking or not to this day I still don't know if it was true lol !
   
   So the fact that a '32 Ford Street-Rod replica fitted with presumably a modern engine being mostly exempt from emission standards definitely has a certain nostalgic appeal ! [:D]

[runt]

" A massive taxpayer uprising"..! Just what we've needed over here for years; shame about our 'British reserve'; or rather, apathy..
   Interesting that many kit/custom/hot rod builders constrained by the Single Vehicle Approval still insist that this is a good thing; weeding out the more dubious/safety compromised offerings and giving the industry more credibility..?
   
   Paul.[:)]

[cmaddox3]

A combined reply...
   
   

quote:Originally posted by Classicus
   
Sorry for the delay in replying Chuck, I'm still trying to take it all in ! I'd also like to hear of other people's ideas on 428 security devices too but the simplest and cheapest ones seem to be the best as you say. Also your suggestions are definitely very "period" so it must be extra points for keeping the car "original" ! [:)]

   
   No Problem Cass, Paul...  I've been busy too!
   
   As for the "Period"/Low Tech nature of my security suggestions...  Well, that's part of the idea as well...  While I doubt we'll ever see an AC 428 Frua be in contention at Pebble Beach Concours d'Elegance, it'd be nice if as much originality of these cars be preserved as possible.
   
   

quote:Originally posted by Classicus
   
And the USA's safety regulations are so different and lax compared to ours (!) so perhaps our being such an overcrowded and small island is something to do with it ? I mean can you imagine what it would be like if each of our counties were autonomous as well !!

   
   The thing about that is...  from what I can remember of my Geography the UK was described as being about the same size land area as Oregon.  However, Oregon has a population of about 3.7 million people vs. about 60 million for the UK...  So, the exercise for Yanks is to imagine if the US was as compact as Oregon and had about 18 times the population density.  Along with it's own Army/Navy, etc.
   
   

quote:Originally posted by Classicus
   
Still it's a shame that all the States can't get it together in the general public's interest and agree on a nationwide safety and emissions standard's policy, as I think on the whole our MOT's despite their stringency have definitely been a good thing when it's so easy for anyone to cut financial corners and risk other's lives.

   
   Not to put too fine of a point on this, but this is probably one of the reasons for that nasty little insurrection that happened about 230 years ago...
   
   The schtick about the safety regulations is, that comparatively speaking relatively few cars remain on the road and in heavy use in the US past an age of 10-15 years.  Frankly, cars are, and have been for about 20 years, so much better constructed then they had been in the '50's, '60's, and '70's.  Yes, from time to time I see a "rolling ghetto" out and about on the highways and by-ways, and the police are much more concerned about impared driving [both the driver and the vehicle if you get my meaning] than they used to be.  Enforcement of drunken driving in particular was frightfully inadequate back in the day and that has changed for the better I'm glad to say.  The cars are much better, both initially and in terms of durability.
   
   As for emissions standards.  Having a single federally imposed standard makes little sense.  The pollution problems of urban California has little similarity with the issues of rural [or just about any location] in Montana or the Dakotas.
   
   

quote:Originally posted by Classicus
   
Especially when I remember my very first car, no driving licence naturally, was a beaten up late forties Riley Pathfinder with no floorboards yet was still perfectly street legal ! Even father was on my side on this one (mother fortunately was still oblivious), because I remember him saying that it was no big deal and he'd soon get it roadworthy for me to practice on despite woodworm having always been a major problem for that particular model. Unfortunately he never did get around to it but as I never knew in those days when he was joking or not to this day I still don't know if it was true lol !

   
   Well, I have some legislative lunacy for you then...
   
   In my state, All front seat occupants are required to be protected by a safety belt or safety restraint system unless they are conducting business which requires frequent stoping and starting [like postal workers, delivery van drivers, police personnel, etc.  YET, there are no requirements for motorcyclists to wear a helmet or goggles!
   
   Why?  Because the bikers have banded together and have very strong lobbyists.
   
   It's a situation that is ripe with hypocracy...  Police basically have the right to pull you over for no reason "I didn't see a seat belt on", write you a ticket, while the Hell's Angels go riding by with no helmets or goggles and the cops are all OK with that.
   
   

quote:Originally posted by Classicus
   
So the fact that a '32 Ford Street-Rod replica fitted with presumably a modern engine being mostly exempt from emission standards definitely has a certain nostalgic appeal ! [:D]

   
   If you can't buy what you want...  make it yourself I guess.
   
   

quote:Originally posted by runt
   
" A massive taxpayer uprising"..! Just what we've needed over here for years; shame about our 'British reserve'; or rather, apathy..

   
   Well, don't lose your charm you guys!  Seriously Paul, your thoughts remind me of a passage from the movie "1776":
   
   John Dickinson: Fortunately, the people maintain a higher regard for their mother country.
   
   Dr. Benjamin Franklin: Higher, certainly, than she feels for them. Never was such a valuable possession so stupidly and recklessly managed, than this entire continent by the British crown. Our industry discouraged, our resouces pillaged... worst of all our very character stifled. We've spawned a new race here, Mr. Dikinson. Rougher, simpler; more violent, more enterprising; less refined. We're a new nationality. We require a new nation.
   
   http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068156/quotes  <-- Great movie/musical by the way if you ever get bored some evening.
   
   My fellow yanks and I are rougher, simpler, more violent, more enterprising, less refined than the countries of our ancestors.
   
   I mean after all...  Stuffing a big V-8 into a little two-seater likely hadn't crossed the minds of folks in the Isles, while it seemed like a no-brainer to a chicken farmer from Texas!  And the result was a rougher, simpler, more violent, more enterprising and less refined product!  LOL!  I'm sure it still blows people's minds, little AC beating the Spaghetti out of Ferrari with a little Texan/Dearborn assistance.
   
   

quote:Originally posted by runt
   
Interesting that many kit/custom/hot rod builders constrained by the Single Vehicle Approval still insist that this is a good thing; weeding out the more dubious/safety compromised offerings and giving the industry more credibility..?

   
   Well, there are customizers which do completely street legal modifications or turn-key options.  Reference Saleen Mustangs or Rouch Performance operations where one can either provide a car for "Stage I-III+" modifications, or buy one built from them directly.
   
   However, I don't think that Carroll Shelby is going to submit the number of 1967 Mustangs for crash testing necessary to meet new car standards.
   
   I'm not sure if the US TV Series "American Chopper" has hit UK shores, but there are a bunch of people in the Motorcycle community doing absolutely outragious things with two-wheeled vehicles these days.  I know nothing about motorcycle regulations and probably even less about what's safe and what's not, but there are a lot of things that look pretty dubious to me.  And I know pointing to the behaviour of others doesn't excuse one's own behaviour, but still...
   
   

quote:Originally posted by runt
   
Paul.[:)]

   
   Again, I hope the quote above isn't taken in a bad way.  We yanks are a fairly independent lot.  We'll only be pushed so far before we push back, it seems.  We'll drive big polluting cars until the cost gets so high that it really hurts us in the wallet.  Then we'll think about driving something more sensible until we get used to the prices or they go down.  But try to take away our choice, we get ornery!
   
   Cheers!
   
   --  Chuck

[nikbj68]

quote:Originally posted by cmaddox3
   
A combined reply...
   
   ...I'm not sure if the US TV Series "American Chopper" has hit UK shores, but there are a bunch of people in the Motorcycle community doing absolutely outragious things with two-wheeled vehicles these days.  I know nothing about motorcycle regulations and probably even less about what's safe and what's not, but there are a lot of things that look pretty dubious to me....
   
   Cheers!
   
   --  Chuck
   

   
   Good stuff! just to pick one point from the above...I can assure you in no uncertain terms that virtually everything that comes from the Teutel`s Orange County workshop would not be road legal o`er here, and I find it hard to believe that when the 'Biker Build-off' guys ride cross country at the end that their bikes are legal over there either!

[cmaddox3]

quote:Originally posted by nikbj68
   

quote:Originally posted by cmaddox3
   
A combined reply...
   
   ...I'm not sure if the US TV Series "American Chopper" has hit UK shores, but there are a bunch of people in the Motorcycle community doing absolutely outragious things with two-wheeled vehicles these days.  I know nothing about motorcycle regulations and probably even less about what's safe and what's not, but there are a lot of things that look pretty dubious to me....
   
   Cheers!
   
   --  Chuck
   

   
   Good stuff! just to pick one point from the above...I can assure you in no uncertain terms that virtually everything that comes from the Teutel`s Orange County workshop would not be road legal o`er here, and I find it hard to believe that when the 'Biker Build-off' guys ride cross country at the end that their bikes are legal over there either!
   

   
   On the former point: While I'm sure some things may well be road legal in the land of the Norvin and Triton, I'd expect many if not most of the Teutel's creations would garner disapproving clucks from the MOT.  On the later point, most US jurisdictions are pretty "tight" when it comes to vehicle registration.  If a vehicle doesn't display a license plate [also called "Tags" in some regions of the states] and they aren't up to date, drivers will be pulled over, ticketed and in some cases impounded or told not to be operated until the conveyance is brought into compliance.
   
   Additionally, I would expect that the bikes would have to be brought into at least minimal compliance with applicable laws within the state of operation before license/registration is issued, and it wouldn't surprise me if such requirements are less stringent in the US than in the UK.
   
   Considering the camera convoy necessary to record such cross-country runs, I'd think that at some point such bikes would come under police observation and possibly scrutiny.  But I wouldn't have any first or even second hand knowledge of such things...
   
   Cheers!
   
   --  Chuck

[TLegate]

No us folk in the Isles would never have thought of stuffing a big V8 into a little two-seater. Oh hang on, that'll be the Allard then (as raced by a young Mr.C.Shelby)
   
   And the AC Ace would (almost) certainly have gained a V8 at some point - it's just that the lightweight Ford 260 did not exist when the Hurlocks were looking around - and they had also visited companies such as Daimler/Jaguar in their unsuccessful search for an engine, any engine. How do I know - Derek Hurlock told me.
   
   And we definately won't mention the V8 Corvette-engined AC Ace that was racing in SCCA in 1958, as Ol' Shel had the idea first. Right.

[ak1234]

Quote " Teutel`s Orange County workshop would not be road legal o`er here "
   
    .... believe me I have seen their bikes up close and those bikes are not street legal here either and plagued with defects, poor workmanship and failures.  Those bikes are show pieces and thats it.
   
   .... the emission standards outside NYC are non existant ..Orange County NY ( where the OCC biys are )  there are no emissions tests only safety inspections.
   
   But as some one mentioned .. cars for main stream USA, AUDIS,  Toyota's,  Nissans, .. dont last more then 15 years.  My A4 broke 100k miles ..its had 2 engines and 2 trans a turbo etc.
   
   You dont have to worry if old cars meet the standards .. there gone after 15 years.
   
   Ron

[cmaddox3]

quote:Originally posted by Trevor Legate
   
No us folk in the Isles would never have thought of stuffing a big V8 into a little two-seater.

   I didn't say never, Trevor.  I said "... likely hadn't crossed the minds"...  From what I've read AC seemed to be looking at the 2.6l Ford Zephyr engine, not at Chevy,  F-85 Buick and Ford V-8's.
   

quote:Originally posted by Trevor Legate
   
Oh hang on, that'll be the Allard then (as raced by a young Mr.C.Shelby)

   When I was writing that I had the Cunningham flash through my mind, but I remembered Briggs Cunningham was American.  So I dismissed the thought.
   
   
   I had a feeling there was an exception, I just couldn't put my finger what it was.  I should have kept on thinking along those lines to try  to remember the Allard. Thanks for reminding me.  Shame on me for posting with dispatch.
   

quote:Originally posted by Trevor Legate
   
And the AC Ace would (almost) certainly have gained a V8 at some point - it's just that the lightweight Ford 260 did not exist when the Hurlocks were looking around - and they had also visited companies such as Daimler/Jaguar in their unsuccessful search for an engine, any engine. How do I know - Derek Hurlock told me.

   It would seem that if the 260ci Ford powerplant wasn't known to the folks at AC, then I'd think it was probably likely the possibility of using it hadn't crossed their minds.  While AC may not have known about the existance of the relatively new 260ci Ford Powerplant until they were contacted by Mr. Shelby, the Small-Block Chevy had been around since 1954 or 1955, and the  F-85 Aluminum Buick V-8 (3.5l/215ci) had been around since 1961.
   
   While we'll never know for sure if the AC Ace would have eventually gained a V-8 powerplant at some point without Mr. Shelby's efforts, I suppose it wouldn't surprise me either way.    It seems that AC was concentrating their efforts to secure a new power plant closer to home: first with  the Bristol and then the Zephyr engine.  It would seem likely as time passed they probably would have cast their nets further afield and might eventually have ended up with an V-8.  But it's not certain.
   

quote:Originally posted by Trevor Legate
   
And we definately won't mention the V8 Corvette-engined AC Ace that was racing in SCCA in 1958, as Ol' Shel had the idea first. Right.

   I would love to hear more about that one as I can't say I remember that one, but if you don't wish to mention it...  That's your prerogative.
   
   Cheers!
   
   --  Chuck

[cmaddox3]

quote:Originally posted by ak1234
   
Quote " Teutel`s Orange County workshop would not be road legal o`er here "
   
    .... believe me I have seen their bikes up close and those bikes are not street legal here either and plagued with defects, poor workmanship and failures.  Those bikes are show pieces and thats it.

   I haven't seen the bikes up close, but having watched the show, I wouldn't be surprised at all if there were defects, failures and if the workmanship left something to be desired. A lot of the stuff I see them do makes me cringe.  I watch for the Soap Opera aspect of the show... Reminds me of working for my Father and Grandfather before they passed on [so many of the arguments remind me of my experience], and they do make some very pretty bikes, not that I'm a biker. I do not know how those bikes, or those done by other customizers/manufacturers/fabricators (like West Coast Choppers, Matt Hotch, Corey and Arlen Ness, etc.) are titled or licensed. I'll bet it'd be interesting to know though!
   

quote:Originally posted by ak1234
   
.... the emission standards outside NYC are non existant ..Orange County NY ( where the OCC biys are )  there are no emissions tests only safety inspections.  

   For motorcycles you mean? If you mean in General, the C.A.R.B. (California Air Resources Board) and in Illinois "Air Team" would tend to disagree with you.
   
   http://www.arb.ca.gov/homepage.htm
   http://www.epa.state.il.us/air/vim/
   

quote:Originally posted by ak1234
   
But as some one mentioned .. cars for main stream USA, AUDIS,  Toyota's,  Nissans, .. dont last more then 15 years.  My A4 broke 100k miles ..its had 2 engines and 2 trans a turbo etc.

   I won't make any Audi comment other than you do know what AUDI supposedly stands for? [Acceleration Under Demonic Influence]!  [;)]
   
   Turbo's have a reputation for having a finite life... They operate at high-speeds and high exhaust heat near their bearings assures it. I have a friend who was big on Saab 900 Turbos, their turbos failed with regularity after a certain number of miles. The phrase: "This turbo has how many miles on it? Oh! It's due! It's due!" was quickly off many Saab mechanic's lips.
   

quote:Originally posted by ak1234
   
You dont have to worry if old cars meet the standards .. there gone after 15 years.

   I don't know, that 1984 Bronco II I once owned is still on the road, I was stopped behind a 1978 Chevy Caprice at a stoplight no more than two hours ago. Are such older cars common? No. Most people bite the bullet and choose to drive something newer with fewer maintenance headaches long before 15, 20 or even 25 years of use has passed. I simply wouldn't say all of them are gone in that amount of time. And in fact, in California you see a lot of high-mileage older cars on the roads. I was surprised at seeing several Datsun Z-Car's and more than a few compact Japanese pickup's from the early 1980's tooling around. Being in high-humidity, or snowy regions are life shortening to cars, but you see lots of older cars on the road in arid locales.
   

quote:Originally posted by ak1234
   
Ron
   

   Cheers Ron!
   
   -- Chuck

[nikbj68]

quote:Originally posted by cmaddox3
   

quote:Originally posted by Nik
   Quote " Teutel`s Orange County workshop would not be road legal o`er here "

   I haven't seen the bikes up close, but ...A lot of the stuff I see them do makes me cringe.I watch for the Soap Opera aspect of the show... I do not know how those bikes...are titled or licensed. I'll bet it'd be interesting to know though!

   I like their creativity, but often cringe more at the soap/slapstick aspects(Like when they 'ramraided' their old w/shop whilst building the 'Shelby' bike)than the build processes...but Wow, has there been some investment in cutting edge technology, since Discovery`s input???
   Any vehicles here subject to SVA(Single vehicle Approval)test often 'develop' non-conforming features after passing that may not be noticed during(or are removed for) subsequent annual MOT tests, so I guess the same could apply in the USofA too.
   

quote:Originally posted by ak1234
   ...You dont have to worry if old cars meet the standards .. there gone after 15 years.

   
   I interpret that as being manufacturers` "End of Life" product support, so it`s left to enthusiasts like ourselves to look after ourselves to a greater extent. Even cars that are now 15+ years old are relatively lo-tech, but looking after current cars when they hit 15+ is going to be increasingly beyond most of us.
   

quote:Originally posted by cmaddox3
   

quote:Originally posted by Trevor Legate
   And we definately won't mention the V8 Corvette-engined AC Ace that was racing in SCCA in 1958, as Ol' Shel had the idea first. Right.

   I would love to hear more about that one as I can't say I remember that one, but if you don't wish to mention it... That's your prerogative.
   Chuck

   
   You`d have to look in the book for that!!!!!
   
   or maybe the 'Cobraskin' version?!
   
   
   Cheers!

[Classicus]

quote:Originally posted by Classicus
   
Still it's a shame that all the States can't get it together in the general public's interest and agree on a nationwide safety and emissions standard's policy, as I think on the whole our MOT's despite their stringency have definitely been a good thing when it's so easy for anyone to cut financial corners and risk other's lives.

   

quote:Not to put too fine of a point on this, but this is probably one of the reasons for that nasty little insurrection that happened about 230 years ago...

   Sorry you've lost me there Chuck what reasons ? [:)]

[TLegate]

Cheers Nik you beat me to it. The V8 Ace is dealt with in great detail in Chapter 2 but suffice it to say the car's bodywork was 'almost certainly' modified at Thames Ditton and was the only Ace to have been exported to the USA sans engine and was fitted with a V8 from day one. The silence about that car is almost deafening :-) Chuck now rushes to his library and pulls out my book and reads about the Ace in question!!!
   
   Please don't take any offence to my postings but it does amaze me (still) that CS is credited for the 'Great Idea' when shed-loads of cars were flogging around the roads and race tracks of the UK and USA with V8s stuffed under the hood/bonnet, and had been for years. Assorted people in the UK were experimenting with the V8 idea. Ken Rudd for one, as part of the great 'what if' debate. Had Charles Hurlock not been so insulting to him (for being almost too successful and having the nerve to use such a common engine as a mere Ford!) CS might have been second in the queue at Thames Ditton. But he wasn't. The Hurlocks had being asking just about every manufacturer with an engine but were rejected for numerous reasons (not wanting the competition, not prepared to suppy small numbers etc) and no doubt the official Ford line was to turn them down, but in this life, it's not what you know, it's who you know, and Shel knew Don Frey, amongst others. The rest, as they say.....
   
   Always fun to discuss the Ifs and Buts of history, no?
   
   For the record, the only time I do get a tad irritated is when history is deliberately re-written. For instance: "AC were never more than a supplier of parts..." Such jaw-dropping idiocies should always been challenged and corrected regardless of who might get upset. Still it seems that CS has now turned his attention towards the company known as SAAC, assuming current reports are accurate, so they will have something to occupy their minds for a while. Such fun!