300 handling versus a certain 60s sports car?

["christopher beilby" <thelastbestgenius@xxxx>]

Great to see all the tech talk/stuff, especially traps for 'would be' wedge 
engine buillders re oil pump shafts.

But hey, isn't it spring coming into summer over there - where are the shots 
of good looking cars, maybe even some with good looking dames/babes !!??

And in 'that we were really lucky we chose to buy 300s' department ??!
Here is one for you - drove a 'maybe I would like to purchase one one day 
car' - a good '64 vette convert. It was solid and nice up to about 60-70 
mph, and then it above this it started to feel funny in the rear compared to 
a now feeling stiffer front. Then it occurred to me, my first car, a 1930 
Ford A with transverse springs for suspension. They bolted/clamped to the 
chassis at their centre. Corvette use a transverse spring at the rear - does 
this in effect reduce the working width of the chassis at the rear to just 
as wide as where spring clamps at centre ??!!
This explains why car I drove felt funnier at higher speed, the 
chassis/suspension effectively like a Morgan three wheeler, wide at front, 
only one point in centre at rear?? Where a Chrysler 300 comes in, is I 
remember in '57 Chrysler made a big deal out of how they moved the mounting 
of the rear springs outward - sounds like Corvette/GM missed big time with 
Corvette's rear independent suspension - or am I wrong ??!!

For it's day the 300C and subsequent was a handling standout, and based on 
this Corvette, was in no way shamed by their '63 onwards independent rear, 
not to mention the 327 I drove (albeit auto) was not super quick up into the 
revs compared to tuned 392.

Enough said, hope you are driving them over there, first day of winter here, 
autumn leaves falling in South Australia.

Aussie Christopher

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to 
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/signup.asp