(first posted 5/20/2014) Hopefully, my love of automobiles is evident in my writing. As Bill Mitchell might have said, I was born with gasoline in my veins, and there’s no signs of the tank running dry. Therefore, it stings a bit to write the title to this contribution, as I love Spitfires. They’re on my list of 28 (combined with the GT6); I think they’re glorious, beautiful, fun-looking…there aren’t enough superlatives to express my love. As kids in the schoolyard might say, “If you love the Spitfire so much, why don’t you marry it?”
It’s because I’m chicken.
With inattentive drivers in these battleships vying for the same road space as I am, the idea of driving a car that will fit into the back of my Dart wagon scares the Spitfire out of me. It’s actually nonsensical: I manage to drive a Corvair convertible on a regular basis, and a Suburban would certainly do a number on that. It’s just that, well, even a Corvair is just so much BIGGER than a Spitfire–it adds to the illusion of safety.
As pretty much everyone knows, a Spitfire is based on the Triumph Herald, a vehicle that was almost completely unheralded (ey-oh) in the United States. As Triumph’s go-to guy in the 50s and 60s, Giovanni Michelotti penned a Herald-based prototype code-named “Bomb,” which managed to get shuffled into a corner of a garage while Triumph went through a lean financial period (was Triumph ever NOT in a lean financial period?).
Interest in the Bomb wasn’t revived until Leyland went all-in on Triumph–the Bomb was dusted off and turned into the Spitfire, an 1147 cc mini-TR4. It was introduced in late 1962, and was a much bigger hit in America than the earlier Herald. That doesn’t mean they are growing on trees, but Spitfires are still among the great bargains in classic cars. That’s good news for the average car person, because a Spitfire is apparently great fun to drive and own (if you can get used to the weird handling of the early models).
The weird handling is a direct result of the Herald’s basic swing axle suspension design, which was similar to that used on the Beetle, early Corvair, and early Tempest.
Pictures of the Spitfire’s awkward tail attitude when it’s pushed to the limit are common on the internet. The backbone design of the frame also meant that the sills (or rocker panels to Americans) formed much of the car’s strength. Therefore, when the almost inevitable rust attacked, the driver was left with a car of dubious structural integrity. Of course, the Spitfire’s continuous popularity means that parts to repair these issues are plentiful.
photo credit: hemmings.com
While the Spitfire’s faults and credits are automotive common knowledge, I’m not sure the Spitfire gets enough credit for its styling. This could be one of Michelotti’s greatest achievements, as the same basic shape lasted all the way through 1980, with only one major update. Apparently, in a cost-cutting maneuver, Spitfires used the same windshield as a TR4, just inclined more steeply. The gas cap and its location are obviously race car-inspired, and the minimal bumper protection adds to the feeling that the driver is getting away with something. I prefer the basic original Mk1 and Mk2 models, but they’re all beautiful; unfortunately, you rarely see a Mk1.
Until you do. I spotted this one at Waterford Hills in Michigan at the annual vintage car event. It’s easily the cleanest early Spitfire I’ve ever seen, and a guy and his son were out enjoying it. Talk about envy: it’s too bad I don’t have the kind of guts to just not worry about the other guy. Black must have been an uncommon color for a Spitfire; because in the ads and brochures, most Spitfires were red, white, or powder blue. Just about any color looks good on a Spitfire.
I overheard the owner telling a fellow Spitfire-fan that he gave this car a complete restoration, and it was easy to believe him. It was nearly immaculate. This photo shows off one of the best features of the Spitfire, its ease of maintenance. Just about everything on the twin-carbed engine is in easy view, and the tire makes an effective seat for a backyard mechanic. Advertisements lauded the Spitfire for its 25-foot turning circle, although in the real world, anything under 30 feet would have probably been perfectly acceptable.
Unfortunately, many Spitfires fell prey to the demon rust, so finding an example like this is a rare and happy occasion. It’s probably the closest I’ll get to driving one, and that’s sad.
If, like me, you appreciate the Spitfire from afar, the above book is for you. It’s by Graham Robson, whose writing I’ve always enjoyed, and it explains the Spitfire’s story in just the right amount of depth to be engaging. You’ll almost certainly appreciate Mike Cook’s Triumph Cars in America as well, for a perspective on the Spitfire’s sales and impact in the USA.
Related reading: 1962 Triumph Herald CC
That black Spitfire brings back intense memories. A senior at Loyola High had one exactly like that, with the red interior and those rather unusual full wheel covers. I pestered him into a ride one day (not easy, for a freshman), on a warm spring day with the top down, of course.
The Spitfire was an attractive alternative to BMC’s Sprite and Midget, being just a bit larger and less cramped, and with less harsh ride, and costing only a wee bit more. They looked a bit less toy-like than the Spridget too, which added to their appeal.
I was surprised at the time when I learned about its swing axle rear suspension; that seemed quite odd coming from Britain. More likely from Germany, which had a long running love affair with them. It did make the Spitfire decidedly softer riding.
Nice, I’ve never seen one in black either.
My favorite spit is the MK3, which has the original TR3-like posterior with the raised front bumper. It’s on my someday short list, having been previously defeated by a rusty Triumph I’d like a rematch.
The Spitfire was actually one of the first, if not the first, dreamcars I ever had. There was one parked practically abandoned on a parking lot near my grandmothers place. And I remember going past it every time we went there.
It was blue with white stripes, and a white hardtop. It was a Spitfire with a seemingly permanent hardtop fitted, so it wasn’t the fastback GT6. If I remember correctly, it had the radio fitted in the rear bulkhead, for some reason, so the driver had to lean back to change the channels. Original, or some sort of mod?
But it stood there, practically abandonded, for some years. I felt so sorry for the car in the winter, when it was snowed over, and nobody cared for it. I was five, six, years old, and oh what I lusted for that car. I was a motorhead really early on…
Don’t know why but I always preferred the MG cars. Had a 64 MGB and spent a lot of time in my roommates AH sprite. Probably you are right. None of them were safe but OTOH all of them were fun.
Feel the same way about my Karma Giha convertible. It sits in my garage and has for maybe 15 years. Don’t know it getting it going again would be fun or scary.
My Ghia coupe has been my daily driver for the last 2 years and I’ve survived so far. A bright color helps….
Lovely example, reminds me of my 1967 MK3 (which used the same body, just with a different front end and a 1296CC engine). Bought it as a rusty runner and restored it in 2007/08, parted with it last year because it just wasn’t being used enough. I kinda miss it now but since I replaced it with a pair of MK1 Toyota MR2s (having wanted an MR2 since I was 5!), I don’t miss it THAT much!
Mk1 & 2 are the best looking of all spitfires. Too bad the swing axle made going fast challenging.
The Spitfire has to be one of the easiest classics cars to own. Amazing parts supply, club support and very easy to work on. I’d say it is equal to an air cooled Beetle. The earlier ones are a little tougher to source interior and trim for the MkIV and 1500 you can get just about everything. The valve adjustment has to be the easiest ever.
I like Spitfires so much I just bought my second one. It is a bit of project but very do-able. I like the later styling a bit better especially with the bumper tits removed or swapped out for the Euro bits. The suspension is sorted and it is a more usable car as well especially if you manage to get an overdrive gearbox.
Time for some pictures! 🙂
I had a ’78 and I liked the rubber extensions on the bumpers, they were indestructible. Now I find myself admiring the ’79 and ’80 rubber bumpers too. My Spitfire got a solid rear-ending by an inattentive driver in an enormous station wagon on the interstate, with no damage done. My ’71 TR6 however with its ornamental and dainty chrome bumpers got totaled a few years ago by a much lighter bump by a jackass at a stoplight. While I wouldn’t call the later year Spitfires “safe”, I would call them far safer than a motorcycle.
I knew exactly what you meant as soon as I read the title. This almost perfectly sums up my feelings about the spitfire. I absolutely love the way the early models look but the severe camber changes at the back frighten me and I don’t want to deal with the rust and British electrics. The later models are better in some respects but they just don’t have the same appeal.
One reason to like it is that it takes up less garage space than American iron!
Yeah cool little cars but I owned a 61 Herald sedan and a 63 coup’e/ragtop and they are mechanically quite brittle the motors do not last being driven hard the handling is quite scary in person never mind internet pics and the gearboxes are noisy and all Ive driven seem to jump out of gear and the cardboard dash in early Heralds and cardboard trans cover are hardly inspiring, body integrity is rubbish once any inevitable rust sets in yep I’ll never own one either.
Big Spitfire fan 🙂 I bought a ’74 MkIV as my first full-on project nearly two years ago now, and it’s inching closer to completion.
The original plan was to do a rolling restoration, but as the original 1.3l was having some serious problems I decided to go straight to the main build.
I’ve bought a 2.5l Triumph I6 originally from a 2.5PI, along with a saloon gearbox and started rebuilding it to fast-road specification. It’ll be getting modified rotoflex rear suspension with CV axles and alloy bits from Canley Classics, along with a host of other alloy and fibreglass bits in an effort to get the weight distribution the same as a stock Spitfire.
I’m aiming for 170-180bhp and roughly 750kg. should be a right little missile 🙂
The other small-chassis Triumph I’ve sort of fallen for is a Sprint engined GT6. Something about the Mk2 body with that screaming little 16v just speaks to me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpTG-rVvtsk
Oh, here’s the build thread so far. It started as pictured, and it’s currently in nearly as many pieces as a Spitfire can be. Soon though 🙂
http://club.triumph.org.uk/cgi-bin/forum10/Blah.pl?m-1358202091/s-0/
Surely that had a 1500 shared with the Sprite, a mate had a 74 it was 1500 went ok for what it was slower than the 58 Humber80 I had at the time but good for a Triumph.
I think the American market cars got the 1500 straight away after the MkIII, but the home market cars had a period with a big-journal 1300 (not as revvy as the earlier small-journal 1300s, but not as torquey as the 1500s).
Not sure about what other markets got though.
That’s part of their appeal I think. They’re nippy enough to be fun, but so far from fast that it’s difficult to get into trouble. Plus, they look fantastic 🙂
Another car I’ll never own.I’m too tall and a convertible would soon be slashed by the chavs and scrotes who live in the same war zone as me.My last car was a £300 17 year old Ford Sierra for a good reason
The pic of the chassis is wrong there was a perimeter out rigger frame work to mount the body to but yeah in a crash they’re rubbish.
The Herald has the perimeter frame bits but the Spitfire doesn’t.
I always liked the way the front clip tilted up on these (and E-types). Is there not some bolt-on goodies to help tame the swing axles? I had a 1970 MGB for several years and so did battle with the ‘Prince’ often.
The chief photographer at the newspaper where I worked back in ’63 bought one of these. He always was a little weird ……
LBC’s are simply too much fun to not own and drive the wheels off one .
These things have the terrible rear suspension but , you can use them as daily drivers and weekend warriors , just don’t go racing .
-Nate
I’d still buy a Minor like yours…they’re also on the Great 28 list.
In high school my twenty-something German teacher owned a Mark 1. I used to stand by the school fence just looking at that cool little car. Just my size….
About the same time, a neighbour had a Mark 2 Sprite, and our landlord’s son had a Mark 1 Sprite. There seem to have been a lot more sports cars around back in the mid-sixties.
For some reason these don’t appeal to me, they just ‘look’ flexible. I suppose it is the shallow sill height under the doors, but a Spridget has far more appeal. I’ve seen one that I quite like, with some chunky flared guards and an alloy Japanese dohc 16v engine.
Collectible Automobile’s Apr 2001 edition also had a nice article on the Spitfire. The GT6’s are nicely styled, but a 6’6′ no way I can fit in one comfortably…..
I have a bunch of GT6 pictures, too. I’ll have to write that up sometime. I think they look great, but I’ve heard that six footers are pretty much off limits.
The 6′ thing depends on both the particular car and how you’re built ~ I was 6’1″ but am now only 6′ (crushed spine &neck) , my height is all in my trunk , I have a 34″ inseam so most small cars fit me just fine .
Sadly I can’t drive a Miata as the windshield header is dead in the center of my eyes , more’s the pity as my Son wanted to give me his old supercharged & massaged Miata track car……
Morrys have *very* good headroom , I have to duck my head getting in , not a problem in my Metropolitan Nash FHC .
-Nate
As regards Triumph not being in financial straits, they were actually doing pretty well in the mid- to late-fifties and then got caught out suddenly around 1960. It was essentially a case of bad timing: Export sales dipped (temporarily, as it turned out) and domestic sales were hit by a credit freeze just as Standard-Triumph had invested heavily in buying up some of their suppliers (mostly to avoid those suppliers being swallowed up by BMC, a very real fear) and buying the land for a new plant.
After the Leyland acquisition, Triumph was back in the black pretty quickly and was doing very well until after the creation of BLMC. Their struggles in the ’70s were mainly a reflection of BLMC’s larger problems and the fact that the specialty divisions kept getting short shrift and being shuffled around.
Don’t think I would ever own one, but they do have a nice body style. And the name “Spitfire” is classic. The swing axles would keep me away, although I have owned many old VW’s and always managed to keep them roof side up. My brother had a 62 TR3, I would consider a nice example of one of those, they seem to be a little more robust and the low cut doors are just too cool!
Ah, the cars I’ll never own. Good thing events conspired to put me in a condo with a 1 car garage. The stuff I would drag home if I had room….Mk IV Spit, GT6 Mk III, Stag, MGB-GT, Fiat 124 Spider, X 1/9, Renault 17 Gordini, Renault Fuego, Honda CRX, DelSol and 600 Z Coupe. a clone of my dear departed 85 Mazda GLC and a Protege5, Mk1 Scirocco, Corrado and Dasher, maybe an 88 Fox wagon, late 60s Bug convertable and a “Thing”…and a rusty Escort, Cavalier or Cobalt to drive during the 300 days per year of bad weather in Michigan.
A teacher at my high school had a green Spitfire. She was constantly getting jump starts from students and faculty alike when she was trying to leave at the end of the day. If I remember right, it still had electrical/starting, issues, even after it had been converted to use a GM alternator and regulator. She had it until the end of senior year, when it suddenly disappeared, and she came to school in a new Nova SS. When we asked her about it, she sighed, and said, “I just wanted a damn car that started most of the time!”. I’ve ridden in several Triumphs and MGs, and all of them made a Chevy Vega look good.
These Spitfires and the Herald donor cars are still popular in NZ many fall prey to having the six cylinder Triumph 2000/2500 engines and trans inserted in shadetree GT6 style yes it fits Triumph themselves did it first with the Vitesse model but those are hard to get and Triumph 2000s are still common for mechanical donors.
I lusted after Spitfires when I was about ten years old and they were just leaving the market. There were two beautiful girls often seen driving them around my neighborhood, which didn’t hurt their appeal.
Eventually I was old enough to drive and one of the beautiful girls had moved on to driving a ’68 Cougar convertible, so her black Spitfire with chrome bumpers was for sale. That was the first one I drove, and I was quite sad about just how disappointing it was, and that I was going to not make the favorable impression I’d wanted on the lovely Sharon by buying her car for close to asking price. I don’t recall if my daily at the time was a ’71 Scamp or an ’88 Festiva, but whatever it was made the Spitfire seem like a creaking, near-collapsing antique. I put it down to her car being a used-up and abused clunker, and test drove a dealer’s Spitfire 1500.
The used car lot Spitfire was brown, as were about a third of the Spitfire 1500s I’ve ever seen. It looked faded but correct from a distance. It was not. Lifting the hood revealed that at one point the car had been painted a bass-boat sort of metallic blue which I can’t recall seeing on any other British car. Lifting the hood also revealed ghosts of wiring harnesses past and used parts from other cars. That one drove as badly as Sharon’s Spitfire, and I was getting snake-bit from finding out that Spitfires could be so much worse than they looked on first glance.
The third Spitfire I drove was a 1500 that had been mechanically restored by an engineer who also had MG experience. That experience consisted of buying and driving a rubber-baby-bumper MG Midget while he restored the Spitfire and then refusing to sell the MG to a friend when he was done with it. This last Spitfire looked better than BL showroom no matter how closely you scanned it. It had a few useful upgrades, like a Dellorto carburetor and a camber-compensator. Seeing it and hearing it idle made me think I had finally found the Triumph that could represent all the glowing reviews Spitfires received during production. Then I drove it. It creaked, and the steering never lightened, and the engine had a flat-spot, and the top fought against the windshield frame, and it was exactly like driving the other two.
There is a guy here in Minnesota that runs autocross with a Spitfire. He has done lots of mods to it and usually spanks us pretty good. A couple of years ago he shows up in the spring, same car but now has a Honda engine from that roaster that spins about 9000 rpm. I think I have seen lawnmowers with bigger engine than what the Spitfire had, now he has a really fast Spitfire.