Bristol alternatives.

[Kevin H]

Originally Posted by Jervaulx

... in a prestige car you should open the window in a more gentlemanly manner by pressing a switch by slight of hand rather than if you were in a £7000 car. I don't agree with excuses of unreliability. When you make cars costing £150,000 and above, you find a reliable mechanism and you fit it. Excuses smacks of laziness to develop and progress and to make the car a better and more passenger friendly car. I also believe this has some truth with the lack of safety features which have been proven, overwhelmingly to save many lives.


Andrew

I agree with you 100% Andrew.

For another example of laziness you only have to look at the air conditioning in the V8 Bristols. I don't know what they are doing today but even as late as the Blenheim 2 they were still using those ugly, inefficient "cassette" type air conditioners slung under the dash, which date back to the early 1970s. That's just a joke in a car in that price bracket.

The lack of development in the V8 Bristols is even more obvious when you look at the chassis, suspension and the power train.

However, rather than laziness this may have been down to economics. My guess is that the company was in terminal decline by the time Mr Silverton came along.

As for whether things like air con and electric rear windows matter, it all depends upon on how you use the car. If you keep your car under wraps in a dehumidified garage and drive it only on sunny Sundays then of course it doesn't matter and you should probably strive for originality. But if you want to use a classic car as a daily driver then a few niceties become more important.

I'm all for subtle/sympathetic modernisation of classic cars if they are to be used as a daily driver. The thread about electric rear windows is here .

[Des]

The 3 litre Rover suggested already, I found to make an excellent substitute
for at least the 2 litre Brizzers.
I've recently been overhauling one, to keep me occupied while I give up the
fags, and it's the first time I've been really up close to one, and many
things have surprisingly impressed me, (I'm surpressed) reminded me of my first
intimate moments with Bristols.
Set the tappets today, were left loose while running in, a right old inlet
over exhaust clusterfeck, but now the thing emulates a sewing machine, a very,
very quiet one, the distributor can actually be heard running. Now it occurs
to me that there's nothing I would want to change or modify about the Rover,
I can't say the same about the Bristol.

Best rear window opener setup I've ever seen would be late 80's 2 door
Nissan Sunny, 2 levers just behind handbrake, accessible by front or rear
occupant, operated hinged glass via cables, brilliantly simple.

In the 403 the heater is not much use unless a window is open. It is hard
to believe that the cabin is that airtight, but letting air out
considerably improves the flow coming in. This is particularly important
when the demister is needed. Perhaps, like Ashley, I have been too
effective in closing gaps in an effort to reduce noise. It is also
difficult to close a door if all windows are closed. The rear side windows
provide the best escape route for air, as this allows the warm air to pass
through the cabin. Opening these is a struggle from the driving seat, and
that is why I rarely open them.
Has anyone devised a "throughflow" system like modern cars have, which would
not involve visible bodywork changes?

Mike Davies.

[Kevin H]

Originally Posted by ynysd

Has anyone devised a "throughflow" system like modern cars have, which would not involve visible bodywork changes?

Mike Davies.

Yes, Bristol did on the 411, with barely noticeable bodywork changes. That's what those two vents are for on the rear wings. There are lightly spring loaded flaps behind those. That's also why there are two wire mesh grilles in the rear parcel shelf. The holes beneath them are not, as this picture shows, for the seat belt to pass through!

Edit: Photo added to show where the seat belt should go. Also photo of vent on inside of rear wing.

[jimfoz]

Originally Posted by Kevin Howard

I agree with you 100% Andrew.

For another example of laziness you only have to look at the air conditioning in the V8 Bristols. I don't know what they are doing today but even as late as the Blenheim 2 they were still using those ugly, inefficient "cassette" type air conditioners slung under the dash, which date back to the early 1970s. That's just a joke in a car in that price bracket.

The lack of development in the V8 Bristols is even more obvious when you look at the chassis, suspension and the power train.

However, rather than laziness this may have been down to economics. My guess is that the company was in terminal decline by the time Mr Silverton came along.

As for whether things like air con and electric rear windows matter, it all depends upon on how you use the car. If you keep your car under wraps in a dehumidified garage and drive it only on sunny Sundays then of course it doesn't matter and you should probably strive for originality. But if you want to use a classic car as a daily driver then a few niceties become more important.

I'm all for subtle/sympathetic modernisation of classic cars if they are to be used as a daily driver. The thread about electric rear windows is here .

In reference to this it is interesting to note that although Bristols historically have always been an aquired choice they were at least a competitive choice in the 50's and 60's and compared well to potential opposition such as Jensen, Facel Vega, Jaguar, Maserati, ISO, Rolls (maybe even some Ferraris) etc. I suppose they used to have access to BAC finance for a time, and Tony Crook, when he sold his successful consessionaries and bought into the company in the 1960's was probably the Toby Sliverton of the day so the cars were still being pretty well developed for a time during the 60's and early 70's.
You're right about the a/c system. I know it allows drivers to simultaniously cook their feet and freeze their eyeballs, but surely a bought-in smaller and more efficient dual zone climate system from the likes of Behr would be 'quite easy' to engineer into the car?

[Ashley James]

I love my Rovers as much as anyone and I've had many over the years,
mostly P4s, but P6's, Land Rovers and now a 75 with less than 40,000
miles on the clock. Rovers and Lord Hives friendship with the Wilkes
brothers was the main reason for the MKVI Bentley being the best car
R-R ever made after the Ghost. He understood how well they were made
and how profitable. R-R only profited from Government re-armament
contracts then!

The only thing my 400 has in common with a Rover is that it's a car,
albeit and eccentric one. It's heavy and old fashioned to drive, but
corners and handles like a modern, makes blood curdling noises and it
looks a bit like the some of the Pre-War streamliners. And it's
anything but airtight! I've secreted draught excluders where I can,
the heater does work, but if I want to see through the windscreen I
have open a side window as one always did with old cars. The opening
rear window is a blessing in the summer.

I'll do my tour of France in it next year when the 80+ cruising speed
will be useful and then I'll make up my mind about it. Therefore if
you're over there end May early June, or if you'd like to join us
(there are a few beds left see www.kda132.com for shortly to appear
details), keep an eye open for a Cambridge Grey (Apple Green metallic)
400 with occupants wearing bright yellow ear defenders!

Ashley

[TLF799R]

What is it with you boys - you claim to love the cars then all you do is run them down. If so much is wrong with them why have one???

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the Fighter have a specially developed air conditioning system, designed for the car at great cost?

It would have presumably been much easier, as other "supercars" do, to pinch theirs from cheap mass produced cars but Bristol didn't do that. They wanted to make their car smaller and lighter so they designed their own!

How can you possibly call that lazy???

When I win the lottery I am straight off to Kensington to order my new Bristol!

Philippa
p.s. Also am I not right that despite other comments on the lack of "proven safety features" Bristol has an exceptional safety record despite being a high performance car.

[quote=Kevin Howard;490]I agree with you 100% Andrew.

For another example of laziness you only have to look at the air conditioning in the V8 Bristols. I don't know what they are doing today but even as late as the Blenheim 2 they were still using those ugly, inefficient "cassette" type air conditioners slung under the dash, which date back to the early 1970s. That's just a joke in a car in that price bracket.
quote]

Quote
Yes, Bristol did on the 411, with barely noticeable bodywork changes.
That's what those two vents are for on the rear wings. There are lightly
spring loaded flaps behind those. That's also why there are two wire mesh
grilles in the rear parcel shelf. The holes beneath them are not, as this
picture
(http://www.bristolcars.info/forums/a...pictureid=233)
shows, for the seat belt to pass through!
End quot

I guess this follows on from the first Cortina, which had vents on the C
pillar. A lot of current cars have vents in the boot which exit behind the
rear bumper and are therefor not visible.These have a rubber flap to act as
a one-way valve. The 403 already has airflow into the boot via the rear
window blind slot, but no way out from there. I would not like to cut vents
into the rear wings, but the areas to the side of the boot floor, behind the
rear wheel arches is a possibility.

[Jervaulx]

(Quote: Kevin Howard)
However, rather than laziness this may have been down to economics. My guess
is that the company was in terminal decline by the time Mr Silverton came
along.
(End Quote)

I think the Bristol Fighter sends out a good signal for the future of the
company under Mr Silverton's stewardship.

(Quote: Kevin Howard)
As for whether things like air con and electric rear windows matter, it all
depends upon on how you use the car. If you keep your car under wraps in a
dehumidified garage and drive it only on sunny Sundays then of course it
doesn't matter and you should probably strive for originality. But if you
want to use a classic car as a daily driver then a few niceties become more
important.
(End Quote)

Don't forget, Bristol Cars regularly comment that their cars are designed
for daily usage, so really these things should be standard fitment.

Andrew

______________________
PREVIOUS MESSAGE FROM: Jervaulx

(Quote: rubbond)

On the other subjects, my goodness. Who really could care a sh*t about
electric rear windows? Or am I mad?

(End Quote)

Basically, if you have front electric windows, you should have the rear
ones
electric also. It also helps older and more infirm passengers in the rear
to open the window when they find it difficult to reach and open the
manual
mechanism. Also, in a prestige car you should open the window in a more
gentlemanly manner by pressing a switch by slight of hand rather than if
you
were in a £7000 car. I don't agree with excuses of unreliability. When
you
make cars costing £150,000 and above, you find a reliable mechanism and
you
fit it. Excuses smacks of laziness to develop and progress and to make
the
car a better and more passenger friendly car. I also believe this has
some
truth with the lack of safety features which have been proven,
overwhelmingly to save many lives.

Having said that, i am a fan of the current models from Bristol and would
recommend them.

Andrew

[Jervaulx]

A tip to help prevent windows steaming up which works on bathrooms mirrors.
Take a soft dry cloth, squirt washing up liquid on it and wipe over the
windscreen and/or side windows. Then take another soft dry cloth and buff
it off. This should stop the misting as it really does work on bathroom
mirrors.

Andrew

[jimfoz]

[quote=TLF799R;498]What is it with you boys - you claim to love the cars then all you do is run them down. If so much is wrong with them why have one???

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the Fighter have a specially developed air conditioning system, designed for the car at great cost?

It would have presumably been much easier, as other "supercars" do, to pinch theirs from cheap mass produced cars but Bristol didn't do that. They wanted to make their car smaller and lighter so they designed their own!

How can you possibly call that lazy???

When I win the lottery I am straight off to Kensington to order my new Bristol!






Lets not forget that if you have any spare pennies after forking out for your new Bristol and you don't like the dashboard, you can possibly instruct Bristol to arrange any bespoke upgrading of it. I remember seeing on these pages a Blenheim belonging to an owner that had a much better and tasteful interior upgrade utilising Rolls Royce eyeball vents and chrome switches and totally ditching the underdash chip-cutter ac. Would this upgrade have been done by Bristol or would someone else have done it??

[Markus Berzborn]

I don't quite get this.
Who needs to open rear windows anyway when you have air con? What for? To ask someone for the way because the driver himself does not speak English?

Regards,
Markus

[Kevin H]

Originally Posted by TLF799R

What is it with you boys - you claim to love the cars then all you do is run them down.

It's not blind love!

Originally Posted by TLF799R

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the Fighter have a specially developed air conditioning system, designed for the car at great cost?

I don't know if you are right or wrong, but who was talking about the Fighter? My comments specifically mentioned V8 Bristols.

Originally Posted by TLF799R

It would have presumably been much easier, as other "supercars" do, to pinch theirs from cheap mass produced cars but Bristol didn't do that. They wanted to make their car smaller and lighter so they designed their own!

How do you know it's not straight out of the Viper?

Isn't that where the chassis came from?

[Jervaulx]

Philippa, we were talking generally about the main model the Blenheim 3 and
not the Fighter which sets a good future for the company.

As far as safety, until the cars go through Euro NCap tests then your views
of the safety record is not viable. Bristol cars are rare as hens teeth and
so the odds of them being in severe crashes is a lot less than a higher
production model.

Also, are you really saying that because some of us have made a critcism of
certain models, then we should go elsewhere? Anybody who really cares about
a marque will make criticsm and on this occasion, it is genuine and heart
felt and not done for the sake of being nasty. Other marques face criticism
from their customers and enthusiasts all the time, they listen and if there
is a need they will act on it.

Andrew

[TLF799R]

Hi Andrew,

As far as safety, until the cars go through Euro NCap tests then your views of the safety record is not viable. Bristol cars are rare as hens teeth and so the odds of them being in severe crashes is a lot less than a higher production model.

Sorry if my views are not as valid as the rest of yours...!

My view, unlike yours, is based among other things on informed comment from a Blenheim owner I met at the factory when picking up our car. He had been in a high speed 8 car motorway pile up where every other car had air bags (some as many as 7).

He was the only driver who emerged unscathed. What the government tests fail to take into account is that should you be involved in a multiple impact your airbags have been and gone once the first car has hit you. You are then presumably sitting in a car designed to protect you through the air bags that doesn't then have them as car number two hits you!

He walked away from the accident thanks to the strength in the Bristol chassis. Of the other people in the accident some were still in hospital 1 month later presumably collecting the insurance money from their write offs when he was collecting his repaired car from the factory.

I would much rather rely on the design of a car to save me than some kind of "GCSEs for cars" created by a government who you all seem to have very little faith in the rest of the time!

Also, are you really saying that because some of us have made a critcism of certain models, then we should go elsewhere? Anybody who really cares about a marque will make criticsm and on this occasion, it is genuine and heart felt and not done for the sake of being nasty. Other marques face criticism from their customers and enthusiasts all the time, they listen and if there is a need they will act on it.

Andrew

I don't mind informed comment about the cars as I said to Kevin, I just feel it should be exactly that - informed!

Philippa

[406Special]

Philippa,

I agree that the Fighter has a unique chassis and probably may have a
uniquely configured air con system , but I suspect the air con will be based
around off the shelf components matched to suit the requirements of the
Fighter, not bespoke down to the ECU and sub components. That would be
farcical economically and something simply not worth doing.

Most large scale auto manufacturers use common components configured to
their specific requirements but often shared amongst several brands/marques.
A classic example (not air con) is the half shaft (drive shaft) off a
Porsche 928. It is more than £450 off the shelf from Porsche and is a
direct swap for the same item used on a Ford Granada of the same era (price
£195). All made by GKN. Similarly air-con units largely come from 3-4
global suppliers. Bosch supplies so much to the auto industry one has to
ask the question, what apart from body and chassis design do the car makers
actually do (lots really). Even engines and gearboxes are routinely shared
these days (Borg Warner / Getrag / etc, or Alfa/Fiat/Vauxhall/Saab with
diesels or even BMW Mini/Peugeot/Citroen diesels to name a few). Everything
from ABS and braking systems to other sub-systems are designed and produced
by third parties. Indeed it is a strength that such outsourcing of common
systems is used, especially for Bristol - makes it better for us who make
the time and effort to keep them going. My 406 will have a latest model
Dana Spicer rear axle and modern front disc calipers, plus other nice shiny
3rd party stuff added for convenience and ease of maintenance - including a
fully integrated off the shelf air con unit.

As to crash worthiness it is of great importance that energy is absorbed by
the structure as much as possible instead of the people inside. Rather than
blame the lack of available airbags (designed to help keep moving body parts
from too much acceleration and impact damage), the issue you raise about a
multiple car pile up is more related to the subsequent lack of impact
(energy) absorption by an already crashed car by another impact. This is a
catch 22 and unfortunate. Although having said that the basic cell
structure of most moderns remains pretty strong even after front and rear
impact absorption. Fewer deaths occur due to high speed (30-50mph) impact
than say 20-30 years ago (pro-rata). Even better still are injuries due to
impact of body parts inside the car.

The Bristol (V8's) has excellent rear impact absorption (relatively weak
(soft) structure) attached to a solid structure and similarly same at front
above chassis line and before engine. Side impact is good too as long as
the impact is below knee height until it hits the inner chassis rails. In
any event, the guy in the heavier object always comes off (almost always)
better than the guy in the smaller one. A V8 Bristol weighs in at 1700kgs
about the same as a modern BMW 5 series or smaller 7 series.

[Jervaulx]

Philippa your comment of the guy surviving the crash is not a scientific one
and is therefore not viable as the Blenheim was not in the same posotion as
all the cars involved. The official tests also show how the car deforms in
a crash dissapaiting the energy and how it handles impact (modern cars
deform whereas older cars didn't causing injuries to passengers) and where
the pedals go for example. Recent tests also found, if a small Renault
Modus was travelling at 30mph and a Mercedes E-class (W124) from the late
1980's pulled out and was hit side on, the Mercedes driver would likely be
killed. Whereas if the roles were reversed, the Renault driver would walk
away. Mercedes cars are known the world over for being some of the safest
and toughest cars in existence. I prefer proven science on a like for like
basis, rather than a guy i met happened to be ok in his car in 1 crash. Oh
and most crashes aren't multiple pile ups, they are single impact. Modern
crash zones are 'proven' by many reliable sources (not just government
tests) to save lives, ignorance doesn't!!

On the case of your argument of not needing an electric opener of the rear
window. What about on days when the air con isn't needed but the passenger
wants fresh air, are we to deny them because you don't see the need for it?
Manual openers are a poor mans way of opening the window and an
impossibility for many older generations who simply cannot reach across.

Andrew

[Markus Berzborn]

Originally Posted by Kevin Howard

How do you know it's not straight out of the Viper?

Isn't that where the chassis came from?

The chassis? You probably mean the engine.

Regards,
Markus

[Kevin H]

Originally Posted by Markus Berzborn

The chassis? You probably mean the engine.

Regards,
Markus

No I did mean the chassis. Just thought I would throw that one out there and see what the reaction was

We all know the engine is a Viper engine, and presumably the transmission, but I assumed that Bristol made the chassis.

However, just last week I was talking to a guy who recently visited Chrysler in Detroit. He is doing some development work on another model of car to utilise the Viper engine so he had some meetings arranged with Chrysler people. They looked after him, picked him up from his hotel, took him out for lunch and gave him a tour of the Viper production plant. These guys were very forthcoming with information until he asked if the Bristol Fighter used the Viper chassis - "No comment" was the response.

Now if Bristol were not using the Viper chassis it would be very simple for the Chrysler guys to say that. But when anyone declines to comment when asked a simple yes/no question, that makes me suspicious.

Why would Bristol not use the Viper chassis? It's a great chassis, well proven and successful in racing versions of the Viper. It would also have saved them a fortune in development costs.

Has anyone ever seen a reasonably detailed description of the Fighter chassis?

[browning l]

Originally Posted by Kevin Howard

No I did mean the chassis. Just thought I would throw that one out there and see what the reaction was

We all know the engine is a Viper engine, and presumably the transmission, but I assumed that Bristol made the chassis.

However, just last week I was talking to a guy who recently visited Chrysler in Detroit. He is doing some development work on another model of car to utilise the Viper engine so he had some meetings arranged with Chrysler people. They looked after him, picked him up from his hotel, took him out for lunch and gave him a tour of the Viper production plant. These guys were very forthcoming with information until he asked if the Bristol Fighter used the Viper chassis - "No comment" was the response.

Now if Bristol were not using the Viper chassis it would be very simple for the Chrysler guys to say that. But when anyone declines to comment when asked a simple yes/no question, that makes me suspicious.

Why would Bristol not use the Viper chassis? It's a great chassis, well proven and successful in racing versions of the Viper. It would also have saved them a fortune in development costs.

Has anyone ever seen a reasonably detailed description of the Fighter chassis?

Your assumption was correct, but then you stop doing justice to Bristol's aircraft-derived engineering practices. A simple inquiry of Bristol Cars LTD elicited the facts that there is no secret about the Fighter chassis; The car has been shown in chassis form both at shows and in the showroom. The two chassis are completely dissimilar.