Bristol alternatives.

[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

[TLF799R]

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.

I never claimed it was scientific, however, this doesn't meant it isn't valid (or viable as you call it). Surely anecdotal evidence is often the trigger for research that wouldn't have happened if no one had shared their practical experience?

Do you work for the road research lab (or whatever the EU say we can call it) by any chance????

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, I'm afraid it wasn't me that said it wasn't needed. I'm all for allowing oldies air.

If you all drove 412s you wouldn't need it you could just drop the hood down! LOL

Philippa

[Jervaulx]

Sorry Philippa i thought it was you who said it, i'll smack myself on the
wrist very hard LOL. On the subject of a convertible, imagine an open top
Fighter, now there's a thought.....

Andrew

[TLF799R]

Originally Posted by Jervaulx

Sorry Philippa i thought it was you who said it, i'll smack myself on the
wrist very hard LOL. On the subject of a convertible, imagine an open top
Fighter, now there's a thought.....

Andrew

Or even a 412 with gull wing doors (Mr Silverton has dashed my hopes and told me it's not possible). Shame...

Philippa