Road and Track set out to test the field of the nice sports cars approved to participate in the SCCA’s new racing class: Showroom Stock Sports Cars, as an addition to their successful Showroom Stock Sedan Series begun a year earlier. The sports cars chosen by the SCCA were the Porsche 914 1.7, Opel GT, MG Midget, MGB, VW Karmann-Ghia, Triumph Spitfire 1500, Triumph GT6, Fiat 124 Spider and the MGB GT. All of them were required to run on tires no larger than 165-section radial tires, and the price ceiling was set at $4,000, although that had to be lifted a bit for the 914.
The nine cars were tested at Riverside International Raceway, and strictly on parameters relevant to racing. That’s a key distinction, as the performance parameters used for regular road tests are often not indicative of success on the track. Elapsed time between two curves or other milestones on the track may be more strongly influenced by the specific gearing than just the usual 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. And there’s more to getting through a curve quickly than a skid pad result.
These factors make for interesting reading, and the results are not quite obvious. Given the huge variation in horsepower, 94 for the DOHC Fiat to 46 hp for the venerable Beetle engine in the Ghia, one might expect similarly large variations in the outcome. Not so.
I’m not going to add a lot of commentary here, as it rather needs to be read to get in all the relevant details. But the outcome is a bit surprising, with the Triumph GT6 coming in first with the lowest lap time and the weaker Spitfire deemed to be”the most fun to drive”. This is despite their swing axle rear suspension, which are apparent trigger words for some folks (note: these were using the “swing spring” version of the Herald/Spitfire rear suspension, which was an intermediate step between the original version and the further modified version for the upcoming 1974 Spitfire 1500 with a wider track and more negative camber).
The powerful Fiat’s mid-pack result might also be a bit unexpected, but then its suspension was simply too soft. And the Karmann-Ghia’s last place is not a surprise, but its ability to hang in there as well as it did is rather. It was deemed to be both more fun and pleasant to drive than the MG Midget, which ranked very poorly.
If I could go back in my time machine, I’d grab the Opel and come back to the present. Just something about the styling (mini-me Corvette) would make me smile today.
My Dad bought an Opel GT 1970, only because the dealer markups on the new 240Z made the Datsun unaffordable. That does make me wonder how the the Z car would have fared in this sort of test. I suspect it would ranked at or near the top.
I believe that these were cars that were going to be eligible for an SCCA showroom stock sports car class, to supplement the existing showroom stock small sedan class. I also don’t think the proposed class ever made it to national status. The Datsun would have been excluded because it would have made all of these cars completely uncompetitive. It was more like a bargain 911 or 914-6 in performance, not an MGB GT from the East. The 240Z’s MSRP would have put it in the middle of this class, but that’s why the 240Z commanded so much more than MSRP in the market.
I remember when this issue came out, I probably read this road test several times. I would eventually own examples of 2 of the cars here and drove a 3rd one (the GT6) that belonged to a female cousin.
Today, I don’t think that I would turn up my nose at any one of these if it was in reasonably good condition. Unfortunately, the onset of arthritis and even worse…a spreading waistline, puts many or most of these cars out of reach.
That said, the only one here I would really want to own is the 914, but surely, with wider tires as it’s first modification/upgrade.
The SCCA pretty quickly realized that the two class approach, with a wide range of sedans and sports cars in the two respective classes, didn’t work well, and soon switched to a three class format, mixing sedans and sports cars in Showroom Stock A, B, and C. These new classes were also included in National level competition (the original Showroom Stock had been Regional only) with National Championships in each class determined by the results of the Runoffs at the end of each season. In 1983 a fourth class, SSGT for American V8’s and turbo Nissan ZX and 944, was added. Showroom Stock lasted until 2012 and all SCCA classes are now for modified (or full race) vehicles only, though allowable modifications vary by category.
In the real world the straight line braking distances that R&T tested were far less significant than brake fade over the course of a multi-lap race. As I recall, the 914 was the winningest SS Sports Car and the Opel 1900 (Ascona) dominated the field among the sedans.
A childhood friend had a Midget and it was always fun when it ran. Every six months when it was running, we’d have a blast in it, then push it home when it quit. If the odometer worked, I’d say that we put more miles on it pushing or towing it, than on its own.
I also remember reading this – I would have been 12 at the time.
Does SCCA Showroom Stock still exist? From a quick Google I can’t see any reference to it in the last decade. I suppose the Mazda MX5/Miata would be pretty much the only option nowadays, but they’d be a *lot* faster.
See my brief history of SS in a comment above. Showroom Stock in its final form, with four classes, ended in 2012. Miata’s were competitive in their class for a period.
I had this issue also and read it until it fell apart. Later owned several examples of MGB, MBG/GT, and Spitfire Mark IV. All of them a blast to drive hard, more fun actually than the ’69 E-Type I had, though the latter was the ultimate crumpet collector for sure. I’d take a ’70 MGB/GT today and drop in a GM aluminum, 215, upgrade suspension and tire, and have even more fun.
Haven’t heard “crumpet collector” in a while! I bet that was great fun in the Jaaag!
They got 92 MPH out of a standard Ghia? I thought Beetles of this vintage topped out in the low to mid 70’s. The Ghia might be somewhat better aerodynamically but is heavier.
Yep, a 1600cc twin port Ghia will do that – mine runs up to that speed re. GPS even now and it probably lacks a few of its original ponies. Ghias have very small frontal area and must have a good CD, too, seeing how they run. Makes them very usable as daily drivers – you don’t have to crawl along on freeways….
I’m a little surprised, too, but it says in the pdf “CarbBaseFlangeNumbersA” that Ghias had special Solex carbs with their own jetting, set up with “lean cruise” 10 mph higher than Bug carbs.
Very thorough! I’ve always had a soft spot for the GT6.
Funny thing about mid-engined cars, the 914 has a weight distribution of 52.4/54.0 – German engineering at its finest! 🙂
Burbank
Showroom stock. I remember reading a lot about them way back when. It looked like a ton of fun. Unfortunately it was for late model cars, while they were relatively affordable, but still well out of my price range, let alone the cost of racing. Still, looked really fun.
On how the cars shook out. Interesting, I would have expected the 914 to have lapped the field, even with a modest (gutless?) engine. Back in the 80’s I got my eyes opened to old British Sports cars by a friend in a MGB. I’m thinking old English car, leaf springs, no IRS, etc. He drove it like, and it acted like, a go kart. I guess when you’re 2″ off the ground to start with there’s not much body roll. It was a real eye opener. I bitched about leaf springs instead of coil, he said he oiled them to make them a pure spring and take the friction out. Yeah, I guess. Not sure how long you can do that, but it worked for him. Top speed on the Ghia didn’t surprise me, although I might even expect a bit more. They were slippery. Opel I thought would do well and it did. The GT6. Ok, it did well, but for how long? Color me cynical.
Still a good read and I wished I could have afforded SSS back then.
Why was there not a Datsun/Nissan 240Z included in this sports car road test comparison?
Perhaps because the “Z-car” was a modern, up to date car that would had destroyed all these antiquated coal carts?
Racing for those too stubborn to buy a Datsun, methinks!
I have owned a few of these and run one as a daily.
The GT6 is great – if you can fit inside you will enjoy a lovely, melodic engine, great gearbox with overdrive and nice handling. Oh, and working on the engine is a pleasure with the flip front – even a place for a cup of Earl Grey on the bulkhead whilst you adjust the Strombergs! Very reliable in my experience, only the gearboxes tend to be overstressed with the whopping 104hp the non USA versions got. Great looking, too and fab view looking out over the bonnet. Hatchback makes it surprisingly practical.
The Opel GT is a lovely thing, especially with wheels and tires that eliminate the narrow tracked look. Great driving position and tight handling, despite the old Kadett A front end.
Goes really well on the Autobahn (the 1100cc version, not so much) due to small size and good aero. Zero practicality, though as there is no deck lid.
The Ghia is a sweet, charming thing. You have to row it along at low speeds, but it will cruise pretty happily on the freeway at 80 and does actually stick and handle tolerably well. I lowered the nose of mine about 3 inches which really improved stability and, I suspect, top speed. It will lock the front wheels too easily under braking (especially in the wet) – different wheel cylinders for the rear drums that will hopefully alleviate that. But, as an everyday vehicle it works – enough space for even bikes inside, cheap, easily available parts and easy to work on. Never fails to start and get you where you want to go. As the article says, it does well for 46hp and it does keep up with traffic if you drive it properly (which makes it fun), but a bump in power is easy to do – It is beginning to lose compression on one pot (common VW problem), which is easy to cure, so I’m throwing bigger bore barrels at mine, along with a carb that is not sized for a lawnmower and big valve heads. Even another 10hp will make a difference!
The 914 is on my wish list – the 916 wheel arches are a must though, turning it from gawky to tough and Type 4 motors are eminently tunable. I recall Paul writing about how satisfying they are to drive, especially the 2 liter 5speed versions and they are practical with 2 trunks a roomy interior and great parts backup.
Now, look. A word about swing axles, if I may.
I have never doubted that swingers are a good thing for professional driving, on a track, and may even have said so at some point. The great photo of the KG illustrates accordingly.
It’s their use on mass-made transports, for the daily grind and the occasional excursion, it’s for that that I sniff and sneer. If some bearded hipster, with the car-knowledge of a newt, fashioned his way into some on-trend KG today, and came whistling downhill into a corner in the rush to his curated coffee, and slowed up on realising the bend was sharper than him, it would not end with the clever cornering shown above, but with his beard up over his eyebrows as he parked it on its roof. (My in-advance apologies to Huey, above. You are clearly not a bearded hipster, and even if you are, that is patently not causal in your purchase of your KG).
It may even be narrower than that, on consideration.
It may be that my real objection is to positive-cambered swing axles, as if the few degrees such were the immutable word of Porsche-as-God, circa 1938. Even Mercedes saw the sense in heresy by the time of the 300SL roadster, making them pivot low so as not to have more Ava Gardners complaining of roofal entrapment.
Here endeth my lesson. Go in peace. go the right way up.
On another topic – I DO have others, you know – it’s interesting to note that the crude old MGB did well, as it illustrates the point that suspension sophistry is not a huge factor on a track. That’s why plenty of US cars made killings there. None of them great shakes on the bumps and slings and arrows of the real road, they could monster on with huge power at the track. The Ford Galaxie was only beaten by 3.8 Jags in ’60’s racing by virtue of the weight vs the brakes, the Jag having respectively less and more of each. Round corners, the huge Ford wasn’t much slower despite the lack of complex underpinnings.
The KG had lost its swing axles about 5 years earlier.
Ah. Just so.
I misled myself from the text, where they say the rear end jacked up a bit, and from the B&W photo, where the rear appears to be tucking under. Expanding the photo shows it isn’t.
I hereby change all the “KG” references above to “Spitfire”. Ahem.
I shall pick up my dignity from the floor on the way out.
Since forever, VW cars have been really easy to soup up. The 46 HP KG didn’t have to stay that way long.
The Porche is listed here at $4375 and the KG $2800. If one were to spend say, $300 upgrading the motor, you’d get Porsche performance for two thirds the money.
That $2800 translates to about $18,000 today. The good old days indeed!
These results clearly show how Fiat really stuffed up the suspension tune and setup of the second series (i.e. BS and BC) 124 Sports Spiders and Coupes in North America, as well as the European/Rest of world variants, in a major way.
How else can one explain cars like the Triumph GT6, Opel GT and MGB GT having a superior lap time in this test?
The first series AS and AC models were universally lauded for their fantastic handling, and had Fiat maintained the spring and damper rates (and the earlier model’s rear anti roll bar), the car would have had the dynamic measure of all of these cars, with the likely exception of the Porsche 914.