Hideous car, slow as hell

Discussion in '2002 Morgan Aero 8 GT' started by CorvetteZO6, Aug 10, 2002.

  1. Never before have i seen the A.C.O. bend so easily for a manufacturer. Just to get the prestegious Morgan name back in the race, and all the associated publicity, they allowed a car in with highly questionable aesthetics and boarderline legal dimensions. The windscreen is supposed to be a certain percentage of the width of the body, but the Morgan's is very narrow, too narrow for the regulations in fact. So they have an automatic aerodynamic advantage in that area. However it's not that big of a deal, though, since in pre-qualifying that car was 36 seconds off the pace of the class leader. Thirty six seconds!! That's ludacrous! Hopefully the A.C.O. will disallow this car from the race and let in one of the much more qualified cars like the second Seikel Porsche or the second factory MG/Lola EX257. Sure, the Morgan name is choc-full-o'-heritage, but what good is bringing back an historic name if you're just going to allow one car to drag that name, which was made grade by so many cars, through the mud. Besides, like I said before, this car is grotesque. The combination of stale colors, awkward body, and cross-eyed gaze give this car more than its fair share of putrescence. In short, they should not allow this car to race in the 24 Hours of Le Mans; although, the team should continue to run the car in an effort to develop the chassis and aerodynamics so that they will be better suited for the race next year. Otherwise, they should just scarp the whole idea and save face while there's still time.
  2. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    This isn't ugly or slow. The design is very intriguing and I highly doubt that a BMW V8 with 500 bhp and a six speed will go slow.
  3. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    I like the Morgan in street guise, but i don't think the racing outfit suits it well at all. But i will concede that the view on its looks is merely opinion. However, when i said it was slow i was not stating my opinion; that is an absolute fact. The car is vastly under-engineered and under-developed. Morgan threw this race car together in an effort to generate public interest for its new street car. If this car actually does have 500 hp, which i doubt it does since the M3 GTR was said to only have around 440, then the people who did the aerodynamic work should be beaten for their stupidity. Like i said when i wrote my first message on this, the car was 36 seconds behind the leading GT class car at Le Mans pre-qualifying. That car was, of course, a Porsche GT3-RS with around 420 hp. So if this car has an 80 hp adavantage and was that far off the pace then it is truly an abomination to the great Morgan name. If it were at least close to the pace i might relent a little on its questionable beauty, but since it's not really noteworthy in either area it does not deserve any mercy. I just hope they can pick it up and avoid a stinging 24 hour embarassment.
  4. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    I'd just like to note that the M3 GTR motor was left mostly stock and was tuned little. Who klnows the extent of the tuning of the Morgan's engine.
  5. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    Why are all the manufacturers bringing back cars that look old?<!-- Signature -->
  6. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    Is there any aerodynamics involved with this car? look like a kleenx box to me/<!-- Signature -->
  7. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    this car must FLY! are u kidding? 500 ponies and just 1000k.. i'd put my $ on it
  8. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from dirtbag</i>
    <b>Is there any aerodynamics involved with this car? look like a kleenx box to me/</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    i find this hard to believe that u think this looks like a kleenex box, when the car u have as ur pic is an aston martin, vantage (i think) those cars are bricks wit a huge engine, i love em, but its wht they are.<!-- Signature -->
  9. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    I'll admit the cross-eyed headlights are slightly off-putting, but with 500 hurse on tap, a 6 speed and only 1000 kg to haul around, it'll move as fst as anything else out there.
  10. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    It gets slated because it's different..........well I love different!<IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><!-- Signature -->
  11. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    Different is great...when it works
  12. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Brit cars rule</i>
    <b>It gets slated because it's different..........well I love different!<IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"></b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    I agree completely.<!-- Signature -->
  13. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    36 seconds!!!! Oh My God!!! Could it be that it handles very poorly(could be the reason)? No, never, a car that has 500HP and weighs a slim 2000lbs CAN'T handle like a fish on a sidewalk. IT SHOULDN'T HANDLE POORLY!!!( I agree, but she-it happens) Yeah, it's got balls. Yeah, it looks nice, even in race trim. I love originality because you never see weird stuff like that everyday. But just maybe the suspension and steering are the equivalent of a 1930 Ford Model T. Yes, it should be fast enough to make up a couple seconds due to poor handling. Or could it be the transmission gearing? The driver? My point is, maybe Morgan isn't really looking to hit the jackpot with this car. Maybe they simply wanna get back on the track and just have some fun. Whatever the reason for a foul up like this, I'm sure it's a good one.

    LaTeR<!-- Signature -->
  14. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    well it couldn't have been all that bad... considering they lost an hour and a half to replace 2 transaxles and still managed to get back into 29th place (before the engine blew that is) it's cant be all bad... as for being slow i believe it did get up to 179 mph which aint shabby... (course i don't know how that compares to the other cars) and don't get to high and mighty on your porche there cause audi won the race so just because you've got the fastest qualifying time means jack...
  15. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    it's reliability problems are one of the reasons it is bad. If they had taken another year to develop the thing they might have been faster and held the thing together. Problems that occur in the races are rarely the same problems that happen when you're testing on your own. For some reason the odd stuff happens in hard racing. But instead of racing it for a year they rushed the build time and threw it at the ACO who in turn let it in. I'll admit they got a little bit more pace between the test days and the race weekend, but they still have a lot of work to do. Given they didn't really have much running time at the test days, but that was because they blew a motor then too. It's normally not very good to have the same problem popping up time and again. If i were in charge of it i would have run the whole British GT series with possible entries in the big races of the FIA GT and ALMS series (most notably the 12 Hours of sebring, Petit Le Mans, Road American 500, since the track is actually somewhat similar to Le Mans, and the 24 Hours of Spa). Had they done something like this they would have had vast experience of both how the car behaves in some of the world's toughest endurance races and how they measure up to teams like Alex Job Racing, who didn't go to Le Mans but are generally regarded as one of the best Porsche teams in the world, and The Racer's Group.
  16. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    I don't know about performance but this car is one sweet looking car.
  17. Re: Hideous car, slow as hell

    this car looks cool 2 drive..i dont think with that weight plus a bmw 500hp engine..thats not slow

Share This Page