On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 20:33:57 -0000, "R. Mark Clayton"
> wrote:

>>>> I had a '66 Triumph Vitesse

>>>IIRC the Vitesse had a lethal flaw, whereby in hard cornering the outside
>>>rear wheel would fold under the car.
>>
>> That would only happen if you snapped off the throttle in mid-corner,
>> which no capable driver would do. It's the same kind of thinking as
>> the people who believe that the Porsche 911 has a "fatal flaw" because
>> it will spin out if you do the same thing.
>
>For a start not all cars (especially middle market cars in the 1960's) come
>with capable drivers.
>
>More seriously you assume a smooth level surface on the road (even less
>common in the 1960's) - slide into a bump and the wheel will fold under the
>car.

I never had that happen with my Vitesse, and mine was one of the early
ones that were much more prone to it than the better sorted later
ones. When it did happen, the wheel did not "fold under the car."
There simply wasn't that much travel in the rear suspension. It would
ride up onto the edge of the tire, hiking the rear of the car up, and
then settle back down.

>The fault was relatively easily induced. You did NOT want to be in the car
>(or near it) when it was.

Why not?

>Some 1960's rear engine RWD cars had nightmare handling - my dad used to put
>a bag of sand in his Renault 8 back in the 60's to counter this. The
>Hillman Imp was another tricky one. Whilst Porsche have long since sorted
>the 911 line's "nervous" or "challenging" handling for normal driving, if
>they do let go then you are in big trouble.

Actually, I always thought that the stock Imp handled pretty well. I
think that people used to put bags of sand in the front because there
was a perceived, but not real, benefit in reducing the positive camber
in the front. Ill informed intuition is often seriously wrong.