feel free to talk and post your thoughts on Vector here in this thread.
feel free to talk and post your thoughts on Vector here in this thread.
The Vector is junk! Why only a 3 speed gearbox? Way too many angles! It might have looked good in 1985 and only 1985. I don't like a single thing about the Vector. It has lots of power but anything can have lots of power.
oh...........
you must not wanna learn much about vectorOriginally Posted by NAZCA C2
Can u tell I don't like it?
y the time I read the first words of your posts, I think I'm the only one on the Forum who likes Vector.
I dont really know much about Vector at all except that the cars look half decent
I have heard of Vector, but I have no idea what one looks like. Please post a pic.
BTW: Dont make yourself so vonurable
UPC's most heavy Bawls drinker. :D
here's the M12. personally i don't think much of it. like what has been said, they looked good in the 80s but that was 20yrs ago...
EDIT: i just read that this was designed in 1996!! what were they thinking
Last edited by @wall; 06-28-2004 at 12:41 AM.
"WHEN IT'S GAME TIME, IT'S PAIN TIME TIME BABY! WOOOH" ~ Terry Tate
I know that they claim the 3 speed auto box was the only gearbox that could cope with the outputs of the Chevy twin turbo V8.
However, imagine if BMW had said to Gordon Murray "the only gearbox available for this engine is a 3 speed automatic", the engine would have been ditched there and then.
There is no way that a 1990 autobox can perform better than a manual, and the only other automatic supercar I can think of is the SLR, and that doesn't claim to be the ultimate drivers car, it is a high performance GT.
Why did Vector not find a different engine?
Many different engines are available with 500 - 600bhp outputs, look at all the race cars of the day - none of them had automatic transmissions.
The Ultima came out at about that time, with a Chevy based engine and high output - that didn't have the auto.
I just don't understand why they made such a compromise.
Thanks for all the fish
hmmmmmmm.
here this outta clear it up. Vector is not the richest car company. Wiegert can barely hang on sometimes. They cant afford to experment with 7 diffrent engines, they have to take their first choicefor just about everything. they can't afford to expirment, that and the fact that Gerald wiegert can be stubborn at times.
well according to the article I quoted, he had ALL the internals of the gearbox redesigned and remanufactured to handle the output.Originally Posted by Karrmann
So either he DID have the money ( ZF or Quaiffe could have given him one of the shelf ) or he was a VERY poor designer.
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
well, GM designed the tranny.
you missed the pointOriginally Posted by Karrmann
Weigert took a working but inadequte transmission from the GM stabel and according to R&T he selected the seventies auto box and THEN "virtually every part ... is specially machined"
So he spent money taking a bad choice gearbox and spent MORE money redesigning the internals to handle the power and ended up with a poor soluton. FOr a fraction of that cost you could have had a REAL gearbox from a quality supplier !!
Personally I think Weigert confused patriotism and engineering and wanted to show that a US-concept supercar would be a winner.
"Good" designers take the BEST and build from there, regardless of the concept behind it or country of origin.
So Murray used a BMW (D) engine- would have been Japanese Honda if theyt weren't already busy , a Traction-Products (USA) gearbox, the glass is by St Gaubain (D) , brakes by Brembo (I) and audio by Kenwood (J)
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
lets hope he works out the bugs with his WX-10.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)