Spider or Spitfire

[noKYspider]

I wanted to get some opinions on the 124 Spider vs. the Triumph Spitfire in terms of why you chose the Spider (and yes, I realize where I'm asking). I'm looking at small convertibles because I want something fun, something to tinker on, and something to teach my kids about the generalities of car maintenance. The Fiat was the first convertible I looked at but I didn't get to drive it because the one I found had no brakes. I've since looked at and driven a 77 Spitfire and a 79 MGB. I ended up ruling out the MGB because it just didn't do much for me in the way it looks even though the car was in good shape at a good price.

After driving both of the British I'm concerned with the lack of power. I've never had a car with less than a v6 and I can't shake this nagging fear that I'll be disappointed over the long haul. I know the Spider has more power and I'm looking for one now to check out and drive. That being said, one of the initial things that kind of shied me away from the Spider was the thought that I might be going at the experience more on my own with the Fiat. It seems all the little British cars have a good support network and clubs that do lots of local events but I haven't really been able to find that here in Cincinnati. Maybe I just haven't been successful in searching though. One of the things I really like though is the potential for having the kids in the car with my wife and I because of the rear seat / package shelf.

So, I'd really be interested in hearing some thoughts, especially from people that looked at Spitfires too and chose the Spider, or people that might own both. I'm trying to get into the hobby with my eyes wide open and want to make sure I make the best possible decision for me and my family over the long haul. Thanks for any thoughts and/or adviceyou might have.

[DUCeditor]

Since the days when they were new and I was looking forward to someday getting a driver's license I've had a soft spot for the Spitfire. There is much to like about the car. First off is its honest simplicity. Look under the hood (love the way it opens!) and you'll see a small, tractor-like, four-banger, a battery, and not much else.

The interior is equally simple. A pair of leather seats, a very simple instrument cluster, and the needed controls. Little more.

Performance-wise, however, it is slow, slow, slow. And the suspension is primitive. All this makes it a totally different type of vehicle than the Fiat Spider which was technologically very advanced for its time. (overhead cam motor, 4-wheel disc brakes, well damped suspension, quick flip back top with wonderful weather sealing when raised, etc.)

For simple Sunday back roading either would be a hoot. One because of its English stiff upper lip character, the other for its Italian Dolce Vita air. But apart from both being moderately priced sporty, two-seater, soft tops they have little else in common.

-don

[narfire]

I have a friend here that lets me use his shop when I need a hoist. He has a triumph TR 250 and a 69 TR 6, the same mechanically. I took one around the block and found they had a small cockpit and heavy. Lots of torque but my spider with the engine upgrades will pull away from it now. My neighbour, who used to work on Fiats in So-Cal years ago, had a spitfire. He said he did a great deal of work on the engine and changed carbs to give it a reasonable amount of power to keep up in traffic. I sat in it and found it , like the triumphs, small and a moderate sized adult could be rubbing shoulders.
You're right in that it seems the british car following is bigger than the Fiat, but I think the Fiat is a superior car in looks, comfort and performance.

[SunnySideUp]

As far as a support network for Spiders, you're on one of the best forums ever. I'm not just saying that -- proof is in the amount of visits and contributions. There is also the organization Fiat-Lancia Unlimited (FLU) with chapters throughout the country. Despite what some non-Fiat folks say, parts for Spiders are easy enough to come by. Suppliers such as Allison Automotive, Auto Ricambi, C.Obert, International Auto Parts, Midwest Bayless, Vick Auto Sports to name a few, and even the used parts folks such as Auto-Italia, Matthews Auto Parts, and forum members can typically get you what you need to get a Spider back into running condition or even full restoration.

Spitfires and Spiders are both sexy cars. Granted, they're not an Aston Martin or a Ferrari, but close enough for most folks who don't have unlimited funds. I had a Spitfire and subsequently my first Spider in my younger days. The Spider feels bigger, has more leg room (for me, at least) and has those classic Italian lines. There are things I miss about my Spitfire like the engine bay access and its "British-ness." But the technology of the Spider (still current by most standards minus airbags and anti-lock brakes), availability of parts and the way it can accommodate two adults with relative ease is why I have another Spider today.

You'd probably be happy with either choice. Check around your local area for clubs or groups. Drive each and get a feel for them. Look at availability of parts, service, and support networks. Armed with that information and some "seat time" will make your choice easier to make.

[RRoller123]

I agree with all the prior comments, and want to stress how much superior the Spider is technologically. Better rear suspension, electric radiator fan, alternator versus generator, FI (1980 or later), DOHC, 4-wheel discs, rear seat (sort of), excellent top, timing belt versus chain. You get my drift. My buddy years ago had a TR2 and I loved that car. It was fun to drive and had that British air about it. But the Spider is pure Italian fun also, and with a lineage through the designer and body fabricator (Battista Farina house, or Pininfarina) to Ferrari, so it is no slouch either. You will get all the help you need on this and other forums, and the parts are easy and inexpensive to procure. I guess it is evident that I went for the Spider! <{:^)

[seabeelt]

I have owned both. I had a 68 Spit when I was much younger and had a Spider since 1985. While both are fun to drive ( and yet different drivers) I would put my money on the Spider. I have had less mechanical and electrical issues and more driving satisfaction overall wit the Spider. Plus the top is the easiest to raise and lower by far. I work with a fellow who has an 82 Spit and even thought it is newer than my Spider, he is still constantly repairing one item or another ( and he is not obsessive about his car) He only uses it in the summer and it is garage kept. I do miss the way the hood opens on the Spit , but all other things being equal, I would not go back. Don't worry about parts, they are plentiful and realatively inexpensive. Good luck on your choice.
r/

[azruss]

the choice here is classic british vs modern (for its day) italian. The spit has a classic 4 banger pushrod motor. Carbs are a pain to deal with compared to webers. It may have the old lever style shocks, so these require rebuilding not just buying a new tube shock and throwing it in the car. brakes are a big deal as spiders are very modern with 4 wheel disc. If you have ever rebuilt drums, it can be a bloody affair if you arent practiced. Brits use a fine splined shaft on the tranny that can be a real pain to slip into the clutch mechanism. the brit cars are rougher riding, prone to tranny and rear end whine. heater and defrost will be a decade behind what the spider has. Brits also had their own rust issues. was common to have a lateral fender seam that would collect water and dirt and rust through. They are simple and to the point, much like the early Spiders before all the smog stuff and FI. Geared much differently than a spider. 4 speeds with a tall 1 gear, vs the spiders 5-speed and a very short first gear. Not sure whether the spit has a swing axle in the rear. This was an early style of IRS. made the rear tire geometry very odd in the corners. Check to see if there is a travel strap to keep the axle from flipping under the car in a heavy corner.
What i noticed the most was when driving one of the british cars for a few months and then jumping back into the spider, how much more refined the spider is. The spit is classic British with those pretty smith gages and thick leather seats.

[kustom]

I have a friend who recently parted with his Spitfire. He spent upwards of $10,000 restoring it, but decided to sell it due to frequent break downs. We often had a laugh that my sometimes neglected Spider never gave me half of the problems that his very well maintained Spitfire did. He may have just had bad luck, but he went with a Toyota MR2.

[twincam69]

I've had a Triumph GT6 (lots of torque, good 6cyl exhaust note and a bit of an oven inside) as well as still owning a '64 Spitfire (in pieces at the moment). The difference between the 124 Spider and these cars is amazing. The Spitfire uses a separate body and frame and you feel the "lack of one piece" when driving over anything other than a very smooth road. The Fiat feels much more engineered and technically advanced, and it is. It is also just as easy to work on, get parts for and with Forums like this, to get solid information. My '69 Spider is a world beyond any '69 Triumph and really does feel and drive like a modern car....just simpler and with more style than most.
Any old sports car will need some attention as you own it, but that is part of the fun. Go for the Fiat.

[Youngmgbuilder]

I think you should go back and look at a restored pre-1974 MGB, they don't have the big ugly rubber bumpers like the post-1974. Also they handle a lot better because they are lower



This MG is one of my favorite examples ('65) and there are plenty in the Ohio area. I have both a 1972 MGB Roadster, 1977 MGB Roadster, and my mom has a 1979 Fiat Spider. And the parts for MG's are so much cheaper! (And no they aren't built cheaper, but aren't as complicated) I love the MG's, great cars and are very simple to work on (I'm only 14 so I can assure you that they aren't that complicated) Not the highest in power but might get lucky and find one with a supercharger.

But if you still don't like the MG's, then I would go with the Triumph Spitfire, still amazingly cheap parts, and a huge network of people and clubs. The Fiat seems a bit more complicated than my MG, and Triumph's and MG's are pretty similar (both owned by British Leyland) Now Fiats are OK cars, but for me they don't do as much as the British cars. They have a different sound than any other classic car, just something about them gets me going.

Goodluck with your search
Olin

[spidernut]

A friend had two Spitfires - a 78 and 79. Though cool looking cars, he had nothing but problems. The natural rubber gaskets spontaneously dissolve, the electronics are horrendous, the brakes even worse and he had nothing but problems. He was very big on Spitfires because he loved the look of the cars. He finally hit the point that he got his 79 running well, so he put it up for sale as fast as he could before it broke down again.

He loved my Spider for a multitude of reasons - all stated by others already.

I was drawn to the Spider for the design, the gas mileage, the power, the handling (in comparison to the other cars), the ease of putting up and down the convertible top, the simplicity of working on them and the availability of parts.

The Fiat clubs in Northern CA are non-existent. There's a good Bay area and LA Basin group. Nonetheless, there's great camaraderie among the Fiat owners. There are many great All Italian events around and we try to support one another.

An 80+ Fuel Injected car would be great for your kids to learn to work on. It is modern enough that they can get a good grasp of modern electronics (with archaic wiring). The Spitfire will not give them the same experience that will translate to newer cars that they'll likely be driving in the future.

[noKYspider]

I wanted to say thank you to everyone for your thoughts and comments. I've read all of them and taken them into consideration. I think the best bet for me is to get out and drive them, which I've heard here and from other posts that I've asked about. I just want to make sure I know what I'm getting into before I get there! Thanks again.

[124ADDHE]

The spit is gorgeous, i prefered it to the spider until i bought one; the cars i was looking at where as follows (in order) Austin healy, spitfire, tr4 and MGB....after drooling in the paper for a year or so whilst saving (ages 18-19, thats why it took so long) and having to make a decision, i kept seeing thse FIATs for sale and much cheaper than all the brits, even a bit cheaper than the MGB, this caused me to really research the soul of the different cars (engine) which left me looking @ the FIAT which was not even an original contender, i loved the looks of the small titty spider from all the angles except the rear end (which is important for a fellow growing up in the booty-important era known as the 90's), my big plan was to install 4 round lights just like Brady did....i still have those lights sitting around for the last 12 years as the Ass-end of the Fiat has become one of my favorite features, it took a few years but it is so unique and if changed would somehow take away a lot of that italianess from the old girl.

Sorry for rambling, its what i do best

[ga.spyder]

I am going to jump in here,and try not to go over all the info in the previos posts.I have owned early and later MG's,and was actually looking for another(glutton for punishment?) or a Spitfire.I had the opputunity to get out of a 78 Spit and into a 81 Spider.I had never driven a Spider or paid much attention.I was blown away.Bottom line,the Brit cars have a certain quaint charm,but they arent even close to as well engineered as the Fiat.Not even close.And,they are painfully slow! Read back on the Road and Track road test when they were new,better car then...better car now.They relied on pre-war technology into the 80's.I love my injected Spider everytime I walk out to the garage and start it without having to fiddle with the carbs or chokes.That never happened with my MG's.

[124cso]

Why would you even need to ask ???? Do you want a car to drive or one to fix and drip oil ?/

The Fiat design is 30 years ahead of the triumph. What is it, a prewar design 1200cc pushrod, 65Hp if you are lucky, in basic trim is was 48hp and that shocking rear suspension ! The Fiat twin cam has a tuning potential of 200 - 250Hp without too much difficulty but the triumph is about at it's max as you buy it. The other way to look at it is this, if you had to sit in it and drive 500 miles, which one would allow you to get out at the other end, still able to walk ?

They are not known as Triumph Shitfires for nothing.