The Fisher Fury will be a car in the spirit of the Lotus Seven that I build entirely myself. It was first sold under the name Sylva, and is essentially Sylva's Seven copy (the Striker) with more bodywork. It is a tubular space frame that is designed to take a variety of components, depending on what the builder prefers, but most commonly British Ford. With an almost stock 4A-GE, T-50 tranny, and a Corolla GT-S rear axle, the price to performance ratio will be unmatched by anything with four wheels. Heck, through the twisties it should be faster than anything else street-legal. The only problem will be convincing Uncle Sam to let me drive it on public roads. :-) I may be able to do so using a kit car or replica of a classic car clause, but the modern components might still be a hitch. If doing so would allow me to register the car as a modified older, exempt Ford, I would be willing to use a late 60's/early 70's Ford rear axle, but itwould not be my first choice. Thanks to the combined forces of the DOT and EPA, post-1967 cars have to meet crash-safety and emmision standards for the year of their production. Don't get me wrong, I am all for safe and clean vehicles, but am frustrated by the way the car I want to build can't follow the spirit of the law due to the letter of the law. Confused? So am I..read on: If you start combining parts from multiple cars, or building a kit car, it can be registered by either the body (if you pass it off as close to stock) or the drivetrain if the body you pair it with meets crash safety standards for the year of production of the engine. A Sylva has to be registered by drivetrain, because the 'body' is not recognizable a something registerable in the U.S. I get frustrated that hot-rodders can combine components and modify their cars in almost any way they want, because their cars are registered as 30's/40's/50's American cars (It looks like a '56 Chevy, OK...let's register it as one) Never mind the 1980's or 1990's Corvette drivetrain and the fact that it couldn't meet crash safety or lighting or any other standards for the year of production of the drivetrain. Not exactly 100% legal, but it is done all the time. Hot rodders do this 'legally' all the time, and I can't put a more-modern, more-efficient, cleaner-burning drivetrain in a Seven-type car legally because it hasn't been tested for crash-safety standards for the year of production of the drivetrain (mid-1980's.) The only way I know of to make it legal is to use an old (pre-1967) drivetrain, that is inefficient and unreliable by modern standards (and pollutes more, and really should run on leaded fuel...etc.) all because it is old enough to be exempt from federal-crash safety and emmisions testing standards. I can then register my car as a "modified" pre-1967 Ford. If I wanted to stick my Toyota mechanicals in anything that was sold in this country originally (including a genuine Lotus Seven,) then I could, and register it, albeit somewhat below board, as a whatever it looks like. Or even a replica that wasn't ever imported officially, but looks like a genuine Lotus Seven...this can be registered as a Lotus Seven replica, and only held to pre-1967 Lotus Seven standards. But because a Sylva/Fisher body doesn't look like anything sold and registered legally in this country, I can't! This is very frustrating. If anyone with experience in getting kit cars (and I don't mean VW Bug or Fiero rebodies...a REAL kitcar that realizes that chassis and suspension are the most important aspects, not Ferrari-look-alike looks! Anyone who either builds or drives a VW Bug floorpan for "structure" with an 'exotic' looking fiberglass body, gullwing doors, a tuned 350 Chevy, and original Bug suspension and brakes needs their head-and priorities-examined!) Anyway, if anyone with experience getting a home-built car on the road in Oregon reads this, or anyone can prove me wrong on any of this, please e-mail me!

I find the "Locost Seven" option very appealing...this is building the car entirely from scratch, fabricating your own spaceframe, and fabricating or sourcing everything else from junkyards. The problem with tackling a project this labor-intensive is that I don't have delusions of either being a welder or a structural and suspension engineer. I would rather pay more #:-o to get a frame and suspension design that is well sorted-out and professionally welded, and then put my creative efforts into things like making my drivetrain fit, and piddly details like brakes #:-() wheels, mirrors, a windshield, and designing an interior.

Lately I have been thinking about an absolutely minimum-spec car that would be _really_ simple and lightweight...like Caterham's Superlight. This brings me to a dilemma; the reason I like the Sylva is the racetrack pedigree and the enclosed fenders. But there is also an appeal to an almost-formula-car Seven with no windshield or top, no carpet or upholstery, fiberglass seats, cycle fenders, super-lightweight flywheel, twin-plate racing clutch, maybe even a super-close-ratio dog gearbox...just the minmum! I have heard a little, and very little at that, about a seven replica from England called Formula 27. The car itsself isn't that much to brag about: tubular spaceframe, looks like a Seven, British Ford mechanicals, build-it-yourself plans, build it yourself kit (contains parts), or a complete ready-built car...like many other Seven kits. The interesting part is what Vision Motor Sports does with them...makes the Formula 27 Blade. This is a Formula 27 with a Honda Fireblade (CBR900RR to us in the states) motor. I guess it uses a motorcycle transmission (but shaft drive, so not the original CBR chain-drive one???) connected to a car live axle via a normal driveshaft. The specs look amazing: 145hp@11,000rpm or something like that, six-speed sequential tranny, and around 850-900 pound weight!!! I have heard rumors of under 4 seconds to 60 and around 8 or 9 to 100...somewhat hard to believe considering that it weighs at least twice the bike's weight with the same gearing and engine, but still... Most importantly, does it have enough torque? It may be light enough that it doesn't matter, but I wonder how much torque this motor puts out...70 ft-lbs, or is this too generous? And how do they do this installation, what tranny do they use and how do they attach it? Still, nothing, absolutely (except maybe a Ferrari F50) nothing, can beat the mechanical music of a four-cylinder bike engine 'on the cam.' This car would be worth any hassle for the sound and the revs alone...:-) Even if the drivetrain isn't Toyota...:-)