This whiplash winter we’re having is getting to me.
One day it’ll be 63° and sunny, and that night it’ll be 17° with windchill down to -439° (or thereabouts.) One day it’ll be so cold I’d seriously consider lighting the leather in my Lincoln on fire to warm it up before I sit down, and the next, I find myself wanting…a convertible.
What kind of convertible? This kind. Would you just look at this thing?
This is a nice car. I’d say judging by the exterior quality, the mechanical bits are every bit as perfect, perhaps more so. You know, it’s supposed to be 63° here tomorrow, and this car looks ever so inviting…
Don’t you want to just hop right in and go for a ride? You’d pick up your best motoring companion, gas up at the nearest filling station (with 93 octane just because you can) and blast off for parts unknown. Look at that seat bolstering, that dash with full instrumentation, the shift lever just where it belongs, and wood made of wood. Let’s GO!
Speaking of go, the TR6 sports a carbureted inline-6 cylinder engine producing 104 bhp in US-spec trim. This output was lower than TR6 mills sold in other parts of the world, which received fuel injection. I’d imagine an American TR6 owner would be awfully tempted to tweak his back towards the 150 bhp that home-market models received. On the other hand, if that owner is not in a hurry, a 2.5 liter I-6 making only 104 horses would probably last a long, long time.
Next week, my 63° day will be just a memory, and for all I know, it’ll be back to proper winter weather again. But Thursday is Groundhog Day, and that lazy little varmint had better do whatever needs done to get the real Spring to show up as soon as possible. And I need a convertible.
(Thanks to Walter Sobchak, Esq. for the great photos from the Cohort. They really tied the story together.)
It reminds me of my Midget (Mk3). I’m 6’3″ and I never checked to see if there was a full top when I bought it. It didn’t and I wouldn’t have fit either way. I did have the Tonneau cover and a wonderful heater that helped very little in the 38 degree ride home one night.
I always wanted to graduate from MG to Triumph.
Nice looking “74. I’ve owned a Carmine Red ’74 since 1981. That colour green is the only other shade I would consider. The red line tires make it look very original. I got rid of those ugly rubber bumper over riders LONG ago. I still have them stored somewhere. I can remember many a chilly night driving in Montreal with the top down, down-filled parked zipped tight, and the heat on full blast (which isn’t very much in a LBC). I’ve heard many -a “I HAD one of those…..I shoulda KEPT IT!” -comments. Well, I DID!
Nice find!
I love it. My MGB was never this nice and I loved it anyway. Wrecking it is just another thing to remember my ex for.
My Midget was the same way. Doors about to fall off and all. I junked or sold a lot of cars to make the ex happy too..
You are welcome. I thought those pics looked familiar. I knew it was a Triumph, but I couldn’t identify the model.
I had one for a short time as a Shady Used Car dealer. It looked just like the one in the photo. Although it was not a FI motor, it had been very heavily breathed on by the previous owner, with dual carbs and a hot cam. It made more than enough power, especially since the car was so light. That motor made tractor torque.
The swing axle rear end was diabolical. It was fine in most situations but in anything like a slick road it was treacherous. One nice, my partner and I were at the UVic student pub getting a belly full. It was a wonderful summer night and we were blasting around the Ring Road. I was gunning it in second gear and then I saw it: a sprinkler was watering the road!
I didn’t think much of it because I was not accustomed to high torque cars with swing axles. As soon as I hit the water the rear end attempted to swap places with the front. I knew enough about swing axles to do the unthinkable in any other car: I gunned it! The steering wheel spun in my hands (beautiful thing it was, too) and the motor roared. I looked over at my friend he had a look of shock and horror on his face. In an instant it recovered and I was sweating bullets; had I done anything else I most probably would have crashed backwards into a lamp standard. I told my friend had I not been in the bag I probably would have done so!
I had driven quite a few S Class Mercedes cars with swing axles but none were anywhere near as nasty as the TR6. But then again most didn’t have the power to weight ratio the TR had, either.
TR6’s and the like(TR4 IRS models, TR250s, and TR5s) had semi trailing arm IRS and inner and outer CV joints. Swing axle suspensions were characterized by not having any sort of hinged joint at the outer ends of the axles and pivoting parallel to the center axis of the car, so TRs can’t be described as swing axle cars. Unfortunately, the semi trailing arm IRS was adopted to a frame that had been around for a long time with a solid back axle and leaf springs, so there wasn’t room to package an effective pivot geometry. They certainly could be diabolical, but perhaps the cause be due to the wheels toeing out dramatically with suspension travel rather than because of the swing axle problem of wheels tucking under during cornering.
Yup the TR’s with IRS used a trailing arm set up not a swing axle. Here is a link to a render of it.
http://i635.photobucket.com/albums/uu78/TRoutMac/RearSuspension_12.jpg
Much of the problem with that set up is that once the bushings get some wear, that would allow the arm to move and “steer” the car. The other problem was the springs that were used fatigued fairly early on messing up the geometry. Combine the 2 and it could lead to less than good handling.
Old Mercedes used a type of swing arm known as the De Dion which was pretty much a live axle cut in two on the Passenger (IIRC) side of the differential.
Pretty sure the rear suspension set up on these was similar to the 2000/2500 sedans which is good but prone to uni joint wear
The Mercedes system with one U-joint was a swing axle design. Even the 300SL had it. De Dion describes a solid axle where the differential is mounted to the body for reduced unsprung weight and the half shafts are connected from the differential to the wheels with U-joints or CV joints at both ends of each half shaft. They were once common on Aston Martins and Alfa Romeos like the GTV6 and Milano.
http://autorepair.about.com/library/glossary/bldef-059a.htm
A De Dion axle is a beam axle with the differential fixed to the body (and thus part of the sprung weight). The Mercedes system (Eingelenkpendelachse, or single pivot) was not a De Dion, nor was it a true swing axle; in addition to the lateral arms, it had longitudinal trailing arms. The axle halfshafts had a common geometric center of movement to reduce the rear roll center, limiting some of the jacking and tuck-under issues of pure swing axles.
Earlier Mercedes had used pure swing axles; the 300SL coupe had them, although later roadsters had the Eingelenkpendelachse.
Any chance it was actually a Triumph Spitfire? Most versions of that had rear swing axles, and were indeed reputed to be diabolical when the camber went wrong.
Here is the render of the TR IRS note it uses U-joints in the half shafts not CV joints.
datsun 180B axles are a common substitute for the original Triumph parts for sedan rear ends they are a better design.
Very nice indeed. I like the fact that you can see the fender seams, a lot of northern cars had them simply bondoed over. What I don’t like is those rubber baby buggy bumpers that BL used to pass bumper standards, on second thought it’s better than what they did to the MGB.
I had a TR4 for 19 years and although I’m still glad I sold it I’d like a TR3 someday…
Nice little Triumph. At 6′ 3″, my legs are too long for a car like that. In the 1970’s, I tried driving a MG that a buddy owned. I couldn’t depress the clutch without hitting the brake. Recently, I got behind the wheel of a Crossfire. Knees hit the steering wheel. I’m too arthritic for even a Corvette. My brother in law bought a 95 last year, and I could barely get into the driver’s seat.
I owned a 6 cylinder auto 84 Camaro new, lots of leg room. The Camaro was my last gasp of youth. The last couple of years, I’ve been itching for a vintage convertible. I used to have a 66 Deville convertible back 30 years ago. I’ve missed that car since I sold it. If I ever run into a nice mid eighties Lebaron convertible locally, I think I’d buy it. I’d call it my Jon Voight car, in honor of Seinfeld. I remember testing the Dodge model before I bought the Camaro. Nice adequate car, but I really didn’t want a drop top then.
As far as Punxsutawney Phil, I never could understand why throngs of people go to that event. People are shuttled back and forth from parking lots, then stand around freezing for hours even before daybreak. Probably if I didn’t live 50 or so miles away, I’d probably want to go. Go figure.
I’m 6′-2″ and the early (circa 1964) MGBs had plenty of legroom. I’d put the seat all the way back and slouch for a good pedal fit. If I had to sit upright for some reason, I’d go forward a notch. I checked out an early 70’s B at an auto show and it had a lot less legroom. For what it’s worth, the TR3A had decent room.
(I had the 64 B in college as a world-class beater, and a ’60 A in the mid 80s. Sold the 3A to finish remodeling my house. Oh well, no time or money to deal with another Britcar out here in the boonies.)
Hey – it’s a hometown car!
This car is shopping at Schreiner Ace Hardware on N. High St. in Columbus, Ohio. Probably looking for more reliable electrical bits.
Ohio kindly lets “historical vehicles” (25+) use year-appropriate plates. A nice touch.
“Seat Belts Fastened,” indeed!
A funny “winter” here… first time my ’70 Stang was out in January since, like, Reagan’s second term. She only runs on a dry track…
While shopping in Columbus, do you use your “Discover” card? (!)
Here in the Southwest it’s been more like the “year without a winter.” It has been cold but we’ve maybe gotten two storms and nothing worth writting home about. If we don’t get significant snow in the mountains we consider the winter a bust.
I honestly will likely start riding the scooter again. (cold bugs the aircooled motor more than it bugs me.)
You wouldn’t put 93 octane anywhere near a 150 BHP TR6 , it would need a diet of 101.
A lot of TR6 owners converted them back to carbs, as the injection was not very reliable….
That’s interesting, considering that the Datsun 240Z of the early 70’s had a 2.4 liter inline 6 with 151 hp and a 9.0:1 compression ratio. I’m not too familiar with those things, but I’m pretty sure they didn’t need 101 octane to refrain from pinging.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_S30#240Z
I think different octane ratings are in play here
Possibly — I assume by 101 octane he meant old 100-101 RON (five-star) fuel, which is more like 94-95 pump octane. On the other hand, octane requirements depend on more than compression ratio…combustion chamber design has a lot to do with it, as well.
The compression ratio of 2.5-litre PI engine was only 9.5:1 (nominal), which was not outrageously high for the late sixties, although still probably a little too high for most regular-grade petrol, especially with a year or two of carbon build-up. However, the engine’s basic architecture was rather long of beard. If I understand the story correctly, the six was based on the 1,147cc four of the Herald 1200, which was itself based on the older 947cc unit. Even though the 2.5-litre had various changes to its valvegear, manifolds, and porting, as well as the Lucas injection, its basic design was going on 20 years old by the mid-seventies.
Pretty much based on the previous Standard Vanguard 6 @litre as used in the Vitesse and Triumph 2000 MK1. The Herald was developed from the Standard 10 engine originally.used in the early Heralds and still used in the coupe with twin carbs during the 1200 era
True confession time: Mr. Mopar Land Yacht here has always wanted a TR-6. Just this color. There is just something about the little British roadster that calls my name. Back in the 70s, I had a cousin with a serious crush on one of these, but he never got one. By the time he was in the market, the US emissions regs had strangled these.
A friend once bought one of the later Spitfires with a catcon. He had terrible vapor lock issues with that one. I fear that the era of the proper British sports car was over by 1970 or so. They always had some issues, but the US safety and emissions requirements tipped the whole proposition out of the zone of usability.
Here in Upstate NY (SALT), I still see the occasional TR6 as a daily driver. If that doesn’t say quality, I don’t know what does.
It says, “I have a WINTER CAR!!”
In the Rust Belt, you can make a car last as long as in Portland. You just have to be willing to take it off the road from November to when the April rains wash the salt off the roadways. Not everyone is willing to bear that expense.
But if your “good car” is a classic, a convertable, and a swell’s car…the expense makes sense. I’ve put much more commonplace hardware up for winters, wanting to protect it…
By 1974, U.S. TR6s had 106 net hp and 133 lb-ft, compared to 104 hp and 143 lb-ft at launch. Non-U.S. TR5s and early TR6PIs had had 150 hp and 164 lb-ft with 9.5 compression, a hotter cam and Lucas injection. From 1973, the TR6PI got the same cam as the carbureted engines, which brought it down to 124 hp DIN and 143 lb-ft of torque. The Lucas injection system doesn’t have a good reputation for reliability; I don’t know how deserved it is, but the carbureted engines might be easier to live with.
In my license plate collection, I do have a set of 1974 Ohio tags with the “Seat Belts Fastened?” stamping. I believe the Buckeyes had that from ’73-’75. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Ohio had them on 1973 and 1974 plates. At the time, Ohio had annual plate renewals, all plates renewed between March 31 and April 30. (And what a circus that was, every year…)
In 1974, the state let bids for galvanized sheet steel for the 1975 series license plates and got NO acceptable bids. So – since the state had played with the idea of multi-year semi-permanent plates, the decision was made to continue using the 1974 series with a 1975 sticker.
In 1976, Ohio issued undated plates that were kept in use for four years. Now, plates are semi-permanent with no termination; several series are in use concurrently.
So, you’re right, the plates had SEAT BELTS FASTENED? as a stamping for three years; but on only two plate series.
What the man says is correct.
The only official recent Ohio “recall” of plates was around ~2002, when we switched from AAA-000 to “BIG STATE” AAA-0000.
Currently finally phasing out the “retarded child’s drawing” plate. But “Birthplace of Aviation” motto seems permanent, alas.
“OHIO: Where people leave from to do GREAT THINGS!”
To be fair… if you’ve just invented THE AIRPLANE… do you risk your first crash in a Dayton corn field… or in a North Carolina sand dune?
The Wright Bros. weren’t dumb, yo.
“…blasting off for parts unknown” – a phrase with wonderful layers of meaning when writing about products of the British auto industry 🙂