TR2/3/3A Major TR3 modification in progress

[TR3Mod]

Just joined you folks. I've had a 1957 Triumph since I was 17. Now I'm 46 and am working on TR number two. But this one's a little different. I may be the first to do this- modify a TR3 body to fit onto a TR6 chassis. I was prompted to post this after reading a couple of comments suggesting this was a relatively easy process. I can assure you it's not. The major fun involves widening the body shell four inches- right up the middle. The main issue is clearance for the rear trailing arms. If anyone is interested in what is going on, I'd be happy to talk about it, and post pictures, if that's possible.

Cheers, TR3Mod

 

[trfourtune]

hey,
are you the first to do it on an irs chassis? do you have to widen the (canadian not british) trunk and hood? are you in the vancouver area? and yes, post pics.
rob

 

[TRTEL]

Well you've got my interest. I've always thought about trying the same thing with a 4A IRS frame. Only trying to make it look like a Beta with the widened fenders. So I'll be watching with interest. Is your donor car a late 3A with the squared off sheet metal behind the seats in the jump seat area post TS60000 I think?
Tom Lains

 

[Banjo]

Well I can't find a picture of it on the web yet, but Standard Triumph built what they called the "TR3 Beta"
It was a widened TR3a body (with the same 4") over a TR4 chassis.
It's not the IRS chassis, Although I seem to remember an artcle about an IRS TR2 being built for rally racing in Austrailia, for some ungodly amount of money.
Still, your project will be rather unique. I can't wait to see the progress.

 

[Andrew Mace]

[ QUOTE ]
Well I can't find a picture of it on the web yet, but Standard Triumph built what they called the "TR3 Beta"
It was a widened TR3a body (with the same 4") over a TR4 chassis....

[/ QUOTE ]Yeah, I also have to wonder if the "Beta" philosophy isn't the way to go here. With the Beta, all Triumph really did was subtly "fatten" the fenders; the original body tub stayed narrow. You note that you might have clearance issues with the rear trailing arms, but I'll wager solving that in other ways would be a whole lot easier than widening the entire body, which means completely rethinking windscreens, top frames and a whole lot of "filler" sheet metal, all of which translates into $$$$! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

If anyone wants, I know of a couple photos of the Beta in various Triumph books; I might be able to scan and post them. I rather LIKE the look of the fat fenders!

 

[trfourtune]

andy,
i think your right. bete was widened fenders on outside of bead joint.body did not have to be widened because it was on a tr4 live axle frame not irs. irs is a whole can of worms.i also would look at redesign of floor body for irs rather than widen whole car. tr3 newbie had better be good bodyman with lots of time or have a personal friend bodyman who will work cheap and still will cost $$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
rob

 

[Andrew Mace]

OK, here's my question. The early TR4 chassis was really little more than the TR2/3 chassis with box sections added in front to "push" out the front track (a longer rear axle was used at the rear).

Then the TR4A got the new "bell shaped" chassis. Did the TR4 body structure really change that much, or did the design of the chassis allow for any limitations of the TR4 platform? Seems to me I've heard any number of tales about folks using older but more solid TR4 tubs on later chassis, etc., etc., and I don't recall hearing any great horror stories about body modification.

So I'm just wondering what is "in the way" on the TR3 body tub....

 

[TR3Mod]

Well, the issue is on an IRS frame and suspension unit- any from 4A, through 6 series. It's the trailing arms from the independant suspension which project well outside the stock body shell- just behind the doors, where a TR3 is very narrow to begin with. Unless the car spreads apart at least four inches it is impossible for the body to tuck over these parts. Even at four inches the inner sills still need to be modified to clear. As well, the corners of the actual frame need to be clipped slightly. Oh, it's great fun!

 

[Guest]

Might look like a Morgan when you are finished....
With the expanded fenders and a running board, I think it would look sharp.

Bill

 

[TR3Mod]

Fenders will remain original and no running boards required! Only the hood, trunk, spare tire cover and front apron will need to be expanded the four inches.

 

[trfourtune]

windshield? soft top? windshield frame? bumpers? fuel tank hole through body? you're going to have a lot more fun than that!
rob

 

[TR3Mod]

Hey Rob

Life is in the journey! How do I post some pictures? I'm new to this group/

 

[Andrew Mace]

Well here's a bizarre thought: what about widening the body from the scuttle (cowl) back. Keep the front as-is and use the "Beta" style widened front fenders (which would be really easy to do in fiberglass, I'd think). That would save all the complications of a wider front apron, hood, windscreen, dash, etc.

 

[TR3Mod]

Hey Andy

That's an interesting idea. Even though I've widened the body shell 4 inches up the middle, I'm still concerned with the over all proportions of the car. I think the front apron needs to be wider. I'm adding an inch to each side and the other two inches right up the middle. I've got two spare hoods, so that's only one weld for that. Same for the trunk lid. So far it looks great. The TR3 really was a narrow car- even for the day- compare to a same vintage Healy 100-4 or 3000. Thanks for the comment.

TR3MOD

 

[TR3Mod]

Oh Rob

I do all my own work- You're right This would cost a fortune. I 've done alot of gas welding. Everything has been butted to within 1/16" and than hammer welded and worked with pick/file etc. Can someone tell me how to post pictures??

TR3MOD

 

[txtr3]

Welcome to the forum. This sounds like quite a project!

To add an attachment, make sure the box is checked by the option "I want to preview my post and/or attach a file" before you select "Continue". On the next page, you'll have a "Browse" option to select a file to attach.

 

[Andrew Mace]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey Andy

That's an interesting idea. Even though I've widened the body shell 4 inches up the middle, I'm still concerned with the over all proportions of the car....

[/ QUOTE ]Understood and appreciated! I guess that's why folks like Boyd Coddington get the really big $$$ for their high-end customs and rods. They're somehow able to keep the "look" of the car while often completely changing almost every dimension.

Here's another really wild thought (and one possibly a bit expensive): have you ever built models? It might almost be worth rounding up a couple of the old Hubley or similar plastic kits of the TR3A, hacking and regluing them, and seeing what you can come up with for re-proportioning. One big mistake there would be a lot cheaper than the same mistake on your "good" tub.... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

 

[Andrew Mace]

I did want to add that I do admire what you're trying to do here (assuming, of course, that you're not hacking up a pristine original or $30,000 restoration). Thing is, I've long contemplated a project of my own, which would involve constructing a Triumph Herald "Ute" or pickup, ala the old Mini pickups or the VW Rabbit pickups of 25+ years ago. It's a model Triumph never built, although they did build a number of Standard saloon-based Utes or pickups...even the Mayflower Ute, all 50 or so of them built by the Australian subsidiary in the early 1950s!

I've got several "extra" Lledo Vanguards series Herald saloons in 1:43, one of which I might just hack up to test some of my "styling" theories. And I hear that Airfix might be reissuing the 1:32 plastic Herald saloon kit. Again, expensive to cut up something like that, but easier and cheaper than making an expensive torch or Sawzall mistake on the real thing.

 

[TR3Mod]

Hey Andy

Thanks. I'm having alot of fun doing this project. I've restored my first Triumph TR3 (which I still own 30 years later)) as a period vintage racer, but this project has a nice mix of technical and creative thinking going on. I really enjoy the fact that it's never been done- that's why I was prompted to share the process. I'll try to get some pictures up soon- too busy working on the car!

TR3MOD

 

[Alan_Myers]

Hi,

Just picked up on this thread and it sounds like a very interesting project! Please do keep us informed about progress and upload a few pictures, or direct us to a site where some pics are posted.

The TR3A "Beta" was a different animal. The idea was a replacement model for the TR3A, still maintaining much of the success of the previous design, but with some refinements. The two or three Betas were done in 1959/60 at the same time TR4 development was happening in parallel. (Notes: At least two Beta are known to still exist, one black and one red. And, the 1960 LeMans TRS cars have Michelotti-inspired lines, in fact are sometimes mis-labelled TR4S, with modified TR3A chassis and the Sabrina twin cam engine however.)

The company ultimately chose to move forward with the new TR4 design, but ended up taking a step backward to produce some TR3"B" in '61/'62, to appease dealers and customers who still wanted the popular earlier model. Heck, it was, after all, a "real" roadster! Who ever heard of wind-up windows, flow through ventilation, a roomier passenger compartment and a top that doesn't leak (much) on a sports car!? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

TR3A "Beta" were not just widened to create a wider track. Rack & pinion steering was also added. Modifications to the frame included bulking it up for strength & rigidity, by adding a 1" deep section welded the full length of the existing main frame rails. This was a bit of over-engineering and in the end the TR4 frame went back to same-size main rails, but with various other mods. In fact, very early TR4 had extensions bolted to the outriggers, adding 2" per side, prossibly this was just Triumph frugally using up some remaining TR3A chassis they had on hand!

I plan to build a Beta once my TR4 project is completed, and have started gathering bits and pieces. I'll simply use a TR4 frame I've already got, with outriggers trimmed off about 2" per side. Not sure if I'll add the 1" depth to the frame rails since the car will be lowered anyway and that would make for pretty poor ground clearance, not to mention a lot of unnecessary, added weight.

No doubt thanks to their popularity with the vintage racing crowd who like to fit wider wheels and tires, "Beta" fenders are easily and inexpensively available in fiberglass from several manufacturers. I know of two in England and one in Canada, at least. Will widening the body as you plan allow for wider tires and wheels?

Beta fenders are also available in aluminum, from Revington TR. Considerably more cost for those, I'm sure!

Of course, it's always possible to simply modify existing steel fenders by adding 2" to the inside (the fender addition is tapered, not just 2" the full length of the fenders, and there are no running boards).

Other Beta mods include special rock guards for the leading edge of the rear fenders, both wider and taller than the originals. Front turn signals are moved from the grill to the fender. A different grill is used, sort of a crate style without the mounting points for the trafficators. Front bumper is TR4-ish, but without over-riders. Rear bumperettes are similar to Spitfire, I think.

Oh, and doors for a Beta need to be modified at the leading edge, to match up properly with the front fenders. But the basic body tub remains about the same.

I've opted for the Beta route because I feel the ladder/live axle chassis is easier to work with, plus stronger, stiffer and more durable than the IRS. But, an IRS setup, done right and with tuned suspension, should be quite interesting and should in the end give better handling and ride.

Best of luck with the project and do keep us informed!
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif