Some Triumph questions.

[Bruce Bowker]

I know the TR2, TR3(a) TR4(a) but after that...

Was the TR 250 next in line and is that a 4 cylinder 2.5 liter.

TR 6 I assume is a 6 cylinder -straight or V?

TR7 - has what?

Assume a TR8 is a TR7 (more or less) with a V8?

Thanks

 

[srmorse]

Some good info here...
VTR link

TR250 was an inline 2.5 liter 6 cylinder
TR6...ditto
TR7 was a 2.0 liter 4
TR8 was a 3.5 liter 8

Wish I had room for one of each...

[ 04-25-2004: Message edited by: srmorse ]</p>

 

[sammyb]

TR2, TR3 and most TR3A production had a 2.0l inline 4.

Some TR3A, all TR3B and TR4 production used the same inline 4 bored to 2.2liters.

The TR250 and TR5 were essentially a TR4 IRS (Independent Rear Suspension) body/chassis with what would become the TR6 2.5l inline 6 engine.
America got the TR250 with dual Strombergs. The rest of the world got the TR5 with Petrol Injection.

TR6 used the same inline 6 engine. America only had dual Srombergs. Europe got optional PI.

TR7 had an overhead cam inline 4 used for many years in Saabs.

TR8 used an aluminum V8 originally designed and used by Buick, then sold to Rover (and used in Range Rovers.) It should be noted that the V8 weighed less than the four used in the TR3!


<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Bruce Bowker:
I know the TR2, TR3(a) TR4(a) but after that...

Was the TR 250 next in line and is that a 4 cylinder 2.5 liter.

TR 6 I assume is a 6 cylinder -straight or V?

TR7 - has what?

Assume a TR8 is a TR7 (more or less) with a V8?

Thanks<hr></blockquote>

 

[bmurphy7369]

Bruce,

A bit of trivia for you...

(Hope I am remembering this correctly)

The original TR2 1991cc engine which was later bored out (different pistons and sleeves) to 2137cc for the TR4 was developed from a Ferguson tractor engine (at least the Ferguson block was used). It had drop-in piston sleeves, so many TR2 and TR3 owners changed the engine to the later 2137cc displacement during an overhaul. The durability of the engine is legendary and its simplistic design is a definite plus for those of us just learning the art of the rebuild.

I believe there may have actually been a TR5 model also made. I may have just seen a TR250 that had its badges altered? If anyone can verify that this model ever existed or can elaborate on it please do. I have lost my copy of "The Triumph TR's" by Graham Robson (think he was the author).

Best wishes and I enjoyed your articles in the Writer's Corner immensely!

Brian

 

[bmurphy7369]

Sorry Sammy,

My eyes skipped over the TR5 in your post. Was this a rare model, ever imported to the U.S.? I thought I had seen at least a photo of one, but know nothing about the cars except that they had the TR4 body design.


Thanks,

Brian

[ 04-29-2004: Message edited by: bmurphy7369 ]</p>

 

[vagt6]

The TR5 was not imported to U.S. dealers, had the 2.5 P.I. engine and right hand drive.

They are very rare here and overseas.

My favorite Triumph!

 

[Eric]

The TR four cylinder motor and the Ferguson tractor motor were both based on the Standard Vanguard motor, so you TR3/4 guys aren't really driving tractors. They are incredibly durable. My Ferguson still works for a living, ploughing my 1/3 mile long steep driveway in the winter. It will sit for many months, outdoors, then fires right up in -20 C (about 0 F) weather. Never been overhauled - amazing machine.

 

[Mickey Richaud]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by vagt6:
The TR5 was not imported to U.S. dealers, had the 2.5 P.I. engine and right hand drive.

They are very rare here and overseas.

My favorite Triumph!<hr></blockquote>

Also, the TR5 had fuel injection, whereas the 250 had carburetors. Apparently, there was a problem with meeting emissions standards here. The evolution from TR2 to 6 was an interesting one, and showed how lasting the design really was. (And could still be!)

 

[Sherlock]

My understanding is that the TR5 or TR250 were sold basically as transition models, as they were only sold for about a year.

When the TR4A finished it's run they would have been waiting for the introduction TR6 (new shell, roughly same chassis I think), so Triumph introduced for that one year the TR5 in England and probably Europe too and the TR250 for North America, I believe that difference is that the TR5 has the fuel-injection and the TR250 doesn't. Then in 1968/69 the TR6 came out with the same 6-cylinder engine in the brand new shell.

I don't claim to be a Triumph expert either... I could be wrong on some of what I just said.

 

[gjh2007]

The TR250 came out because Triumph had planned a revamp of the TR4A with six cylinder (to compete with the MGC)upcoming mandadory safety & emissions requirement. Michelotti was comissioned to design a new body (what became the TR6) but it wasn't ready in time, so they cobbled together the TR4 with the interior, some suspension & engine improvements that were ready.

The TR5 PI engine with 150 hp couldn't meet the US emissions regs, so they kept the CD175 Strombergs, & dropped the compression ratio which dropped the hp to a little over 105 ish. People say the 250 was a pig compared to the TR5, but a properly set up one runs just fine.
Not claiming to be an expert, but I just re-read "the History of Triumph Sports cars" Interesting reading from inside sources.

 

[Eric]

Actually, the TR6 wasn't a brand new shell, but a makeover of the TR4/5. The centre section of a TR6 is identical to a TR4/5, but the front and rear sections were restyled. The chassis and suspension were also virtually identical. Karmann did a masterful job of updating the old beast, as the 6 looked far more up to date than the 4 and 5.

 

[sammyb]

Bob Tullius' Group 44 TR6 racer was actually just his TR250 rebodied with new front and rear sections...that's how similar the cars are.

the "PI" in TR5 PI stood for Petrol Injection, or Fuel Injection. By the way, there is some debate over not bringing PI to the US. Evidently, the Lucas PI system would have met the requiremts at the time.

In Europe, TR6 models were also offered with a PI option.

 

[Eric]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by sammyb:
the "PI" in TR5 PI stood for Petrol Injection, or Fuel Injection. <hr></blockquote>

Gee - from my reading, I assumed it stood for Perpetually Inoperative!

 

[bmurphy7369]

Wait a minute... Was it Michelotti or Karmann who did the body for the TR6? Or did Michelotti (Italian) work for Karmann (German)? I'm not being flippant in asking this. I read something a while ago about the designers hired by Triumph and it had something to do with both names above, maybe one for the TR6 or TR7 and the Spitfire, Michelotti for the TR6 maybe and Pininfarina for the Spit? Anyone remember who designed what? Did Michelotti or Pininfarina or Karmann do any of the pre-TR6 designs?

Brian

 

[gjh2007]

Let me check my reference book when I get home; stand by for further details!

 

[UltimateQuestion]

Michelotti served as house designer for Triumph during a long period, being responsible for many distinctive Triumph designs:

Beginning with the TR4 sports.
Continuing with the Herald saloon.
The Herald-derived Spitfire.
And GT6.
The small saloons, the 1300, 1500, Toledo and Dolomite.
The 2000 MkI & II
The 2000-derived Stag grand-tourer.
The well proportioned Triumph Italia, produced by Vignale.

Michelotti web page

Karmann did the re-body update TR6

[ 04-30-2004: Message edited by: UltimateQuestion ]</p>

 

[bmurphy7369]

Thanks gjh, I've been doing some research for you as well.. check your post regarding your old friend Steve Rossi. Quite a mover and a shaker! I think I've located him, apparently still in Detroit and continuing to move up in the automotive parts business..... waaay uppp!

Brian

 

[ELTGuy]

Yep.. Karmann did the design of the TR6 as Michelotti was busy with other projects and would not have had a design ready for production in time. The TR4 body was pretty long in the tooth and Triumph did not wish to loose market share.


Mike Cooks book about selling Triumphs in America (he was a marketing guru for Standard Triumph then BL) also addresses the Petrol Injection not comming over to America. He did confirm that the primary reason PI didn't make it was emissions would be tough for the engineers to meet, but not impossible. He brought up the fact that Triumph dealers in America did not have any experience in the Lucas Petrol Injection and many dealership owners did not want to invest in the training or equipment necessary to perform service work on the PI system. So Triumph never made an investment in the necessary engineering required to bring PI over. Which is just as well, because at that time they didn't have much spare cash lying around for much of any engineering other than what was necessary to sell cars immediately.

A condition which remained after the great merger of all marques under one roof. Only one could get developmnent funding... and that went to Triumph with the TR7 and 8. Mg soldiered on with the MGB and Midget, the latter getting a Triumph designed 1500cc engine. The odd thing is that the TR7 inittially was a styling study out of the BMC design studio prior to and during the merger with Leyland. And there are some design prototypes of TR7 bodies made to look MG-ish.

I'll have to scan them in.. as they are interesting. They show, if nothing else, the unability of BL to invest much at all into any project other than just enough to get by.

 

[VitSport6]

Originally posted by UltimateQuestion:
[QB]Michelotti served as house designer for Triumph during a long period, being responsible for many distinctive Triumph designs:

Beginning with the TR4 sports.
Continuing with the Herald saloon.
The Herald-derived Spitfire.
And GT6.

Forgot one....Vitesse or the Sports 6
Just thought I would add....