Hey - did you know if you click on the title of a thread it will take you to the first unread post since you last visited that thread?
but were afraid to ask: 
STOP!! Never post your email address in open forums. Bots can "harvest" your email! If you must share your email use a Private Message or use the 
smilie in place of the real @
Pretty Please - add it to our Events forum(s) and add to the calendar! >> 
Bruce Bowker
Obi Wan
Offline
Just glancing over Truimphs on ebay and saw a 1962 TR3 and a 1961 TR4. Is this just a "year of sale" thing or did Triumph actually build TR4's while TR3's were still in production?
Bruce
Bruce
-
Hey Guest!
British Car Forum has been supporting enthusiasts for over 25 years by providing a great place to share our love for British cars. You can support our efforts by upgrading your membership for less than the dues of most car clubs. There are some perks with a member upgrade!**Upgrade Now**
(PS: Upgraded members don't see this banner, nor will you see the Google ads that appear on the site.)
TR4/4A TR3 and TR4
- Thread starter Bruce Bowker
- Start date
Share this page
Banjo
Yoda
Offline
there was an overlap. The last TR3s were the TR3Bs. some of them actually got a TR4 motor and trans. They were built in 62.
The TR4 was officially launched in 62, so if that one really is a 61 it must be an extremely early example, or more likley they guessed at it and it's really a 62
The TR4 was officially launched in 62, so if that one really is a 61 it must be an extremely early example, or more likley they guessed at it and it's really a 62
Geo Hahn
Yoda
Offline
My recollection of the story is that the US sales departments were unsure that the buying public would go for that radical new TR4 (roll-up windows for goodness sake!) and persuaded Standard to continue with sidescreen production... hence, the TR3B models (some of which were really just TR3As with a new commission number sequence, others of which got the TR4 engine and a synch'ed first gearbox).
OP
Bruce Bowker
Obi Wan
Offline
Interesting story and thanks for your information.
There was no overlap as such with the MGA and MGB as I recall. Again interesting that Triumph dealers felt that way.
Bruce
There was no overlap as such with the MGA and MGB as I recall. Again interesting that Triumph dealers felt that way.
Bruce
Banjo
Yoda
Offline
You sure about the MGs? I thought the MGA MkII was the 1962 crossover. Being built at the same time as the all new MGB.
Pretty much the same as the TR3B, It was to use up the leftover body shells.Or it was also said to be the less complex but still high performance alternative to the finiky twin cam.
But I'm not sure about that one. I am sure about the TRs.
Triumph dealers in the US seemed to have a lot of sway.
I just sold my TR4A solid axle. that was another stepchild of whining dealers.
In 65 with the introduction of the TR4A, with the all new independant rear suspension, there came an out cry from the US that customers would not want the added complexity and cost of the IRS setup. So they made a special batch of cars,with the new frame retrofitted with solid axle rear ends to quiet the critics.
Then there's the TR250.... TR4A body, TR6 engine trans, convertable top, and interior.
Pretty much the same as the TR3B, It was to use up the leftover body shells.Or it was also said to be the less complex but still high performance alternative to the finiky twin cam.
But I'm not sure about that one. I am sure about the TRs.
Triumph dealers in the US seemed to have a lot of sway.
I just sold my TR4A solid axle. that was another stepchild of whining dealers.
In 65 with the introduction of the TR4A, with the all new independant rear suspension, there came an out cry from the US that customers would not want the added complexity and cost of the IRS setup. So they made a special batch of cars,with the new frame retrofitted with solid axle rear ends to quiet the critics.
Then there's the TR250.... TR4A body, TR6 engine trans, convertable top, and interior.
Offline
[ QUOTE ]
Just glancing over Truimphs on ebay and saw a 1962 TR3 and a 1961 TR4. Is this just a "year of sale" thing or did Triumph actually build TR4's while TR3's were still in production?
[/ QUOTE ]As others have noted, there was overlap due to the TR3B production. Of course, some of them ended up being registered first as 1963 models due to the date when they were sold. Meanwhile, I suppose it's possible a few very early TR4s were registered as 1961 models, but I doubt it. The car was introduced late in that year, and I can't really imagine any dealer proclaiming "step right up and buy...uh...what's now a brand-new, never-before-seen...last year's model!"
Meanwhile, the '62 TR3 on eBay might even be a 1960-built car. From about mid-1960 and on for a year or so, Triumph had some tough times with sales, not to mention the Leyland takeover, etc., etc.
Just glancing over Truimphs on ebay and saw a 1962 TR3 and a 1961 TR4. Is this just a "year of sale" thing or did Triumph actually build TR4's while TR3's were still in production?
[/ QUOTE ]As others have noted, there was overlap due to the TR3B production. Of course, some of them ended up being registered first as 1963 models due to the date when they were sold. Meanwhile, I suppose it's possible a few very early TR4s were registered as 1961 models, but I doubt it. The car was introduced late in that year, and I can't really imagine any dealer proclaiming "step right up and buy...uh...what's now a brand-new, never-before-seen...last year's model!"
Meanwhile, the '62 TR3 on eBay might even be a 1960-built car. From about mid-1960 and on for a year or so, Triumph had some tough times with sales, not to mention the Leyland takeover, etc., etc.
OP
Bruce Bowker
Obi Wan
Offline
[ QUOTE ]
You sure about the MGs? I thought the MGA MkII was the 1962 crossover. Being built at the same time as the all new MGB.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not positive. I guess one could say there was a 1962 MGB but as cars were in the 1960's, anything late in the year was considered a 1963. I suppose there are MGB's registered as 1962.
Still interesting how Triumph reacted to dealers though.
Bruce
You sure about the MGs? I thought the MGA MkII was the 1962 crossover. Being built at the same time as the all new MGB.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not positive. I guess one could say there was a 1962 MGB but as cars were in the 1960's, anything late in the year was considered a 1963. I suppose there are MGB's registered as 1962.
Still interesting how Triumph reacted to dealers though.
Bruce
trfourtune
Jedi Knight
Offline
HOLD ON,
i have a tr4 parts car that is a 1961. i don't recall the number but it is somthing close to CT 867 L i think. there WERE 1961 tr4's. i'm in canada so maybe we got them before you?
rob
i have a tr4 parts car that is a 1961. i don't recall the number but it is somthing close to CT 867 L i think. there WERE 1961 tr4's. i'm in canada so maybe we got them before you?
rob