MGB v Triumph TR
Discussion
Had a B in the 1970's and while I loved it (despite it's constant desire to fall apart) I always hankered after a TR (4 or 6) which seemed faster and more exciting.
Now 30 years on I am once again hankering after a TR (where I put the family I haven't worked out) but keep seeing nice looking "B"s which seem much less expensive than the TR. You can make a B go quickly, it just takes a bit of work/cash. The TR certainly looks the more exciting, the 4 looking like an old sports car and the 6 looking more agressive than a B Anyone recently tried both for a more current comparison, maybe my memory is playing tricks.
TR4A the way is squatted on acceleration looked great
The 6 I remember kept knocking out thrust washers and had injection problems
Both could leave my B standing
My B needed batteries, screen, alternator, springs, kin pins, big ends, clutch, hood, shocks, overdrive, exhaust (regularly) all in a year and it was only 5 years old. Fortunately I was young & single with time to work on it.
Now 30 years on I am once again hankering after a TR (where I put the family I haven't worked out) but keep seeing nice looking "B"s which seem much less expensive than the TR. You can make a B go quickly, it just takes a bit of work/cash. The TR certainly looks the more exciting, the 4 looking like an old sports car and the 6 looking more agressive than a B Anyone recently tried both for a more current comparison, maybe my memory is playing tricks.
TR4A the way is squatted on acceleration looked great
The 6 I remember kept knocking out thrust washers and had injection problems
Both could leave my B standing
My B needed batteries, screen, alternator, springs, kin pins, big ends, clutch, hood, shocks, overdrive, exhaust (regularly) all in a year and it was only 5 years old. Fortunately I was young & single with time to work on it.
Skyedriver said:
Both could leave my B standing
Ooh, I'd take issue with that.I competed with a very lightly modified MGBGT for a good number of years in historic road rallies, and there was nothing to choose twixt my car and TR4's etc. The only TR's that were really quick were the 2s and 3s.
Indeed, there was a guy with a 3a that could genuinely beat Imprezas on night rallies, and I swear that is the truth.
I like TRs though. The only proper alternative to the B imo is the 4 and 4a, both very nice cars which are a nice mixture of vintage/classic with practicality, imo. The TR5 is a lovely car but has rocketed in price, twice the values of MGBs now. The TR6 was a lovely looking car but wrote cheques it couldn't cash, to quote a dreadful magazine cliche.
. In all honesty, my B left them for dead when I encountered them on trackdays. (My B had mild and easy and cheap mods to the suspension, with a 1950cc engine on standard carbs and ignition. Just a basic upgrade to the front anti-roll bar transforms the car, with absolutely no come-back in terms of harsh ride etc.)
The trouble with Bs in my opinion is that whilst a proper 60's car properly set up is a really good classic to own, there are also countless horrible cars out there which have had the most horrendous modifications made to them, from horrible ill fitting wooden dashboards to wrong wheels and horrible trims and paint jobs and engine mods that just don't work and god knows what. Run a mile from any B that you come across which has had a Weber fitted to it. The TR brigade seem to me to be a cut above all this and doesn't seem to indulge in such insanity.
I do think a 4 or 4a is a nicer classic to own in many ways, but i also think that the B is a better all round car which is easier and cheaper to live with.
Oh, and i also see that from your experience of owning a B in past years, it's nice to see that nothing has changed and they're still exactly the same.
Trouble is, a TR4 would be the same too.Ive had several of both and still have a 4A. For a weekend car I do like the 4 and prefer its looks. For a daily car in modern traffic it would be the 6 hands down. I havent driven an injected one but my last 6 was fitted with DGV's and personally I think for the street its a real improvement over standard (USA) carbs. My current 4 has SU's and they are just fine.
No more B's for me.
No more B's for me.
Watching this threat with great interest.
I was lucky enough to have an MGBGT, as a company car in the 70s (OED222M)
I had the choice of an MG or a TR6 but, at the time, there was a waiting list for the TR.
I really wanted a Lotus Elan but the company said no.
I loved the MG but, having had one, I'd really like a TR6 for a while.
Let us know what you choose and how you get on.
Please don't buy a rubber bumper version MG or a TR7!
I was lucky enough to have an MGBGT, as a company car in the 70s (OED222M)
I had the choice of an MG or a TR6 but, at the time, there was a waiting list for the TR.
I really wanted a Lotus Elan but the company said no.
I loved the MG but, having had one, I'd really like a TR6 for a while.
Let us know what you choose and how you get on.
Please don't buy a rubber bumper version MG or a TR7!
Might be a while before I take the plunge, having had a B (and 3 midgets in the 70's & 80's)
The idea of a TR comes from the fact that I haven't had one and also I know a few lads in the TR club
(Had an Elan too which lived up to its reputation)
Will keep you informed, might still go Stag (wanted one since the 70's) or Vitesse as the family want to come along......
The idea of a TR comes from the fact that I haven't had one and also I know a few lads in the TR club
(Had an Elan too which lived up to its reputation)
Will keep you informed, might still go Stag (wanted one since the 70's) or Vitesse as the family want to come along......
They ruined the handling on the MGB, when they raised the car an inch and fitted the rubber bumpers, to try and comply with USA regulations (I believe).
The rubber bumpers also spoilt the looks of the car.
The TR7 just looks fugly, says a guy who once owned a Ducati Multistrada.
I also heard that the TR7 was designed for the US market too but I don't know if this is correct.
So with my extremely limited knowledge of car designs etc, I personally think that both cars ruined their range.
The rubber bumpers also spoilt the looks of the car.
The TR7 just looks fugly, says a guy who once owned a Ducati Multistrada.
I also heard that the TR7 was designed for the US market too but I don't know if this is correct.
So with my extremely limited knowledge of car designs etc, I personally think that both cars ruined their range.
Davel said:
They ruined the handling on the MGB, when they raised the car an inch and fitted the rubber bumpers, to try and comply with USA regulations (I believe).
Yes, but you can lower it again, and if after performance you wouldn't run either standard setup anyhow.Davel said:
The rubber bumpers also spoilt the looks of the car.
How??This always seems to be banded about. Personally I think they make the GT a better shape.
I loved the look of my B GT and wouldn't/didn't swap it to chrome units. Mine was yellow with a black vinyl roof, the black bumpers complimented and suited it IMO.
Also I personally don't think this looks bad:
[imghttp://www.everydayclassics.co.uk/img/stock_photo/1208183250_mgb_gt_le.jpg[/img]
Davel said:
The TR7 just looks fugly, says a guy who once owned a Ducati Multistrada.
I guess that is subjective as the TR7 has a huge following and sold more than any other TR model. I like the way they look as I know many other do also.This is mine:
Davel said:
I also heard that the TR7 was designed for the US market too but I don't know if this is correct.
WTF has that got to do with anything? Loads of cars are.What the TR7 offers is all the charm the older classics have, but with a greater degree of usability and a better performance platform.
Not saying they are to everyone's taste or the be all and end all. But they have a roomy cabin, good heater, are easy to get in and out of and have a descent boot. This makes them as practical and as easy to live with as an MX5 MK1.
Couple that with stronger gearboxes and axles than you'll find on an MGB, coil suspension and a better chassis they then make for a potentially quick car.
As proven by the Group 44 car raced in the US were it was affectively banned due to being too quick. To the BL works rally cars were the TR7 V8 dominated tarmac rally's and even the twin turbo Janspeed Le Mans racer.
And despite the TR6's impressive stats of IRS and fuel injection. The 2.0 litre TR7 could still post better lap times and cornering ability.
Davel said:
So with my extremely limited knowledge of car designs etc, I personally think that both cars ruined their range.
no comment... 
I understood that they raised the height of both cars, so that their bumpers would be at the same height as their competitors in America and this affected their handling.
My MG'B'GT had the chrome bumpers and I just thought that they were a much better looking car. The rubber bumper may have been more streamlined but it changed the look of a then clasic.
As for the TR7, I'm sorry if I've offended you. I've never has one but, again, it changed the look away from the classic TR shape into something completely different.
As I said before, it's just my personal opinion.
My MG'B'GT had the chrome bumpers and I just thought that they were a much better looking car. The rubber bumper may have been more streamlined but it changed the look of a then clasic.
As for the TR7, I'm sorry if I've offended you. I've never has one but, again, it changed the look away from the classic TR shape into something completely different.
As I said before, it's just my personal opinion.
Davel said:
They ruined the handling on the MGB,
They didn't ruin the handling, that was magazine-speak. With the raised height the cars didn't handle quite as well when hurled around at the extremes in a car park, as they do in magazine-land where they think this sort of thing has some relevance.I once spent a weekend in a rubber-bumper BGT on the Haynes 2-day classic and i found it very nice in a comfortable-classic sort ot way. I was very surprised when we went round donington and i found myself passing everything else.
There's a huge difference between different sorts of MGB in driving experience and price. Rubber bumpered cars rightly or wrongly go for a lot less money. Early cars (pre 66 pull handle) are much more expensive but less refined. For a road car I'd go for 73/74 chrome bumpered B. GTs are half the price of roadsters.
TR4s and 6s are much quicker in a straight line. You can make them handle but in general they are not as good as MGBs in that department. Practicality and reliability is about even with parts readily available from Moss and others. If you tweak them TRs are much quicker.
A nice 4 will set you back the most and a rubber bumpered MGBGT the least. If open top is not a pre-requisite I'd look at the MGB GTV8 which is practical reliable and fast - and easily tuned.
My only real advice is whatever you get, go for a good one as otherwise they can consume vast amounts to put right
TR4s and 6s are much quicker in a straight line. You can make them handle but in general they are not as good as MGBs in that department. Practicality and reliability is about even with parts readily available from Moss and others. If you tweak them TRs are much quicker.
A nice 4 will set you back the most and a rubber bumpered MGBGT the least. If open top is not a pre-requisite I'd look at the MGB GTV8 which is practical reliable and fast - and easily tuned.
My only real advice is whatever you get, go for a good one as otherwise they can consume vast amounts to put right
Yes, the TR7 was designed to appeal to tasteless Yanks, and is still just as ugly today as it ever was, in particular the hardtop.
No matter what engine you put in it, or however good the handling is, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
A horrid car, which killed the TR image stone dead. (IMHO
)
Likewise the MGB was ruined.
I have driven both early and rubber bumper models when new, and believe me, the handling of the big-bumper ones, sitting on their stilts, was rubbish !
At the time, the US required standardised bumper heights on cars...hence the butchery.
No matter what engine you put in it, or however good the handling is, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
A horrid car, which killed the TR image stone dead. (IMHO
)Likewise the MGB was ruined.
I have driven both early and rubber bumper models when new, and believe me, the handling of the big-bumper ones, sitting on their stilts, was rubbish !
At the time, the US required standardised bumper heights on cars...hence the butchery.
Edited by grahamw48 on Sunday 4th October 00:03
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff