Yep, here we go again. Personally, I'd say buy the
TR-7, *if* you want to spend the effort to fix some
major problems. Like the horrid engine. I've got
a '77 TR-7, a sunroof coupe, bought for a little
of nothing with an engine that ran on 3 cylinders.
Of course it will get one of the 3.5 blocks I've
got sitting about.
A lot of MG folks attack the '7 as being the end of
MG. Well, I may be mistaken, but I remember hearing
something about them English folks still building MGs,
but then I'm from Arkansas, so I may be confused.
Yes, to many the TR-7 symbolizes the end of the classic
MG period. Yes, the had many problems from bad gearboxes
(the 4 speed version) to a cylinder head to block integration
problem that plagues all the 4 cylinder cars.
But then it is also a neat car. You'd be surprised how many
people think a '7 is modern, even exotic. And, if you care
to do some engineering, they can be impressive. A TR-8 won
the SCCA pro rally championship (was that '80 or '79?).
The engine bay begs for a Rover V-8, and the looks impress
even the younger "all I want is a Ferrari" crowd. The car
didn't end MG, poor management ended MG *AND* Triumph.
All of the "should haves": 'B V-8 in the US market, either
the Sprint or V-8 in the TR-7, most everyone here knows the
drill.
I've got a '7. And 4 MGBs. And a Healy. I'd have an
E-type if I had the place and funding for it. I'd
also love to own a Mini, and a GT-6, and a 'B GT, and
a Marcos of any flavor.
The TR-7 is an interesting idea turned into a car with
a lot of problems. The most "modern" of the classic
British sports cars, and a car that since most enthusiasts
turn their backs to it, will only get rarer, at least
rare to find a clean, cared for example.
-Keith Wheeler
Team Sanctuary http://www.TeamSanctuary.com/
|