On Sat, 25 Oct 1997, John Cowan wrote:
> Under the skin, my TR-4A solid axle scarcely differs from my TR-3A.
> Nonetheless, they are very different in feel. Different rear ends,
> different power and the 4 has stiff springs, as well as anti-roll bars.
> Personally, I think the best compromise would be a 3 with 87 mm pistons,
> anti-roll bars front and back, and a lower seat, because I stare out at the
> top of the windshield.
They're different in feel partly because the TR4A - even a solid-axled one
- uses an entirely different chassis design. Your stiff springs and
anti-roll bars obviously contribute, but they are not standard equipment.
Aside from the lighter steering (rack & pinion versus the TR2/3 Bishop Cam
box), I notice very little difference in feel between my very early TR4
and a TR3. On the other hand I do notice a difference between my TR4 and
a solid-axled TR4A. Feels like a different design, which in fact it is.
> If you can find a real clean example of either, grab it.
Agreed. They're both lots of fun.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC TC6710 NEMGTR #2271
Cub Hill, Maryland 1962 Triumph TR4 CT3154LO (daily driver)
fold@mail.bcpl.lib.md.us
|