Scott Hollis writes:
>Not intending a flame war but I've got a question that I need help on.
>I've got a chance to buy a mint '79 TR7, no rust, never driven in the
>rain(or at least, not too much ;-)) with 14,000 miles. However, I've
>been getting the impression that owning a TR7 is not the way to go i.e.
>low power output, not very collectible, parts hard to come by etc...
>My question, is this a correct impression? Should I pass this up and go
>with a more collectible model(TR6, Spitfire)? Are parts plentiful for
>these vehicles? I've noticed there are plenty of restoration books out
>there for them. I should mention that I'm new to restoration work hence
>this is why the TR7 is so attractive to me(that, and it's a two seater
>Triumph!!!).
>Any info. is much appreciated!
>Thanks,
>Scott
>'99 Nomad
>'79 Triumph Bonneville
>'?? Triumph < fill in the blank > convertible
Scott,
You should post this question on the TR7/8 list and see what response
you get. Here in the states TR7 don't pull much money. This means
that a pretty good TR7 can be had for a little bit of money and will
give you much enjoyment in return.
Yes, the engines are wimpy but only compared to the european versions.
And upgrades are available. Parts are readily available. The only
parts less abundant for TR7's than for other models of Triumphs are
the sheet metal panels since BL has destroyed the tooling. But if
you have a rust free, dent free example that is not an issue.
Then there is the personal preference issue. The TR7 was quite a
departure from the previous TR's. Many people were put off by the
change and the styling. Other people really like the TR7, however.
It is a thoroughly modern car (for it's time) and very comfortable.
Post this question on the TR7/8 list and you will get glowing reports
about how wonderful these cars are. The address is
tr8@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
This sounds like a nice car and I wouldn't recommend passing on it
for frivolous reasons.
Dave Masey
57 TR3
71 TR6
80 TR8
I like them all for different reasons.
|