I dont know to much about either car.. but what I would think is comparing the
AH
to the TR5! With a family of 3s and 4s I CANT stand the TR6's front end!!!
I think the TR5 is the complete solution. It closer classic and rare compared
to the
AH's.
Thats just my opinion...
Doug Hansen
64 spit4
John Macartney wrote:
> It's one thing to attempt to compare a Healey to a TR6 - which which TR6?
> The Healey has unquestionable drool factor - but its always had it. It had
>style by the
> truckload, it made an incomparable noise and it handled and performed in the
>true manner
> of a sports car of the fifties/sixties. It was and is unique. The lookalike
>now being made
> in Stroud with the Rover V8 engine has, for me anyway, just as much of the
>looks about it
> as its forebear but I guess the purists will shudder at this statement.
> The twin carb version 6 up to 1970 spec as supplied from the factory, was
>comfortable,
> fun, a good performer with good low down torque and a delight to drive. It
>didn't 'oil up'
> in heavy traffic and its overall performance was quite good. Then change
>seats for a UK or
> just the engine for a Rest of the World TR6PI and you're into a whole
>different ballgame.
> I can't remember the figures for the last Healey but about 145bhp from a 3
>litre lump?
> That's 48bhp per litre. The early US spec TR6's were in the region of 42bhp
>per litre and
> the TR6PI dished out 60bhp per litre.
> IMHO, we have effectively three totally different cars. All of them had
>unique points in
> their favour but to claim that one is better than the other is rather like
>trying to
> compare a 1275 Cooper S against a Daihatsu Charade Turbo GTti against a
>Peugeot 205GTI..
> For balls out performance, handling, noise, comfort, ride quality,
>repairability and sheer
> value for money - even today, a good TR6PI has to come out on top. The Healey
>is fabulous
> in every way and I'd give my eye teeth to own one - but they're all way
>different and
> thank goodness they are. At the end of the day its "what you want for
>yourself" -
> comparisons on a technical basis don't enter the equation and they aren't
>really all that
> relevant.
> .
> Jonmac
|