Hi all,
I usually drive a '95 GMC K2500 pickup and the maintainence cost, GAS PRICES
and hard to trace minor problems have made my little TR the more reliable
vehicle.
A couple of comparisons FWIW:
- It costs me about $90cdn a week on gas for the pickup. It has been
costing me less than $20cdn for the TR. I get the same distance out of both.
- The pickup has been in the shop 7 times in the last 6 months to try and
trace down a intermittent stalling problem. After replacing 4 components
and all of my wasted time they finally dealt with it. The bill for all of
the work ( not including my time ) would have been $900cdn if not for
warrenty. The wiper motor on the TR would not park properly, last night I
took it out pulled it apart lubricated the switch, replaced the grease (
dried and gungy ), all back together and now work per spec. 10 cents in
grease and 1 hour of time.
- Had to replace the battery in the TR and the pickup. The TR I pulled the
old one out and put in the new one, fired up the engine and went for a
drive. The pickup, for some reason there was a hiccup in the hooking up of
the battery and must have reset one of the onboard computers which didn't
allow it to start for TWO days.
In conclusion, the pickup has its place but the reason for getting it int he
first place cause it was a "newer, more reliable" vehicle!?!?!?! Besides
the TR is a hell of a lot more fun to drive!! Boy, I wish I could drive the
TR a year :-)
David A. Templeton
Open Text Corp.
Waterloo, ON
Canada
WebSite: http://trandmustang.homestead.com
'74 Triumph SpitSix '66 Ford Mustang (Wife's)'66 Ford Mustang GT (Project 2)
'59 Triumph TR3a (Project) '99 GMC Safari '95 GMC K2500 Sierra
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-triumphs@autox.team.net
> [mailto:owner-triumphs@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of
> erl@unix.mail.virginia.edu
> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 11:40 AM
> To: Rich Scotti
> Cc: Triumph Mailing List
> Subject: Re: New car vs. old car pollution: stats
>
>
>
> A bit of a run-on, but...
>
> When I got my TR-3A, my father said how unreliable these sports cars were
> supposed to be, and how expensive they were to repair. Why didn't I get a
> few-year-old Ford or something. He drove a fairly new Buick. We compared
> maintenance records over the next few years, and on almost every point,
> from gas milage to parts costs, the TR was cheaper. The one main
> difference was in the transmissions. The Dreaded PO had trashed first in
> my car, so it would not stay in first, and that cost a pretty penny, but
> pay-back came when a few years later the Buick's trans went South, and it
> cost about 20% more to be repaired than the TR's had cost! I might point
> out, the TR's trans never needed to be fixed again, either! My father
> sold the Buick a few years later.....
>
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Rich Scotti wrote:
>
> >
> > I couldnt resist. A guy in the office tells me his Miata is
> everything my TR
> > was supposed to be. I shared the previous thread with him and
> heres what he
> > came up with.
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Peter Quinn
> > >To: Rich Scotti
> > >Date: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 9:54 PM
> > >Subject: RE: Rationalization
> > >
> > >One miata owner's reply.
> > >
> > >1) My total cost over the last ten years is less than the cost
> of new parts
> > for a TR4 during that period.
> > >a. Tires, oil, belts, convertible top (an idiot who broke into
> my car, but
> > didn't steal anything.
> > >2) A/C?? In a convertible?? Who in their right mind would do
> something like
> > that?
> > >3) I expect to be driving my Miata when it is as old as the
> TR4, and then
> > some.
> > >4) +- 30 mpg with excellent emissions.
> > >
> > >
> > >Peter Quinn
> > >
> >
> > Side note: I've met a few Miata owners that bought them new and
> plan to keep
> > them fresh. The Miata guys are not so different from us in
> reality. Its
> > the disposable Ford Excursion guys that make the case. After all that I
> > still can't convince my wife that the TR is practical.
> >
> > Scotti
> > BRG '66 TR4A IRS
> >
> >
> >
>
> James A. Ruffner
>
|