From DJFidler at rogers.com  Thu Jan 10 12:59:22 2013
From: DJFidler at rogers.com (David Fidler)
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:59:22 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
Message-ID: <010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>

Sorry to correct you Dave, I know of a few TR5s that were sold new in
Toronto through Sportscars Unlimited. They were shipped here in error and,
rather than take them back, BL said sell 'em! One of our TTC members is the
guy who sold them.

Fid.

-----Original Message-----
From: 6pack-bounces at autox.team.net [mailto:6pack-bounces at autox.team.net] On
Behalf Of Dave More
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 6:23 PM
To: Timothy Holbrook
Cc: 6Pack List
Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250

Canada, like the US, received the TR250. No TR5's were sold as new in North
America.

Cheers,
Dave


On 2012-12-26, at 4:18 PM, Timothy Holbrook <tjh173 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> Trying to figure out a piece of Triumph trivia with my Dad...did the
> Canadian market get the TR5, or the TR250?  Online references about the
TR250
> are somewhat contradictory/vague, sometimes saying that the 250 was for
the
US
> market, other times stating it was the North American market.  What's the
> word?
>
> Thanks,
> Tim
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/tr6 at lbcs.ca

________________________________________

6pack at autox.team.net

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/djfidler at rogers.com

From tr6 at lbcs.ca  Thu Jan 10 19:56:09 2013
From: tr6 at lbcs.ca (Dave More)
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 19:56:09 -0700
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
Message-ID: <B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>

Ya got me! So "officially" there were no Tr5's sold in North America other
than those admitted due to bureaucratic bungling? :)

Is there any record of where those TR5's ended up, and if they're still
active?

Cheers,
Dave


On 2013-01-10, at 12:59 PM, "David Fidler" <DJFidler at rogers.com> wrote:

> Sorry to correct you Dave, I know of a few TR5s that were sold new in
> Toronto through Sportscars Unlimited. They were shipped here in error and,
> rather than take them back, BL said sell 'em! One of our TTC members is the
> guy who sold them.
>
> Fid.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 6pack-bounces at autox.team.net [mailto:6pack-bounces at autox.team.net] On
> Behalf Of Dave More
> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 6:23 PM
> To: Timothy Holbrook
> Cc: 6Pack List
> Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
>
> Canada, like the US, received the TR250. No TR5's were sold as new in North
> America.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
>
> On 2012-12-26, at 4:18 PM, Timothy Holbrook <tjh173 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Trying to figure out a piece of Triumph trivia with my Dad...did the
>> Canadian market get the TR5, or the TR250?  Online references about the
> TR250
>> are somewhat contradictory/vague, sometimes saying that the 250 was for
> the
> US
>> market, other times stating it was the North American market.  What's the
>> word?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tim
>>
>> ________________________________________
>>
>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>
>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/tr6 at lbcs.ca
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/djfidler at rogers.com

From jodyfkerr at gmail.com  Thu Jan 10 21:27:34 2013
From: jodyfkerr at gmail.com (Jody Kerr)
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 21:27:34 -0700
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
Message-ID: <CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>

I met th fellow who lives in New Mexico and owns a proper TR5. When I
asked he said there were 17 of them in the US.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Dave More <tr6 at lbcs.ca> wrote:
> Ya got me! So "officially" there were no Tr5's sold in North America other
> than those admitted due to bureaucratic bungling? :)
>
> Is there any record of where those TR5's ended up, and if they're still
> active?
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
>
> On 2013-01-10, at 12:59 PM, "David Fidler" <DJFidler at rogers.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry to correct you Dave, I know of a few TR5s that were sold new in
>> Toronto through Sportscars Unlimited. They were shipped here in error and,
>> rather than take them back, BL said sell 'em! One of our TTC members is the
>> guy who sold them.
>>
>> Fid.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: 6pack-bounces at autox.team.net [mailto:6pack-bounces at autox.team.net] On
>> Behalf Of Dave More
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 6:23 PM
>> To: Timothy Holbrook
>> Cc: 6Pack List
>> Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
>>
>> Canada, like the US, received the TR250. No TR5's were sold as new in North
>> America.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On 2012-12-26, at 4:18 PM, Timothy Holbrook <tjh173 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey all,
>>>
>>> Trying to figure out a piece of Triumph trivia with my Dad...did the
>>> Canadian market get the TR5, or the TR250?  Online references about the
>> TR250
>>> are somewhat contradictory/vague, sometimes saying that the 250 was for
>> the
>> US
>>> market, other times stating it was the North American market.  What's the
>>> word?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> ________________________________________
>>>
>>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>>
>>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/tr6 at lbcs.ca
>>
>> ________________________________________
>>
>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>
>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/djfidler at rogers.com
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/jodyfkerr at gmail.com
>
>



-- 
http://www.theymightberacing.com/

1953 Studebaker Champion            1960 Austin Healey 3000 (BT7L/5479)
1974 Jensen Healey MKII (14291)   1974 Jensen Healey MKII (18854)
1978 Triumph Spitfire (Mum's)         1981 Triumph TR8
1970 MG MGB                               1980 Triumph TR7
"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn
from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent
disinclination to do so."
--Douglas Adams

From djfidler at rogers.com  Thu Jan 10 22:04:09 2013
From: djfidler at rogers.com (David Fidler)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:04:09 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>

Quite a few exist in NA, but as far as I know, only the few (I think it was 3)
sold in Canada arrived here unregistered new. Of course some US and Canadian
armed forces guys bought TR5s while they were stationed in Europe and shipped
over when they came home, so there are probably a lot more here than we think.
I see them on eBay frOm time to time.

I don't know where the Canadian fives ended up or if they're still on the
road, but I'll ask our guy (he's also our historian, so if anyone knows, he
will).

Best regards,

David.

Sent from my iPad

On 2013-01-10, at 11:27 PM, Jody Kerr <jodyfkerr at gmail.com> wrote:

> I met th fellow who lives in New Mexico and owns a proper TR5. When I
> asked he said there were 17 of them in the US.
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Dave More <tr6 at lbcs.ca> wrote:
>> Ya got me! So "officially" there were no Tr5's sold in North America other
>> than those admitted due to bureaucratic bungling? :)
>>
>> Is there any record of where those TR5's ended up, and if they're still
>> active?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On 2013-01-10, at 12:59 PM, "David Fidler" <DJFidler at rogers.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry to correct you Dave, I know of a few TR5s that were sold new in
>>> Toronto through Sportscars Unlimited. They were shipped here in error
and,
>>> rather than take them back, BL said sell 'em! One of our TTC members is
the
>>> guy who sold them.
>>>
>>> Fid.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: 6pack-bounces at autox.team.net [mailto:6pack-bounces at autox.team.net]
On
>>> Behalf Of Dave More
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 6:23 PM
>>> To: Timothy Holbrook
>>> Cc: 6Pack List
>>> Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
>>>
>>> Canada, like the US, received the TR250. No TR5's were sold as new in
North
>>> America.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2012-12-26, at 4:18 PM, Timothy Holbrook <tjh173 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey all,
>>>>
>>>> Trying to figure out a piece of Triumph trivia with my Dad...did the
>>>> Canadian market get the TR5, or the TR250?  Online references about the
>>> TR250
>>>> are somewhat contradictory/vague, sometimes saying that the 250 was for
>>> the
>>> US
>>>> market, other times stating it was the North American market.  What's
the
>>>> word?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>>>
>>>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>>> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/tr6 at lbcs.ca
>>>
>>> ________________________________________
>>>
>>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>>
>>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>> Unsubscribe:
>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/djfidler at rogers.com
>>
>> ________________________________________
>>
>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>
>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/jodyfkerr at gmail.com
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.theymightberacing.com/
>
> 1953 Studebaker Champion            1960 Austin Healey 3000 (BT7L/5479)
> 1974 Jensen Healey MKII (14291)   1974 Jensen Healey MKII (18854)
> 1978 Triumph Spitfire (Mum's)         1981 Triumph TR8
> 1970 MG MGB                               1980 Triumph TR7
> "Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn
> from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent
> disinclination to do so."
> --Douglas Adams

From dave at ranteer.com  Fri Jan 11 01:52:46 2013
From: dave at ranteer.com (Dave)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 02:52:46 -0600
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com><56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca><010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com><B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <187D06D10B474BAE8082AC0D9AE9FB3D@Datsun>

one of those is in the philadelphia area, member of the delaware county 
triumphs.  that car came from belgium, and had been wrecked.  its gorgeous 
now.

-----Original Message----- 
From: Jody Kerr
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 10:27 PM
To: Dave More
Cc: 6Pack List
Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250

I met th fellow who lives in New Mexico and owns a proper TR5. When I
asked he said there were 17 of them in the US.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Dave More <tr6 at lbcs.ca> wrote:
> Ya got me! So "officially" there were no Tr5's sold in North America other
> than those admitted due to bureaucratic bungling? :)
>
> Is there any record of where those TR5's ended up, and if they're still
> active?
>
> Cheers,
> Dave

From 70tr6 at comcast.net  Fri Jan 11 07:15:53 2013
From: 70tr6 at comcast.net (Ashford Little)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:15:53 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <187D06D10B474BAE8082AC0D9AE9FB3D@Datsun>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<187D06D10B474BAE8082AC0D9AE9FB3D@Datsun>
Message-ID: <37E35198-4D95-4B01-9E8B-DE97245334AC@comcast.net>

Is it a BRG car?  One lived in Atlanta a few years ago.  I met the owner at a
local show.  We got to talking about the car.  He really didn't know much
about the car or Triumphs.  I asked him to call me if he ever wanted to sell
it, and in the meantime to get involved.  Never saw him again, but a year or
so later I came across the car being sold by a dealer.

Thus ended the story.

Ashford Little
ralittle2 at mac.com




On Jan 11, 2013, at 3:52 AM, Dave <dave at ranteer.com> wrote:

> one of those is in the philadelphia area, member of the delaware county
triumphs.  that car came from belgium, and had been wrecked.  its gorgeous
now.
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Jody Kerr
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 10:27 PM
> To: Dave More
> Cc: 6Pack List
> Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
>
> I met th fellow who lives in New Mexico and owns a proper TR5. When I
> asked he said there were 17 of them in the US.
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Dave More <tr6 at lbcs.ca> wrote:
>> Ya got me! So "officially" there were no Tr5's sold in North America other
>> than those admitted due to bureaucratic bungling? :)
>>
>> Is there any record of where those TR5's ended up, and if they're still
>> active?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dave
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/70tr6 at comcast.net

From cartravel at pobox.com  Fri Jan 11 09:12:30 2013
From: cartravel at pobox.com (Larry Young)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 10:12:30 -0600
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
Message-ID: <50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>

Did the TR5 meet Canadian emission standards of the time?  I bought my 
TR250 on European delivery and had to have a special EPA form stating 
that it met US emission standards in order to register it in the US.
Larry Young

On 1/10/2013 11:04 PM, David Fidler wrote:
> Quite a few exist in NA, but as far as I know, only the few (I think it was 3)
> sold in Canada arrived here unregistered new. Of course some US and Canadian
> armed forces guys bought TR5s while they were stationed in Europe and shipped
> over when they came home, so there are probably a lot more here than we think.
> I see them on eBay frOm time to time.
>
> I don't know where the Canadian fives ended up or if they're still on the
> road, but I'll ask our guy (he's also our historian, so if anyone knows, he
> will).
>
> Best regards,
>
> David.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 2013-01-10, at 11:27 PM, Jody Kerr <jodyfkerr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I met th fellow who lives in New Mexico and owns a proper TR5. When I
>> asked he said there were 17 of them in the US.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Dave More <tr6 at lbcs.ca> wrote:
>>> Ya got me! So "officially" there were no Tr5's sold in North America other
>>> than those admitted due to bureaucratic bungling? :)
>>>
>>> Is there any record of where those TR5's ended up, and if they're still
>>> active?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2013-01-10, at 12:59 PM, "David Fidler" <DJFidler at rogers.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sorry to correct you Dave, I know of a few TR5s that were sold new in
>>>> Toronto through Sportscars Unlimited. They were shipped here in error
> and,
>>>> rather than take them back, BL said sell 'em! One of our TTC members is
> the
>>>> guy who sold them.
>>>>
>>>> Fid.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: 6pack-bounces at autox.team.net [mailto:6pack-bounces at autox.team.net]
> On
>>>> Behalf Of Dave More
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 6:23 PM
>>>> To: Timothy Holbrook
>>>> Cc: 6Pack List
>>>> Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
>>>>
>>>> Canada, like the US, received the TR250. No TR5's were sold as new in
> North
>>>> America.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2012-12-26, at 4:18 PM, Timothy Holbrook <tjh173 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Trying to figure out a piece of Triumph trivia with my Dad...did the
>>>>> Canadian market get the TR5, or the TR250?  Online references about the
>>>> TR250
>>>>> are somewhat contradictory/vague, sometimes saying that the 250 was for
>>>> the
>>>> US
>>>>> market, other times stating it was the North American market.  What's
> the
>>>>> word?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>> ________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>>>>
>>>>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>>>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>>>> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/tr6 at lbcs.ca
>>>> ________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>>>
>>>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/djfidler at rogers.com
>>>
>>> ________________________________________
>>>
>>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>>
>>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>> Unsubscribe:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/jodyfkerr at gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://www.theymightberacing.com/
>>
>> 1953 Studebaker Champion            1960 Austin Healey 3000 (BT7L/5479)
>> 1974 Jensen Healey MKII (14291)   1974 Jensen Healey MKII (18854)
>> 1978 Triumph Spitfire (Mum's)         1981 Triumph TR8
>> 1970 MG MGB                               1980 Triumph TR7
>> "Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn
>> from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent
>> disinclination to do so."
>> --Douglas Adams
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/cartravel at pobox.com

From DJFidler at rogers.com  Fri Jan 11 13:23:25 2013
From: DJFidler at rogers.com (David Fidler)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:23:25 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>

Are you sure about that Larry? I've never actually seen the test results,
have you? 

My guess is that the problem was more to do with the lower octane (RON)
rating of US fuel. The UK PI TR5s (and TR6s) were designed to run on 4 star
leaded fuel (97 octane), if they didn't meet the US regs, it's most likely
the inferior fuel quality/lower octane was the cause. Europe has as strict,
if not more stringent, emissions regs than the US and the PI TR5s and 6s
passed those. Injected cars typically have better emissions than carbs,
although the Lucas system was totally mechanical and therefore didn't have
any of the modern electronic emissions control systems.

Just sayin'

Fid.

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Young [mailto:cartravel at pobox.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:36 AM
To: David Fidler
Cc: 6pack at autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250

The TR5 did not meet US Emission standards and could not legally be 
imported into the US.

On 1/11/2013 10:27 AM, David Fidler wrote:
> Larry,
>
> I don't think the dealer cared about that. The TR5s were able to exceed US
and Canadian emissions standards anyway. The real reason (so I'm told) is
they were dumbed down to Stroms because the US dealers created hell about
having to maintain the Lucas injection system and the boffins at Triumph
acquiesced.
>
> Best regards,
>
> David.
>
> Sent from my iPad

From 70tr6 at comcast.net  Fri Jan 11 13:31:56 2013
From: 70tr6 at comcast.net (Ashford Little)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:31:56 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
Message-ID: <1A166899-5F76-42B0-9368-187751DF3A9E@comcast.net>

I heard that the whole emissions argument was "the story" but that the real
reason was cost.  The PI system costs more and they didn't think us Yanks
would pay for the added cost as PI wasn't common at the time.  I think Mike
Cook might have said this.  Then again, I might be wrong.

Ashford Little
ralittle2 at mac.com




On Jan 11, 2013, at 3:23 PM, David Fidler <DJFidler at rogers.com> wrote:

> Are you sure about that Larry? I've never actually seen the test results,
> have you?
>
> My guess is that the problem was more to do with the lower octane (RON)
> rating of US fuel. The UK PI TR5s (and TR6s) were designed to run on 4 star
> leaded fuel (97 octane), if they didn't meet the US regs, it's most likely
> the inferior fuel quality/lower octane was the cause. Europe has as strict,
> if not more stringent, emissions regs than the US and the PI TR5s and 6s
> passed those. Injected cars typically have better emissions than carbs,
> although the Lucas system was totally mechanical and therefore didn't have
> any of the modern electronic emissions control systems.
>
> Just sayin'
>
> Fid.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Young [mailto:cartravel at pobox.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:36 AM
> To: David Fidler
> Cc: 6pack at autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
>
> The TR5 did not meet US Emission standards and could not legally be
> imported into the US.
>
> On 1/11/2013 10:27 AM, David Fidler wrote:
>> Larry,
>>
>> I don't think the dealer cared about that. The TR5s were able to exceed US
> and Canadian emissions standards anyway. The real reason (so I'm told) is
> they were dumbed down to Stroms because the US dealers created hell about
> having to maintain the Lucas injection system and the boffins at Triumph
> acquiesced.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> David.
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/70tr6 at comcast.net
>
>


Ashford Little
70tr6 at comcast.net

From taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com  Fri Jan 11 13:51:37 2013
From: taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com (Sally or Dick Taylor)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 12:51:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
Message-ID: <1357937497.88597.YahooMailNeo@web161303.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Fid --- High octane fuel was available here in the States during all of the
'60s when the TR5s were new. I remember seeing 100+ octane on some of our
pumps and muscle cars lined up to get it. I'm less certain as to why the U.S.
didn't allow their sales here. It would seem like it would be an emissions
thingy, as the US didn't care about whether these cars would run on a lesser
grade of octane. We know the cam used in the 5 to be "dirtier" than the
carbureted engine. Another drawback to US sales could've been the higher cost
of the P.I. system, and the training necessary to service them. Oh, well...
Dick
'73 
Los Angeles area



>________________________________
> From: David
Fidler <DJFidler at rogers.com>
>To: 'Larry Young' <cartravel at pobox.com> 
>Cc:
6pack at autox.team.net 
>Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 12:23 PM
>Subject: Re:
[6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
> 
>Are you sure about that Larry? I've never
actually seen the test results,
>have you? 
>
>My guess is that the problem
was more to do with the lower octane (RON)
>rating of US fuel. The UK PI TR5s
(and TR6s) were designed to run on 4 star
>leaded fuel (97 octane), if they
didn't meet the US regs, it's most likely
>the inferior fuel quality/lower
octane was the cause. Europe has as strict,
>if not more stringent, emissions
regs than the US and the PI TR5s and 6s
>passed those. Injected cars typically
have better emissions than carbs,
>although the Lucas system was totally
mechanical and therefore didn't have
>any of the modern electronic emissions
control systems.
>
>Just sayin'
>
>Fid.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:
Larry Young [mailto:cartravel at pobox.com] 
>Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013
11:36 AM
>To: David Fidler
>Cc: 6pack at autox.team.net
>Subject: Re: [6pack]
Canada - TR5 or TR250
>
>The TR5 did not meet US Emission standards and could
not legally be 
>imported into the US.
>
>On 1/11/2013 10:27 AM, David Fidler
wrote:
>> Larry,
>>
>> I don't think the dealer cared about that. The TR5s
were able to exceed US
>and Canadian emissions standards anyway. The real
reason (so I'm told) is
>they were dumbed down to Stroms because the US
dealers created hell about
>having to maintain the Lucas injection system and
the boffins at Triumph
>acquiesced.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> David.
>>
>>
Sent from my iPad
>
>________________________________________
>
>6pack at autox.team.net
>
>Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>Archive:
http://www.team.net/archive
>Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com

From tr6 at lbcs.ca  Fri Jan 11 13:52:41 2013
From: tr6 at lbcs.ca (Dave More)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:52:41 -0700
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <1A166899-5F76-42B0-9368-187751DF3A9E@comcast.net>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
	<1A166899-5F76-42B0-9368-187751DF3A9E@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <33E2C81D-F8FF-45E4-A58C-35DBA726D032@lbcs.ca>

And to add to the tales of complexity and cost apparently the PI cars also
didn't take kindly to the types of elevation changes we have in North America,
which tends to be a non-issue with modern  EFI systems. Although I did own a
'77 Rabbit and a '76 Saab 99, both with Bosch K-Jetronic (mechanical)
injection and altitude didn't seem to bother those

Cheers,
Dave


On 2013-01-11, at 1:31 PM, Ashford Little <70tr6 at comcast.net> wrote:

> I heard that the whole emissions argument was "the story" but that the real
> reason was cost.  The PI system costs more and they didn't think us Yanks
> would pay for the added cost as PI wasn't common at the time.  I think Mike
> Cook might have said this.  Then again, I might be wrong.
>
> Ashford Little
> ralittle2 at mac.com
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 11, 2013, at 3:23 PM, David Fidler <DJFidler at rogers.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you sure about that Larry? I've never actually seen the test results,
>> have you?
>>
>> My guess is that the problem was more to do with the lower octane (RON)
>> rating of US fuel. The UK PI TR5s (and TR6s) were designed to run on 4
star
>> leaded fuel (97 octane), if they didn't meet the US regs, it's most likely
>> the inferior fuel quality/lower octane was the cause. Europe has as
strict,
>> if not more stringent, emissions regs than the US and the PI TR5s and 6s
>> passed those. Injected cars typically have better emissions than carbs,
>> although the Lucas system was totally mechanical and therefore didn't have
>> any of the modern electronic emissions control systems.
>>
>> Just sayin'
>>
>> Fid.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Larry Young [mailto:cartravel at pobox.com]
>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:36 AM
>> To: David Fidler
>> Cc: 6pack at autox.team.net
>> Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
>>
>> The TR5 did not meet US Emission standards and could not legally be
>> imported into the US.
>>
>> On 1/11/2013 10:27 AM, David Fidler wrote:
>>> Larry,
>>>
>>> I don't think the dealer cared about that. The TR5s were able to exceed
US
>> and Canadian emissions standards anyway. The real reason (so I'm told) is
>> they were dumbed down to Stroms because the US dealers created hell about
>> having to maintain the Lucas injection system and the boffins at Triumph
>> acquiesced.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> David.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> ________________________________________
>>
>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>
>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/70tr6 at comcast.net
>
>
> Ashford Little
> 70tr6 at comcast.net
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/tr6 at lbcs.ca

From mdporter at dfn.com  Fri Jan 11 14:06:46 2013
From: mdporter at dfn.com (Michael Porter)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:06:46 -0700
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <1A166899-5F76-42B0-9368-187751DF3A9E@comcast.net>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
	<1A166899-5F76-42B0-9368-187751DF3A9E@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <50F07EE6.8060408@dfn.com>

On 1/11/2013 1:31 PM, Ashford Little wrote:
> I heard that the whole emissions argument was "the story" but that the real
> reason was cost.  The PI system costs more and they didn't think us Yanks
> would pay for the added cost as PI wasn't common at the time.  I think Mike
> Cook might have said this.  Then again, I might be wrong.
>

IIRC, the plan was to introduce PI as a means of meeting the 1968 US 
emissions standards, but the development costs mounted (partly because 
Lucas specified individual runner throttling and some other new 
proprietary parts, which really drove up unit pricing and time to 
delivery).  There was also some preliminary rally testing done that 
indicated that the lack of barometric mixture control made performance 
problematic in a lot of US locations.  When it was found at a late stage 
of development that Stromberg could meet emissions at a lower cost than 
PI, that pretty much sealed the deal for the larger US market.

As for emissions standards, they may be comparable to the US standards 
now (or even tighter), but that simply wasn't the case in 1968. Triumph 
at the time was concerned about meeting US standards, which were quite 
new to both them and the American manufacturers. The British and 
European standards were almost non-existent then, which is why the the 
PI engines were first equipped with a camshaft with considerably more 
overlap than the US engine and could make a rated 150 hp. Nor did fuel 
quality have much to do with it (there's nothing intrinsically better 
about European fuel blending). At the time of introduction, pump gas of 
~ 100 octane was available (remember Sunoco 260?).  It was only when 
tetraethyl lead began to be phased out in the `80s that octane ratings 
dropped (Europe was well behind the US in that change, which might 
contribute to the belief that European fuel was superior).


Cheers.

-- 


Michael Porter
Roswell, NM


Never let anyone drive you crazy when you know it's within walking distance....

From gaf3 at charter.net  Fri Jan 11 14:14:42 2013
From: gaf3 at charter.net (Glenn Franco)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:14:42 -0500
Subject: [6pack] County Pistons Quality Control Issue
Message-ID: <50F080C2.1080007@charter.net>

FYI
I am in the midst of a TR6 Rebuild with an engine that is .020" overbored.
While fitting up the pistons and checking clearances everything checked 
out and the bore was concentric and to specs.
With the piston installed in the bore I noticed increased drag with #1 
piston installed.
With rings gaps, skirt clearance correct I pulled the piston and didn't 
see any  issues.
Further inspection showed that the piston was cocked in the bore and had 
score marks on the bottom of one skirt with the same wear just below the 
oil ring on the other side.
After inspecting it with the machine shop we noticed that the ring 
grooves were not fully machined on one side of the piston.
The rings would not move far enough in the groove and was proud of the 
surface causing the piston to cock in the bore.
We collectively have not seen this before and have a new set of AE 
pistons not County on the way.

Having spent many years in Automotive Engineering at one of the former 
Big Three, these events are usually not one of's.
There likely are many more out there that ran down the line in the same 
batch at the same time before it was caught.

These are new County Piston sets (I think made in Israel now).
I would inspect their parts very closely before you install them.

I also noticed machine chips in the machined groove of their Tri-Metal 
Main Bearings (Israel).
The chips were in the machined groove and were plated over with the 
babbit and copper.

I have had very good experiences with their parts in the past.
Just thought I would provide a heads up.

Glenn

From DJFidler at rogers.com  Fri Jan 11 14:17:54 2013
From: DJFidler at rogers.com (David Fidler)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:17:54 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <23A0410A-1301-446D-A2C3-2B290F979548@mac.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
	<23A0410A-1301-446D-A2C3-2B290F979548@mac.com>
Message-ID: <02bd01cdf041$1f77d560$5e678020$@com>

Yep, that is pretty much what I heard too, but I forgot about the cost
factor, which I think was more to do with the maintenance cost than the OEM
cost of the unit... you Yanks didn't/wouldn't go on the training courses to
learn how to tune/fix them! ;-) Corvettes had fuel injection from the late
fifties, so I don't know why it held any mystery for US mechanics? We'll
probably never really know for sure.

 

Fid.

 

From: Ashford Little [mailto:ralittle2 at mac.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 3:32 PM
To: DJFidler at rogers.com
Cc: Ashford Little; 'Larry Young'; 6pack at autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250

 

I heard that the whole emissions argument was "the story" but that the real
reason was cost.  The PI system costs more and they didn't think us Yanks
would pay for the added cost as PI wasn't common at the time.  I think Mike
Cook might have said this.  Then again, I might be wrong.  


Ashford Little

ralittle2 at mac.com

 

 

 

On Jan 11, 2013, at 3:23 PM, David Fidler <DJFidler at rogers.com> wrote:





Are you sure about that Larry? I've never actually seen the test results,
have you? 

My guess is that the problem was more to do with the lower octane (RON)
rating of US fuel. The UK PI TR5s (and TR6s) were designed to run on 4 star
leaded fuel (97 octane), if they didn't meet the US regs, it's most likely
the inferior fuel quality/lower octane was the cause. Europe has as strict,
if not more stringent, emissions regs than the US and the PI TR5s and 6s
passed those. Injected cars typically have better emissions than carbs,
although the Lucas system was totally mechanical and therefore didn't have
any of the modern electronic emissions control systems.

Just sayin'

Fid.

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Young [mailto:cartravel at pobox.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:36 AM
To: David Fidler
Cc: 6pack at autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250

The TR5 did not meet US Emission standards and could not legally be 
imported into the US.

On 1/11/2013 10:27 AM, David Fidler wrote:



Larry,

I don't think the dealer cared about that. The TR5s were able to exceed US

and Canadian emissions standards anyway. The real reason (so I'm told) is
they were dumbed down to Stroms because the US dealers created hell about
having to maintain the Lucas injection system and the boffins at Triumph
acquiesced.




Best regards,

David.

Sent from my iPad


________________________________________

6pack at autox.team.net

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/70tr6 at comcast.net

From gaf3 at charter.net  Fri Jan 11 15:00:19 2013
From: gaf3 at charter.net (Glenn Franco)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:00:19 -0500
Subject: [6pack] [Fot] County Pistons Taiwan Quality Control Issue
In-Reply-To: <50F080C2.1080007@charter.net>
References: <50F080C2.1080007@charter.net>
Message-ID: <50F08B73.1040504@charter.net>

Correction County Pistons are made in Taiwan.

On 1/11/2013 4:14 PM, Glenn Franco wrote:
> FYI
> I am in the midst of a TR6 Rebuild with an engine that is .020" 
> overbored.
> While fitting up the pistons and checking clearances everything 
> checked out and the bore was concentric and to specs.
> With the piston installed in the bore I noticed increased drag with #1 
> piston installed.
> With rings gaps, skirt clearance correct I pulled the piston and 
> didn't see any  issues.
> Further inspection showed that the piston was cocked in the bore and 
> had score marks on the bottom of one skirt with the same wear just 
> below the oil ring on the other side.
> After inspecting it with the machine shop we noticed that the ring 
> grooves were not fully machined on one side of the piston.
> The rings would not move far enough in the groove and was proud of the 
> surface causing the piston to cock in the bore.
> We collectively have not seen this before and have a new set of AE 
> pistons not County on the way.
>
> Having spent many years in Automotive Engineering at one of the former 
> Big Three, these events are usually not one of's.
> There likely are many more out there that ran down the line in the 
> same batch at the same time before it was caught.
>
> These are new County Piston sets (I think made in Israel now).
> I would inspect their parts very closely before you install them.
>
> I also noticed machine chips in the machined groove of their Tri-Metal 
> Main Bearings (Israel).
> The chips were in the machined groove and were plated over with the 
> babbit and copper.
>
> I have had very good experiences with their parts in the past.
> Just thought I would provide a heads up.
>
> Glenn

From gaf3 at charter.net  Fri Jan 11 15:01:55 2013
From: gaf3 at charter.net (Glenn Franco)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:01:55 -0500
Subject: [6pack] [Spits] County Pistons Quality Control Issue
In-Reply-To: <CAOtbU9Xt1mNHBZ=dj_7Voyzr8F2C8Qb0kTZrbP+FhASTY01K4w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50F080C2.1080007@charter.net>
	<CAOtbU9Xt1mNHBZ=dj_7Voyzr8F2C8Qb0kTZrbP+FhASTY01K4w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50F08BD3.9000200@charter.net>

Yes the County Rockers are made in India.
They usually have better quality control than most.

On 1/11/2013 4:33 PM, Doug Braun wrote:
> Another horror story:
>
> A while back I replaced my Spit's rocker arm shaft with the part that 
> most vendors sold.  I believe it was "County"
> branded, and it was made in India.  I went to adjust the valves a few 
> days later, and I noticed that the front four rocker arms
> seemed rather oil-starved.  When I ran the engine with the rocker arm 
> cover off, I could see that only the rear four rocker
> arms were getting lubricated.
> It turned out that the shaft was not completely hollow:  They had 
> rifle-drilled it inwards from each end, but they did not drill
> deep enough, and the two holes did not meet up in the center.
>
> Doug
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Glenn Franco <gaf3 at charter.net 
> <mailto:gaf3 at charter.net>> wrote:
>
>     FYI
>     I am in the midst of a TR6 Rebuild with an engine that is .020"
>     overbored.
>     While fitting up the pistons and checking clearances everything
>     checked out and the bore was concentric and to specs.
>     With the piston installed in the bore I noticed increased drag
>     with #1 piston installed.
>     With rings gaps, skirt clearance correct I pulled the piston and
>     didn't see any  issues.
>     Further inspection showed that the piston was cocked in the bore
>     and had score marks on the bottom of one skirt with the same wear
>     just below the oil ring on the other side.
>     After inspecting it with the machine shop we noticed that the ring
>     grooves were not fully machined on one side of the piston.
>     The rings would not move far enough in the groove and was proud of
>     the surface causing the piston to cock in the bore.
>     We collectively have not seen this before and have a new set of AE
>     pistons not County on the way.
>
>     Having spent many years in Automotive Engineering at one of the
>     former Big Three, these events are usually not one of's.
>     There likely are many more out there that ran down the line in the
>     same batch at the same time before it was caught.
>
>     These are new County Piston sets (I think made in Israel now).
>     I would inspect their parts very closely before you install them.
>
>     I also noticed machine chips in the machined groove of their
>     Tri-Metal Main Bearings (Israel).
>     The chips were in the machined groove and were plated over with
>     the babbit and copper.
>
>     I have had very good experiences with their parts in the past.
>     Just thought I would provide a heads up.
>
>     Glenn
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     Spitfires at autox.team.net <mailto:Spitfires at autox.team.net>
>     Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>     Suggested annual donation  $11.47
>     Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>     Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>     Unsubscribe/Manage:
>     http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/spitfires/doug at dougbraun.com

From boydwagner3 at aol.com  Fri Jan 11 15:19:14 2013
From: boydwagner3 at aol.com (Body Wagner)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:19:14 -0500
Subject: [6pack] [Fot] [Spits] County Pistons Quality Control Issue
In-Reply-To: <50F08BD3.9000200@charter.net>
References: <50F080C2.1080007@charter.net>
	<CAOtbU9Xt1mNHBZ=dj_7Voyzr8F2C8Qb0kTZrbP+FhASTY01K4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<50F08BD3.9000200@charter.net>
Message-ID: <690F0574-316A-4FFD-9253-09734B72B958@aol.com>

Where are AE pistons made?

Boyd C Wagner

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 11, 2013, at 5:01 PM, Glenn Franco <gaf3 at charter.net> wrote:

> Yes the County Rockers are made in India.
> They usually have better quality control than most.
> 
> On 1/11/2013 4:33 PM, Doug Braun wrote:
>> Another horror story:
>> 
>> A while back I replaced my Spit's rocker arm shaft with the part that 
>> most vendors sold.  I believe it was "County"
>> branded, and it was made in India.  I went to adjust the valves a few 
>> days later, and I noticed that the front four rocker arms
>> seemed rather oil-starved.  When I ran the engine with the rocker arm 
>> cover off, I could see that only the rear four rocker
>> arms were getting lubricated.
>> It turned out that the shaft was not completely hollow:  They had 
>> rifle-drilled it inwards from each end, but they did not drill
>> deep enough, and the two holes did not meet up in the center.
>> 
>> Doug
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Glenn Franco <gaf3 at charter.net 
>> <mailto:gaf3 at charter.net>> wrote:
>> 
>>    FYI
>>    I am in the midst of a TR6 Rebuild with an engine that is .020"
>>    overbored.
>>    While fitting up the pistons and checking clearances everything
>>    checked out and the bore was concentric and to specs.
>>    With the piston installed in the bore I noticed increased drag
>>    with #1 piston installed.
>>    With rings gaps, skirt clearance correct I pulled the piston and
>>    didn't see any  issues.
>>    Further inspection showed that the piston was cocked in the bore
>>    and had score marks on the bottom of one skirt with the same wear
>>    just below the oil ring on the other side.
>>    After inspecting it with the machine shop we noticed that the ring
>>    grooves were not fully machined on one side of the piston.
>>    The rings would not move far enough in the groove and was proud of
>>    the surface causing the piston to cock in the bore.
>>    We collectively have not seen this before and have a new set of AE
>>    pistons not County on the way.
>> 
>>    Having spent many years in Automotive Engineering at one of the
>>    former Big Three, these events are usually not one of's.
>>    There likely are many more out there that ran down the line in the
>>    same batch at the same time before it was caught.
>> 
>>    These are new County Piston sets (I think made in Israel now).
>>    I would inspect their parts very closely before you install them.
>> 
>>    I also noticed machine chips in the machined groove of their
>>    Tri-Metal Main Bearings (Israel).
>>    The chips were in the machined groove and were plated over with
>>    the babbit and copper.
>> 
>>    I have had very good experiences with their parts in the past.
>>    Just thought I would provide a heads up.
>> 
>>    Glenn
>>    _______________________________________________
>> 
>>    Spitfires at autox.team.net <mailto:Spitfires at autox.team.net>
>>    Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>>    Suggested annual donation  $11.47
>>    Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>    Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>    Unsubscribe/Manage:
>>    http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/spitfires/doug at dougbraun.com
> _______________________________________________
> fot at autox.team.net
> 
> http://www.fot-racing.com
> 
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/fot/boydwagner3 at aol.com

From gaf3 at charter.net  Fri Jan 11 15:41:25 2013
From: gaf3 at charter.net (Glenn Franco)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:41:25 -0500
Subject: [6pack] [Fot] [Spits] County Pistons Quality Control Issue
In-Reply-To: <690F0574-316A-4FFD-9253-09734B72B958@aol.com>
References: <50F080C2.1080007@charter.net>
	<CAOtbU9Xt1mNHBZ=dj_7Voyzr8F2C8Qb0kTZrbP+FhASTY01K4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<50F08BD3.9000200@charter.net>
	<690F0574-316A-4FFD-9253-09734B72B958@aol.com>
Message-ID: <50F09515.30005@charter.net>

The new defective TR6 set I just installed are made in Taiwan.
I just looked in my collection of NOS ones and I have 4 new .020" Spit 
County Pistons and those appear to be made in the UK but they are likely 
10-15 yrs old or better.
Glenn

On 1/11/2013 5:19 PM, Body Wagner wrote:
> Where are AE pistons made?
>
> Boyd C Wagner
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 11, 2013, at 5:01 PM, Glenn Franco <gaf3 at charter.net> wrote:
>
>> Yes the County Rockers are made in India.
>> They usually have better quality control than most.
>>
>> On 1/11/2013 4:33 PM, Doug Braun wrote:
>>> Another horror story:
>>>
>>> A while back I replaced my Spit's rocker arm shaft with the part that
>>> most vendors sold.  I believe it was "County"
>>> branded, and it was made in India.  I went to adjust the valves a few
>>> days later, and I noticed that the front four rocker arms
>>> seemed rather oil-starved.  When I ran the engine with the rocker arm
>>> cover off, I could see that only the rear four rocker
>>> arms were getting lubricated.
>>> It turned out that the shaft was not completely hollow:  They had
>>> rifle-drilled it inwards from each end, but they did not drill
>>> deep enough, and the two holes did not meet up in the center.
>>>
>>> Doug
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Glenn Franco <gaf3 at charter.net
>>> <mailto:gaf3 at charter.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     FYI
>>>     I am in the midst of a TR6 Rebuild with an engine that is .020"
>>>     overbored.
>>>     While fitting up the pistons and checking clearances everything
>>>     checked out and the bore was concentric and to specs.
>>>     With the piston installed in the bore I noticed increased drag
>>>     with #1 piston installed.
>>>     With rings gaps, skirt clearance correct I pulled the piston and
>>>     didn't see any  issues.
>>>     Further inspection showed that the piston was cocked in the bore
>>>     and had score marks on the bottom of one skirt with the same wear
>>>     just below the oil ring on the other side.
>>>     After inspecting it with the machine shop we noticed that the ring
>>>     grooves were not fully machined on one side of the piston.
>>>     The rings would not move far enough in the groove and was proud of
>>>     the surface causing the piston to cock in the bore.
>>>     We collectively have not seen this before and have a new set of AE
>>>     pistons not County on the way.
>>>
>>>     Having spent many years in Automotive Engineering at one of the
>>>     former Big Three, these events are usually not one of's.
>>>     There likely are many more out there that ran down the line in the
>>>     same batch at the same time before it was caught.
>>>
>>>     These are new County Piston sets (I think made in Israel now).
>>>     I would inspect their parts very closely before you install them.
>>>
>>>     I also noticed machine chips in the machined groove of their
>>>     Tri-Metal Main Bearings (Israel).
>>>     The chips were in the machined groove and were plated over with
>>>     the babbit and copper.
>>>
>>>     I have had very good experiences with their parts in the past.
>>>     Just thought I would provide a heads up.
>>>
>>>     Glenn
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>     Spitfires at autox.team.net <mailto:Spitfires at autox.team.net>
>>>     Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>>>     Suggested annual donation  $11.47
>>>     Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>>>     Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>>>     Unsubscribe/Manage:
>>>     http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/spitfires/doug at dougbraun.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> fot at autox.team.net
>>
>> http://www.fot-racing.com
>>
>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/fot/boydwagner3 at aol.com

From boydwagner3 at aol.com  Fri Jan 11 15:54:53 2013
From: boydwagner3 at aol.com (Body Wagner)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:54:53 -0500
Subject: [6pack] race seats
Message-ID: <5159678D-89A6-452D-A64A-F0F32EBC285D@aol.com>

I am building a TR6 for auto crossing and hill climbing. I am searching for a
seat that will be safe for this yet be comfortable as a road seat.

Boyd Wagner

From cartravel at pobox.com  Fri Jan 11 09:36:19 2013
From: cartravel at pobox.com (Larry Young)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 10:36:19 -0600
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
Message-ID: <50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com>

The TR5 did not meet US Emission standards and could not legally be 
imported into the US.

On 1/11/2013 10:27 AM, David Fidler wrote:
> Larry,
>
> I don't think the dealer cared about that. The TR5s were able to exceed US and Canadian emissions standards anyway. The real reason (so I'm told) is they were dumbed down to Stroms because the US dealers created hell about having to maintain the Lucas injection system and the boffins at Triumph acquiesced.
>
> Best regards,
>
> David.
>
> Sent from my iPad

From brucesimms2003 at yahoo.ca  Fri Jan 11 09:50:36 2013
From: brucesimms2003 at yahoo.ca (Bruce Simms)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 08:50:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] TR5 in Canada
Message-ID: <1357923036.35783.YahooMailNeo@web121603.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

Ran into a garage owner on Vancouver Island who was a Leyland dealer mechanic
in Vancouver circa 1970.   He said that BL brought in a TR5 (or early TR6 PI?,
can't remember) as a marketing tool.    It was eventually sold locally, and,
the dealer mechanics cussed the Lucas PI as it was troublesome for them!  I
would doubt they had the specialized PI training and tools of a dealership in
Britain or other markets.    
 
Triumph wasn't the only one to have issues
with early fuel injection systems.   I recall wishing my 74 Volvo had twin
SUs.
 
Cheers, Bruce Simms

From Jimandruthhome at aol.com  Fri Jan 11 20:31:47 2013
From: Jimandruthhome at aol.com (Jimandruthhome at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:31:47 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [6pack] 6pack Digest, Vol 5, Issue 3
Message-ID: <6c3f.66ff6de2.3e223323@aol.com>

Hi,
 
I have a good friend of 30 years, from whom I learned a lot about  cars, 
especialy LBC's.  We met because my new to me, but 11 years  old and well 
thrashed, 1971 TR6 had stumped me.
 
He had recently gone out on his own.  This was early 1980's, and he  worked 
mostly on LBC's, but also on other cars from across the pond.  He  did a 
fair amount of business with BMW 2002 tii owners.  They  had, if I remember 
rightly, Bosch mechanical injection. He was, and is, an  unusually talented 
mechanic ( we campaigned everything from a BMW 325is to an  IROC Camaro in 
the, sadly long since gone, IMSA show room stock endurance  series).
 
Anyway, he was one of a very few guys in the NYC area who could tame the  
Bosch mechanical injection without extensive factory training (he had none) 
and  so got a lot of business on that score.  He was also adept at fixing the 
 infamous, rotting BMW 2002 rear shock towers.
 
Maybe the Brits were right to be skeptical about the willingness of US  
dealers/mechanics to deal with Bosch mechanical injection.  I know  Corvettes 
had mechanical injection from way back, but were their injection  systems 
Bosch?   I'm thinking that back in the 50's and early 60's  everything from 
overseas was pretty suspect, at least re service, so either GM  had their own 
injection system, or it was licensed from Bosch or another  overseas company 
but the source was never mentioned out loud. Not a Corvette  guy, so just 
speculating about that.
 
Jim Knight
71 TR6

From mdporter at dfn.com  Sat Jan 12 07:05:54 2013
From: mdporter at dfn.com (Michael Porter)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 07:05:54 -0700
Subject: [6pack] 6pack Digest, Vol 5, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <6c3f.66ff6de2.3e223323@aol.com>
References: <6c3f.66ff6de2.3e223323@aol.com>
Message-ID: <50F16DC2.4030204@dfn.com>

On 1/11/2013 8:31 PM, Jimandruthhome at aol.com wrote:
>   
> Maybe the Brits were right to be skeptical about the willingness of US
> dealers/mechanics to deal with Bosch mechanical injection.  I know  Corvettes
> had mechanical injection from way back, but were their injection  systems
> Bosch?   I'm thinking that back in the 50's and early 60's  everything from
> overseas was pretty suspect, at least re service, so either GM  had their own
> injection system, or it was licensed from Bosch or another  overseas company
> but the source was never mentioned out loud. Not a Corvette  guy, so just
> speculating about that.

Jim, I tend to think the business about unwillingness to learn fuel 
injection is more apocryphal than substantive.  The technology was 
changing in a lot of ways by then (note that 4As had had, for example, 
several years of IRS suspension by the time PI showed up), and the 
savvier mechanics would have been eager to keep up.  The factory may 
have been reluctant to provide training because of the cost, but my 
experience in dealerships is that there were always a few people who 
wanted to stay current, and the truth is, one didn't have to have a shop 
full of mechanics capable of fuel injection work--one just needed at 
least one guy who could do it.

As for Corvettes, IIRC, fuel injection was a special option in the year 
of introduction in 1957, and there were about a thousand made that 
year.  It was a Rochester system first developed by, in part, Zora 
Arkus-Duntov, but the development was initially begun for Pontiac, I 
think, because Pontiac's sales were flagging and GM was beginning a 
program (run by John Delorean) to attract younger buyers to Pontiacs . A 
slightly different system (better fuel metering in cold weather) was 
actually installed on the new 1957 model, the Bonneville, on 600 units, 
one for each dealer.

Unlike either Lucas or Bosch at the time, the Rochester system was 
continuous injection, with the injector nozzle positioned very near the 
intake valve, and fuel metering done by vacuum signals from the air 
metering unit to several diaphragms operating levers controlling the 
fuel valves.  Compared with the Lucas PI system, it was actually a lot 
more fidgety and fiddly, with lots more moving parts and multiple vacuum 
signals.


Cheers.

-- 


Michael Porter
Roswell, NM


Never let anyone drive you crazy when you know it's within walking distance....

From glemon at neb.rr.com  Sat Jan 12 09:04:25 2013
From: glemon at neb.rr.com (Greg Lemon)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 10:04:25 -0600
Subject: [6pack] 6pack Digest, Vol 5, Issue 3
Message-ID: <C8ABAB8C7B5648F68EF1FF346D7E466A@livingroompc>

 Michael, Jim, all, the idea that the fuel injection would be too fiddly for 
US dealers is attributed to Bruce McWilliams, who was one of Triumph's 
marketing/distributor guys back in the 60s, and presumably would know.  I 
just happened to be reading the "Triumph TR250/TR6 Companion" this week  and 
that is what it says, adding that their "moral was low at that time" and 
they didn't  need another issue to deal with, but in other sections it talks 
about the cost it would add to the car, and also I believe does make some 
mention of  bigger climate differences in the States being a potential 
issue.  It does state that the system could have been made to meet US 
emissions with only a  modest loss in power.  My theory is that the 
cumulative effect of the all the various things, additional cost both in 
development, and to the car, the time that development would take, plus the 
additional burden on the dealer and or potential hit in reputation if 
dealers didn't keep them running well, that contributed to the decision to 
offer the TR250 with  Strombergs in the US.  Maybe the dealer issue was the 
last one that was brought to the table and therefore broke the camel's back, 
but that is pure speculation on my part.

 If it would not have been that hard to meet emissions with the fuel 
injection it is too bad they didn't offer it along with the carburated car, 
kind of like they did with the  BMW 2002 and 2002tii,
I think they could have shifted a few more units and helped the reputation 
of the British sports car in the US (all the contemporary road test reports 
were talking about the dated designs  of the MGs and Triumphs and low 
specific output, dated designs, and not so stellar straight line performance 
by then).  When introduced the TR2 could outdrag any American car to 60 mph 
according to one magazine.  Of course the American horsepower race a started 
shortly thereafter and Triumphs and MGs were left in the dust for straight 
line performance soon thereafter, but the fuel injected TR could have at 
least kept performance up in the same ballpark as the early Porsche 911s and 
the soon to be introduced Z car.

Greg Lemon

From cartravel at pobox.com  Sat Jan 12 14:16:27 2013
From: cartravel at pobox.com (Larry Young)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 15:16:27 -0600
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
Message-ID: <50F1D2AB.1090001@pobox.com>

I have owned my TR250 since it was new and many of the period road tests 
stated that emissions was the reason for using carbs on the TR250.  
Ironically, fuel injection is now the cleaner system, but it was at a 
much more primitive stage of development in 1968.  There were many other 
modifications required to meet US emissions - cam, compression, 
ignition, etc.   I don't believe there were any appreciable differences 
in fuels.  My 250 was delivered in Coventry and was driven all over 
Europe before shipment back to the states. It required premium 
everywhere which was leaded in those days.  It has never run as well on 
lead free premium.
Larry

On 1/11/2013 2:23 PM, David Fidler wrote:
> Are you sure about that Larry? I've never actually seen the test results,
> have you?
>
> My guess is that the problem was more to do with the lower octane (RON)
> rating of US fuel. The UK PI TR5s (and TR6s) were designed to run on 4 star
> leaded fuel (97 octane), if they didn't meet the US regs, it's most likely
> the inferior fuel quality/lower octane was the cause. Europe has as strict,
> if not more stringent, emissions regs than the US and the PI TR5s and 6s
> passed those. Injected cars typically have better emissions than carbs,
> although the Lucas system was totally mechanical and therefore didn't have
> any of the modern electronic emissions control systems.y
>
> Just sayin'
>
> Fid.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Young [mailto:cartravel at pobox.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:36 AM
> To: David Fidler
> Cc: 6pack at autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
>
> The TR5 did not meet US Emission standards and could not legally be
> imported into the US.
>
> On 1/11/2013 10:27 AM, David Fidler wrote:
>> Larry,
>>
>> I don't think the dealer cared about that. The TR5s were able to exceed US
> and Canadian emissions standards anyway. The real reason (so I'm told) is
> they were dumbed down to Stroms because the US dealers created hell about
> having to maintain the Lucas injection system and the boffins at Triumph
> acquiesced.
>> Best regards,
>>
>> David.
>>
>> Sent from my iPad

From cartravel at pobox.com  Sat Jan 12 14:35:21 2013
From: cartravel at pobox.com (Larry Young)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 15:35:21 -0600
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <1357937497.88597.YahooMailNeo@web161303.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
	<1357937497.88597.YahooMailNeo@web161303.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <50F1D719.9070202@pobox.com>

I have trouble believing the argument about complexity of maintenance of 
the PI system.  Remember, GM had been using fuel injection on several 
models since the late 50's.  Not to mention all the hot rodders using 
the Hilborn system.  I believe the Lucas system was a step closer to our 
current modern systems though.

With regard to the cost argument, wouldn't you pay just a little bit 
more for a 40 percent increase in power?  The alternative was two 
additional cylinders, but virtually no increase in power over the 
previous model.  Since they couldn't market performance, you got things 
like buttons that said "Triumph Over Conformity - TR250".  I have a 
couple of these buttons.

Kas Kastner told me he thought the majority of the power increase was 
not due to the PI system, but other modifications.  The conservative cam 
with little or no overlap comes to mind.

Larry

From cartravel at pobox.com  Sat Jan 12 14:57:39 2013
From: cartravel at pobox.com (Larry Young)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 15:57:39 -0600
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <4033E0285D7443F89C9839D816ACB204@livingroompc>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com><56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca><010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com><B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca><CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com><6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<4033E0285D7443F89C9839D816ACB204@livingroompc>
Message-ID: <50F1DC53.90705@pobox.com>

I think 1968 was when the EPA certification came about.   The engine in 
my 250 threw a rod in Europe, so I got a replacement engine under 
warrantee.  I was given a special form  for US Customs certifying that 
it met US emission standards.  I think the US emission standards have 
always been more strict than other countries. European cars are now 
about 40% diesel and it has been very difficult to get them clean enough 
to import.  I have a German diesel with two catalytic converters, one 
requires a urea tank.  It also has a filter for particulates.  The 
Europeans are more concerned about green house gases (carbon dioxide), 
but less concerned about carbon monoxide which is poisonous.
Larry Young

On 1/11/2013 8:03 PM, Greg Lemon wrote:
> Some web research shows Canada didn't have national auto emission 
> standards until 1971 so should not have been an issue with the TR5, if 
> they sold TR250s new in Canada was probably marketing/expediency and 
> not due to regulations.
>
> Also, I met the guy that had his bought in Germany and imported to the 
> US TR5 featured in Hemmings Sports and Exotic a couple of years ago, 
> he said on import to the USA (this was a number of years ago, don't 
> know exactly, I think the 80s), they made him replace the fuel 
> injection with TR250 carbs, vacuum lines, etc, to make it "US EPA 
> spec" (guess they didn't know/care about the cam) then they cleared 
> it, apparently with a nod and a wink, and allowing him to keep the 
> fuel injection, which he re-installed.
>
> Greg Lemon

From taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com  Sun Jan 13 00:35:25 2013
From: taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com (Sally or Dick Taylor)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 23:35:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <50F1D719.9070202@pobox.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
	<1357937497.88597.YahooMailNeo@web161303.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<50F1D719.9070202@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <1358062525.37454.YahooMailNeo@web161305.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Larry --- Would I pay "just a little bit more" for a 40% increase in power?
Probably so, but I would've been in the minority back in the late sixties when
it was just about as cheap to get a V8 Cheve or Mustang. Cost, or dealer
profit, had to be a factor when competing with other (foreign) sports cars. 
A "conservative cam" must've helped sell some later models of the TR6, so far
as emissions regulations was concerned. Power dropped to 125 as I recall. The
CR was also reduced during this period. 
I don't know if even these detuned
engines could pass mustard on emissions in California. The SMOG, or emissions
testing, didn't start here until 1986. I had to take out the S2 cam recently
installed to get my '73 to pass the sniff (HC and CO) test.  

Tim H. is
getting his money's worth on this topic. Right Tim!?    

Dick Taylor    
>________________________________
> From: Larry Young <cartravel at pobox.com>
>To: Sally or Dick Taylor <taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com> 
>Cc: "DJFidler at rogers.com"
<DJFidler at rogers.com>; "6pack at autox.team.net" <6pack at autox.team.net> 
>Sent:
Saturday, January 12, 2013 1:35 PM
>Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
> 
>I have trouble believing the argument about complexity of maintenance of
the PI system.  Remember, GM had been using fuel injection on several models
since the late 50's.  Not to mention all the hot rodders using the Hilborn
system.  I believe the Lucas system was a step closer to our current modern
systems though.
>
>With regard to the cost argument, wouldn't you pay just a
little bit more for a 40 percent increase in power?  The alternative was two
additional cylinders, but virtually no increase in power over the previous
model.  Since they couldn't market performance, you got things like buttons
that said "Triumph Over Conformity - TR250".  I have a couple of these
buttons.
>
>Kas Kastner told me he thought the majority of the power increase
was not due to the PI system, but other modifications.  The conservative cam
with little or no overlap comes to mind.
>
>Larry

From 70tr6 at comcast.net  Sun Jan 13 09:03:48 2013
From: 70tr6 at comcast.net (Ashford Little)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 11:03:48 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <50F1D719.9070202@pobox.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
	<1357937497.88597.YahooMailNeo@web161303.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<50F1D719.9070202@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <FBA35F76-6D72-4463-BD50-74F74835E41B@comcast.net>

The 40% increase in power probably wasn't accurate.  IIRC, the way horsepower
was measured was changed about this time from Gross to Net.  I think the later
PI cars were quoted at about 125hp, which is still a nice bump.  The cost of
the PI system was not the only cost that was involved.  Dealer training would
have added to the cost, but another factor that I think was hurting Triumph &
BL was the Pound to Dollar ratio.  Over the next couple of years these cars
went up in price dramatically while they were trying to keep losing market
share to the new Japanese market entrants.

Ashford Little
70tr6 at comcast.net



On Jan 12, 2013, at 4:35 PM, Larry Young <cartravel at pobox.com> wrote:

> I have trouble believing the argument about complexity of maintenance of the
PI system.  Remember, GM had been using fuel injection on several models since
the late 50's.  Not to mention all the hot rodders using the Hilborn system.
I believe the Lucas system was a step closer to our current modern systems
though.
>
> With regard to the cost argument, wouldn't you pay just a little bit more
for a 40 percent increase in power?  The alternative was two additional
cylinders, but virtually no increase in power over the previous model.  Since
they couldn't market performance, you got things like buttons that said
"Triumph Over Conformity - TR250".  I have a couple of these buttons.
>
> Kas Kastner told me he thought the majority of the power increase was not
due to the PI system, but other modifications.  The conservative cam with
little or no overlap comes to mind.
>
> Larry
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/70tr6 at comcast.net

From janah at att.net  Sun Jan 13 13:54:26 2013
From: janah at att.net (John Cyganowski)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:54:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
Message-ID: <1358110466.66676.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Most of the reasons for the TR250 vs TR5 have been touched upon here.
 
Bruce McWilliams had a large role in this decision.  His job was not to cater
to perfromance enthusiasts, it was to sell cars and in 1967 he had a big
problem.  The TR4 was essentially the same car that they launched in 1961.
Okay it got IRS - whoopie! This was the muscle car era and the young men
wanted power, not a noisey 4 banger. Triumph had thousands of unsold TR4s and
something had to be done.  A 6 cylinder was a step in the right
direction. Mechanical fuel injection had been around in aircraft since WWII,
but it was relatively new for automobiles. It is true GM offered mechanical
fuel injection in the corvettes as an option. For mass production it had to be
cheap and reliable. In 1967 it was neither.  And it was not reliable until GM
started coming out with electronic fuel injection in the late 70s early 80s.
For Triumph, North America was the market for sportscars, not the rest of the
World. The potential for a "black eye" and slow sales
 over service issues won out over performance.  Time proved McWillliams
correct. There were all kinds of fuel injection issues in the EU. It took the
company quite a while to sort out these issues. The Kimberly book goes into
this a little bit. Now a days we know how to make the Lucas PI system function
like it should but PI would have been a disaster in North America in 1968.
Instead it was a contained problem in a relatively small market.
 
John Cyg
70 Damson
CC52927LO

From rivers2hills at yahoo.com  Sun Jan 13 18:02:49 2013
From: rivers2hills at yahoo.com (John Summers)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:02:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] Somehow:)
Message-ID: <1358125369.27903.YahooMailNeo@web161205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

I was quite surprised-and pleased yesterday to find the 6pack back in my in
box.  Feel like I'm part of the community again:) It was a rough year for my
TR6. Mostly not running. Finally, on 10/1 I had it hauled to "The English
Garage" here in Jacksonville and told the owner-I want my car to start.  Start
more than once or twice per trip.  Also had a brake booster that went bad.
 So, he tinkered with it until November,,,,,,,,,,,but I got it back and it has
been dependable.  He took out the Pertronix Electronic ignition and put back
points.  May have cleaned out the fuel tank also.  Still-as always-having
trouble with the rear lights.  Got "lights" when the headlights are on.  No
brake or turn signal.  Maybe I need new bulbs:) Even though it badly needs new
paint, I have gotten several nice comments about it in the last three days.
 If they only knew:))  Anyway, that's my story.

John Summers
'74  TR6

From lang at isis.mit.edu  Mon Jan 14 07:12:28 2013
From: lang at isis.mit.edu (Robert M. Lang)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:12:28 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <50F1D719.9070202@pobox.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
	<1357937497.88597.YahooMailNeo@web161303.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<50F1D719.9070202@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62L.1301140910580.23194@isis.mit.edu>

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013, Larry Young wrote:

[stuff deleted]

> Kas Kastner told me he thought the majority of the power increase was not due 
> to the PI system, but other modifications.  The conservative cam with little 
> or no overlap comes to mind.

And the 9.5:1 compression... that's 10 or 15 HP right there with no other 
mods (in all likelyhood).

Just sayin.

> Larry

regards,
rml
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Lang              Triumph TR6!!            |  This space for rent
Former NER Solo Chair                          |
Voice:617-253-7438                             |  Cell: 339-927-4489
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From dcmdcm at nc.rr.com  Mon Jan 14 09:56:02 2013
From: dcmdcm at nc.rr.com (Douglas Morris)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:56:02 -0500
Subject: [6pack] '71 TR-6 for sale
Message-ID: <A1DD0FF1-F55B-47DE-8259-D7EB3FFE5551@nc.rr.com>

Feller in Troy, NC (near Southern Pines and Asheboro) has a yellow '71 TR-6
for sale.
I don't know anything about it (he came up to me in my -6 in a parking lot),
but he said it's mostly restored and runs well.
Evidently, a health issue prevents his driving it any more.
Just throwin' it out there. Don't ask me about it, m'kay? I know noth-thing.
Contact: John Ellis, 910-673-0417

Doug Morris, NC

From cartravel at pobox.com  Mon Jan 14 12:15:34 2013
From: cartravel at pobox.com (Larry Young)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:15:34 -0600
Subject: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358062525.37454.YahooMailNeo@web161305.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca>
	<010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com>
	<B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca>
	<CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com>
	<50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com>
	<677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com>
	<50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com>
	<1357937497.88597.YahooMailNeo@web161303.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<50F1D719.9070202@pobox.com>
	<1358062525.37454.YahooMailNeo@web161305.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <50F45956.4070202@pobox.com>

When I bought my TR250, my dad tried to persuade me to get a Mustang 
instead.  Both he and my brother had them with plain vanilla 2V 289 
(185hp) that he said would do 115 mph.  I tried to explain that straight 
line speed was only part of the fun.  What about driving on a twisted 
mountain road?   I was in the minority of course.  Most guys in my town 
wanted a pickup with a big V8 and a gun rack.  It is a shame that 
Triumph dropped the ball after introducing the TR2 that would kick ass 
and then gave its successors very little power improvement.  I think you 
guys are over inflating the cost issue. How much more was a TR5 when 
currency differences were accounted for?  The hot cam certainly didn't 
cost any more. The TR250 distributor had to cost more with its 
complicated dual vacuum system. The currency differences were actually a 
help.  When I was planning the purchase of my TR250 the pound dropped 
from $2.80 to $2.40 (if memory serves), which made the car cheaper.

I wish we had someone like Mike Cook involved in this discussion.
Larry Young

On 1/13/2013 1:35 AM, Sally or Dick Taylor wrote:
> Larry --- Would I pay "just a little bit more" for a 40% increase in 
> power? Probably so, but I would've been in the minority back in the 
> late sixties when it was just about as cheap to get a V8 Cheve or 
> Mustang. Cost, or dealer profit, had to be a factor when competing 
> with other (foreign) sports cars.
>
> A "conservative cam" must've helped sell some later models of the TR6, 
> so far as emissions regulations was concerned. Power dropped to 125 as 
> I recall. The CR was also reduced during this period.
> I don't know if even these detuned engines could pass mustard on 
> emissions in California. The SMOG, or emissions testing, didn't start 
> here until 1986. I had to take out the S2 cam recently installed to 
> get my '73 to su pass the sniff (HC and CO) test.
> the
> Tim H. is getting his money's worth on this topic. Right Tim!?
> kik
> Dick Taylor

From cartravel at pobox.com  Mon Jan 14 12:27:18 2013
From: cartravel at pobox.com (Larry Young)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:27:18 -0600
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358110466.66676.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <1358110466.66676.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <50F45C16.8070401@pobox.com>

I can agree with some of this logic, but the central issue is whether 
the PI system could have met US EPA regulations.  I think the answer is 
No. Were any other manufacturers using it on their US cars in '68? Fuel 
injection was a performance enhancement up until the later fully 
electronic (e.g. Bosch L-Jetronic) systems were developed.

On 1/13/2013 2:54 PM, John Cyganowski wrote:
> Most of the reasons for the TR250 vs TR5 have been touched upon here.
>   
> Bruce McWilliams had a large role in this decision.  His job was not to cater
> to perfromance enthusiasts, it was to sell cars and in 1967 he had a big
> problem.  The TR4 was essentially the same car that they launched in 1961.
> Okay it got IRS - whoopie! This was the muscle car era and the young men
> wanted power, not a noisey 4 banger. Triumph had thousands of unsold TR4s and
> something had to be done.  A 6 cylinder was a step in the right
> direction. Mechanical fuel injection had been around in aircraft since WWII,
> but it was relatively new for automobiles. It is true GM offered mechanical
> fuel injection in the corvettes as an option. For mass production it had to be
> cheap and reliable. In 1967 it was neither.  And it was not reliable until GM
> started coming out with electronic fuel injection in the late 70s early 80s.
> For Triumph, North America was the market for sportscars, not the rest of the
> World. The potential for a "black eye" and slow sales
>   over service issues won out over performance.  Time proved McWillliams
> correct. There were all kinds of fuel injection issues in the EU. It took theW
> company quite a while to sort out these issues. The Kimberly book goes into
> this a little bit. Now a days we know how to make the Lucas PI system function
> like it should but PI would have been a disaster in North America in 1968.
> Instead it was a contained problem in a relatively small market.
>   
> John Cyg
> 70 Damson
> CC52927LO
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/cartravel at pobox.com

From janah at att.net  Wed Jan 16 06:27:17 2013
From: janah at att.net (John Cyganowski)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 05:27:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
Message-ID: <1358342837.78808.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

In my humble opinion, the emmissions thing is a fable that was published a
long time ago and has become accepted fact.  First, in 1967 there was no EPA.
EPA was begun in 1970 under President Nixon. Car emmisson standards (the
little that they had) came under the Department of Health Education and
Welfare (HEW). Oh for the days when government was not so bloated.
 
I think the PI system needed altitude compensation in the US. This would have
cost more. But I don't think the PI system could not be tuned. That is what
fuel injection is all about - delivering the right amount of fuel at the right
time.
 
The issue was sales.  McWilliam nixed anything he thought would be a
distraction to sales. The home market was small. The home market had troubles
with the PI system, but the number of cars produced for that market was small,
so the problems were managable. The North American Market by comparison was
huge. McWilliams just did not want those issues. He was right.
 
John Cyg.

From taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com  Wed Jan 16 12:37:24 2013
From: taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com (Sally or Dick Taylor)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:37:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358342837.78808.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <1358342837.78808.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1358365044.35294.YahooMailNeo@web161305.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

John makes a good point. In 1968 the US were selling muscle cars with big
cams, multi carbs and high compression. These faced no government restrictions
until later on. 



>________________________________
> From: John Cyganowski
<janah at att.net>
>To: 6pack at autox.team.net 
>Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
5:27 AM
>Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
> 
>In my humble opinion, the
emmissions thing is a fable that was published a
>long time ago and has become
accepted fact.  First, in 1967 there was no EPA.
>EPA was begun in 1970 under
President Nixon. Car emmisson standards (the
>little that they had) came under
the Department of Health Education and
>Welfare (HEW). Oh for the days when
government was not so bloated.
>
>I think the PI system needed altitude
compensation in the US. This would have
>cost more. But I don't think the PI
system could not be tuned. That is what
>fuel injection is all about -
delivering the right amount of fuel at the right
>time.
>
>The issue was
sales.  McWilliam nixed anything he thought would be a
>distraction to sales.
The home market was small. The home market had troubles
>with the PI system,
but the number of cars produced for that market was small,
>so the problems
were managable. The North American Market by comparison was
>huge. McWilliams
just did not want those issues. He was right.
>
>John Cyg.
>
>________________________________________
>
>6pack at autox.team.net
>
>Donate:
http://www.team.net/donate.html
>Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>Forums:
http://www.team.net/forums
>Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com

From 70tr6 at comcast.net  Wed Jan 16 12:41:42 2013
From: 70tr6 at comcast.net (Ashford Little)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:41:42 -0500
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358365044.35294.YahooMailNeo@web161305.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1358342837.78808.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<1358365044.35294.YahooMailNeo@web161305.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3EC02700-AD32-40F2-A3B1-4435B2CFE349@comcast.net>

Yeah, hard to imagine a 440 6-Pack would pass even a gas station... not to
mention almost any other big block motor in the US.

My first "car" was actually a yacht of the land variety.  1971 Mercury
Marquis.  Oh yeah, I forgot to mention my father ordered it with the 429ci
Mach One motor.  Pass an emissions test.  Yeah right.

Ashford Little
70tr6 at comcast.net



On Jan 16, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Sally or Dick Taylor <taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> John makes a good point. In 1968 the US were selling muscle cars with big
> cams, multi carbs and high compression. These faced no government
restrictions
> until later on.
>
>
>
>> ________________________________
>> From: John Cyganowski
> <janah at att.net>
>> To: 6pack at autox.team.net
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
> 5:27 AM
>> Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
>>
>> In my humble opinion, the
> emmissions thing is a fable that was published a
>> long time ago and has become
> accepted fact.  First, in 1967 there was no EPA.
>> EPA was begun in 1970 under
> President Nixon. Car emmisson standards (the
>> little that they had) came under
> the Department of Health Education and
>> Welfare (HEW). Oh for the days when
> government was not so bloated.
>>
>> I think the PI system needed altitude
> compensation in the US. This would have
>> cost more. But I don't think the PI
> system could not be tuned. That is what
>> fuel injection is all about -
> delivering the right amount of fuel at the right
>> time.
>>
>> The issue was
> sales.  McWilliam nixed anything he thought would be a
>> distraction to sales.
> The home market was small. The home market had troubles
>> with the PI system,
> but the number of cars produced for that market was small,
>> so the problems
> were managable. The North American Market by comparison was
>> huge. McWilliams
> just did not want those issues. He was right.
>>
>> John Cyg.
>>
>> ________________________________________
>>
>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>
>> Donate:
> http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums:
> http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/70tr6 at comcast.net

From jimjcmo at yahoo.com  Wed Jan 16 13:15:54 2013
From: jimjcmo at yahoo.com (Jim Jones)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:15:54 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <3EC02700-AD32-40F2-A3B1-4435B2CFE349@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <1358367354.66930.YahooMailClassic@web142703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

True that. MY dad had a 1970 Sedan de Ville with the Caddy 472 V8. I never
knew what its numbers were, but that was a torque beast. Hard to imagine the
emissions that car produced.

Jim Jones

Jones Beltone Hearing and Audiology

Jefferson City, MO

--- On Wed, 1/16/13, Ashford Little <70tr6 at comcast.net> wrote:

From: Ashford Little <70tr6 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
To: "Sally or Dick Taylor" <taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com>
Cc: "John Cyganowski" <janah at att.net>, "6pack at autox.team.net"
<6pack at autox.team.net>
Date: Wednesday, January 16, 2013, 1:41 PM

Yeah, hard to imagine a 440 6-Pack would pass even a gas station... not to
mention almost any other big block motor in the US.

My first "car" was actually a yacht of the land variety.  1971 Mercury
Marquis.  Oh yeah, I forgot to mention my father ordered it with the 429ci
Mach One motor.  Pass an emissions test.  Yeah right.

Ashford Little
70tr6 at comcast.net



On Jan 16, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Sally or Dick Taylor <taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> John makes a good point. In 1968 the US were selling muscle cars with big
> cams, multi carbs and high compression. These faced no government
restrictions
> until later on.
>
>
>
>> ________________________________
>> From: John Cyganowski
> <janah at att.net>
>> To: 6pack at autox.team.net
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
> 5:27 AM
>> Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
>>
>> In my humble opinion, the
> emmissions thing is a fable that was published a
>> long time ago and has become
> accepted fact.  First, in 1967 there was no EPA.
>> EPA was begun in 1970 under
> President Nixon. Car emmisson standards (the
>> little that they had) came under
> the Department of Health Education and
>> Welfare (HEW). Oh for the days when
> government was not so bloated.
>>
>> I think the PI system needed altitude
> compensation in the US. This would have
>> cost more. But I don't think the PI
> system could not be tuned. That is what
>> fuel injection is all about -
> delivering the right amount of fuel at the right
>> time.
>>
>> The issue was
> sales.  McWilliam nixed anything he thought would be a
>> distraction to sales.
> The home market was small. The home market had troubles
>> with the PI system,
> but the number of cars produced for that market was small,
>> so the problems
> were managable. The North American Market by comparison was
>> huge. McWilliams
> just did not want those issues. He was right.
>>
>> John Cyg.
>>
>> ________________________________________
>>
>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>
>> Donate:
> http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums:
> http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/70tr6 at comcast.net

________________________________________

6pack at autox.team.net

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/jimjcmo at yahoo.com

From lang at isis.mit.edu  Wed Jan 16 14:13:25 2013
From: lang at isis.mit.edu (Robert M. Lang)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:13:25 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358365044.35294.YahooMailNeo@web161305.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1358342837.78808.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<1358365044.35294.YahooMailNeo@web161305.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62L.1301161612340.30644@isis.mit.edu>

On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Sally or Dick Taylor wrote:

> John makes a good point. In 1968 the US were selling muscle cars with big
> cams, multi carbs and high compression. These faced no government restrictions
> until later on.


... insurance was also a factor on the demise of real muscle cars.

:-)

rml
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Lang              Triumph TR6!!            |  This space for rent
Former NER Solo Chair                          |
Voice:617-253-7438                             |  Cell: 339-927-4489
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From jimjcmo at yahoo.com  Wed Jan 16 15:10:54 2013
From: jimjcmo at yahoo.com (Jim Jones)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:10:54 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358342837.78808.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1358374254.32428.YahooMailClassic@web142702.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

I agree with John, and believe that Bruce McWilliams was correct in his
decision. The Brits DID have trouble with the early PI cars. The early high
strung cams caused a lopey idle and the fuel metering units had to be rebuilt
(expensively) when they failed. Far more of an ordeal compared to rebuilding a
carb. It's likely that by the time the PI system was perfected, if that was
possible, the cost may have put those cars into a price class where they could
not compete well. Servicing would have been an issue for most of the BL
dealers' service departments. Chevy dealers routinely removed the Rochester
fuel injection units from Corvettes at their owners' request because they were
a pain to keep working.

The other issue is that the North American market needed the six cylinder
FAST. Remember the TR250 was only marketed for what? 16 months? Waiting
another year for a better PI system before rolling out the car could well have
cost BL several dealers at a time when many were on the brink of taking down
their Triumph signs. And remember that these cars, particularly the TR6,
succeeded brilliantly. They kept the Triumph brand in the game.

Face it. The basic design of these cars dated back to the mid-sixties, if not
earlier. Trying to make it into a modern car would have required starting all
over from the ground up, something that was not going to happen with the TR7
under development.

Jim Jones

Jones Beltone Hearing and Audiology

Jefferson City, MO

--- On Wed, 1/16/13, John Cyganowski <janah at att.net> wrote:

From: John Cyganowski <janah at att.net>
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
To: 6pack at autox.team.net
Date: Wednesday, January 16, 2013, 7:27 AM

In my humble opinion, the emmissions thing is a fable that was published a
long time ago and has become accepted fact.  First, in 1967 there was no EPA.
EPA was begun in 1970 under President Nixon. Car emmisson standards (the
little that they had) came under the Department of Health Education and
Welfare (HEW). Oh for the days when government was not so bloated.

I think the PI system needed altitude compensation in the US. This would have
cost more. But I don't think the PI system could not be tuned. That is what
fuel injection is all about - delivering the right amount of fuel at the
right
time.

The issue was sales.  McWilliam nixed anything he thought would be a
distraction to sales. The home market was small. The home market had troubles
with the PI system, but the number of cars produced for that market was
small,
so the problems were managable. The North American Market by comparison was
huge. McWilliams just did not want those issues. He was right.

John Cyg.

________________________________________

6pack at autox.team.net

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/jimjcmo at yahoo.com

From levilevi at comcast.net  Wed Jan 16 19:06:43 2013
From: levilevi at comcast.net (Bud R)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 19:06:43 -0700
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358367354.66930.YahooMailClassic@web142703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1358367354.66930.YahooMailClassic@web142703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4B69DB82-C31F-4F43-BB85-3447912CFDD0@comcast.net>

My 54 Oldsmobile (1st car paid $50.00) burned oil so bad I carried a  
five gallon can of it in the huge trunk. It was the car filling up the  
intersection with smoke.


Bud Rolofson

71TR6 CC57365 (Good 6)
71 Spitfire MK IV Race Car #3
66TR4A CTC57529 (The Project)
71F-250 Camper Special (Triumph Support Vehicle)
Z-50A Hardly Davidson 1977 Honda Mini-Trail Bike (Triumph Pit Bike)


On Jan 16, 2013, at 1:15 PM, Jim Jones wrote:

> Hard to imagine the
> emissions that car produced.

From cartravel at pobox.com  Thu Jan 17 11:20:33 2013
From: cartravel at pobox.com (Larry Young)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:20:33 -0600
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358342837.78808.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <1358342837.78808.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <50F840F1.7070504@pobox.com>

Sorry, there is no fable here. If you read a bit of history, you will 
find that the first real standards on tailpipe emission occurred in 
1968.  Here are a couple references, which state:

"The first legislated exhaust (tailpipe) 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaust_system> emission standards were 
promulgated by the State of California for 1966 model year for cars sold 
in that state, followed by the United States as a whole in model year 
1968. The standards were progressively tightened year by year, as 
mandated by the EPA."

At that time, the auto makers only tool for reducing emissions was by 
detuning.  Catalytic converts came about in 1975 and helped to reduce 
the amount of detuning required.  Electronic engine controls helped even 
more.  Those that mention muscle cars should notice that they began to 
decline about this same time and were then totally killed by the 1973 
oil embargo.  It's too bad Triumph didn't adopt electronic fuel 
injection once it was perfected rather than continuing to detune, then 
the TR6 and TR7 wouldn't have been such dogs.

references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_emissions_control
http://www.autolife.umd.umich.edu/Environment/E_Overview/E_Overview4.htm


On 1/16/2013 7:27 AM, John Cyganowski wrote:
> In my humble opinion, the emmissions thing is a fable that was published a
> long time ago and has become accepted fact.  First, in 1967 there was no EPA.
> EPA was begun in 1970 under President Nixon. Car emmisson standards (the
> little that they had) came under the Department of Health Education and
> Welfare (HEW). Oh for the days when government was not so bloated.
>   
> I think the PI system needed altitude compensation in the US. This woulrd have
> cost more. But I don't think the PI system could not be tuned. That is what
> fuel injection is all about - delivering the right amount of fuel at the right
> time.
>   
> The issue was sales.  McWilliam nixed anything he thought would be a
> distraction to sales. The home market was small. The home market had troubles
> with the PI system, but the number of cars produced for that market was small,
> so the problems were managable. The North American Market by comparison was
> huge. McWilliams just did not want those issues. He was right.
>   
> John Cyg.
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/cartravel at pobox.com

From tjh173 at yahoo.com  Thu Jan 17 11:28:28 2013
From: tjh173 at yahoo.com (Timothy Holbrook)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:28:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358372076.74582.YahooMailNeo@web163505.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <3EC02700-AD32-40F2-A3B1-4435B2CFE349@comcast.net>
	<1358367354.66930.YahooMailClassic@web142703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<1358372076.74582.YahooMailNeo@web163505.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1358447308.89445.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Intesting points (and Dick, you're right, I had no idea my harmless "did
Triumph sell TR5's in Canada" question would turn into all this, but I sure am
enjoying where it's going!), but a quick Wiki check finds that emissions
standards WERE introduced in the US in the 60s:
 
======
 The first legislated
exhaust (tailpipe) emission standards were promulgated by the State of
California for 1966 model year for cars sold in that state, followed by the
United States as a whole in model year 1968. The standards were progressively
tightened year by year, as mandated by the EPA.
By the 1974 model year, the
emission standards had tightened such that the de-tuning techniques used to
meet them were seriously reducing engine efficiency and thus increasing fuel
usage. The new emission standards for 1975 model year, as well as the increase
in fuel usage, forced the invention of the catalytic converter for
after-treatment of the exhaust gas. This was not possible with existing leaded
gasoline, because the lead residue contaminated the platinum catalyst. In
1972, General Motors proposed to the American Petroleum Institute the
elimination of leaded fuels for 1975 and later model year cars. The production
and distribution of unleaded fuel was a major challenge, but it was completed
successfully in time for the 1975 model year cars. All modern cars are now
equipped with catalytic converters and leaded fuel is nearly impossible to buy
in most First World countries.
 
======
 
That said, I agree with you guys
that these emissions standards must have been pretty "relaxed" in the late 60s
and early 70s when you think of so many of the US muscle cars that were being
produced at that time.  
 
I'm similarly skeptical that the extra cost of the
PI system would have been a signficant factor in putting carbs on the North
American cars.  As a supply chain guy who has been in the manufacturing
segment for a long time, I would much prefer a single "flavor" (every TR6 in a
single PI format) rather than dealing with a mix of PI and carbs.  Any cost
differences in the PI vs carb hardware would likely have been absorbed by
simplified procurement and inventory management of parts, a sole assembly
process for all assembly line workers to follow, easier training of dealers
and technicians, etc.  Seems much more likely that Triumph were worried about
how well the PI car would run in the much more important US market in which
there are many different climates and elevations, and where buyers are less
inclined to be amused by a car's idiosyncrasies!
 
My Dad worked for Triumph
(unfortunately not in a capacity which gave him the insight to answer this
current million dollar question of the 6pack list!) and drove his new PI TR6
(in the early 70s in UK) over the Pyrenees, and had a hell of a time with the
car sputtering and losing power as the altitude increased, exhaust pipes black
with soot, etc.  That would be big trouble with US buyers!
 
Tim

From: Jim
Jones <jimjcmo at yahoo.com>
To: Sally or Dick Taylor <taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com>;
Ashford Little <70tr6 at comcast.net> 
Cc: John Cyganowski <janah at att.net>;
"6pack at autox.team.net" <6pack at autox.team.net> 
Sent: Wednesday, January 16,
2013 3:15 PM
Subject: Re: [6pack] TR5 and TR250

True that. MY dad had a 1970
Sedan de Ville with the Caddy 472 V8. I never
knew what its numbers were, but
that was a torque beast. Hard to imagine the
emissions that car produced.

Jim
Jones

Jones Beltone Hearing and Audiology

Jefferson City, MO

--- On Wed,
1/16/13, Ashford Little <70tr6 at comcast.net> wrote:

From: Ashford Little
<70tr6 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
To: "Sally or Dick
Taylor" <taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com>
Cc: "John Cyganowski" <janah at att.net>,
"6pack at autox.team.net"
<6pack at autox.team.net>
Date: Wednesday, January 16,
2013, 1:41 PM

Yeah, hard to imagine a 440 6-Pack would pass even a gas
station... not to
mention almost any other big block motor in the US.

My
first "car" was actually a yacht of the land variety.  1971 Mercury
Marquis. 
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention my father ordered it with the 429ci
Mach One
motor.  Pass an emissions test.  Yeah right.

Ashford Little
70tr6 at comcast.net
On Jan 16, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Sally or Dick Taylor <taylorturbo6 at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> John makes a good point. In 1968 the US were selling muscle cars
with big
> cams, multi carbs and high compression. These faced no government
restrictions
> until later on.

From 70tr6 at comcast.net  Thu Jan 17 11:38:35 2013
From: 70tr6 at comcast.net (Ashford Little)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:38:35 -0500
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358447308.89445.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <3EC02700-AD32-40F2-A3B1-4435B2CFE349@comcast.net>
	<1358367354.66930.YahooMailClassic@web142703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<1358372076.74582.YahooMailNeo@web163505.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<1358447308.89445.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1D261D88-AF06-4CA3-A25C-22AC516DF6C4@comcast.net>

> My Dad worked for Triumph
> (unfortunately not in a capacity which gave him the insight to answer this
> current million dollar question of the 6pack list!) and drove his new PI
TR6
> (in the early 70s in UK) over the Pyrenees, and had a hell of a time with
the
> car sputtering and losing power as the altitude increased, exhaust pipes
black
> with soot, etc.  That would be big trouble with US buyers!
>
> Tim


Hmm, which brings up another question to the uninformed (me).  How did the PI
system meter fuel?  Or why was it the higher altitudes caused issues?
Obviously the air gets thinner, and it didn't compensate, so what did the PI
lack that the carbs had to compensate for altitude?

Ashford Little
70tr6 at comcast.net

From jsvannorman at gmail.com  Thu Jan 17 11:38:20 2013
From: jsvannorman at gmail.com (John VanNorman)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:38:20 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Buckeye Triumph Swap Meet
Message-ID: <CAB=Dx7VXXkZyfU4UEJz=eOUBrBc5tVPAxAq93ygnJLdrTrG5dA@mail.gmail.com>

Hey everyone,

Buckeye Triumphs will be hosting its Third Annual Cabin Fever Swap
Meet on Feburary 9, 2013. We'll have various vendors from around the
area. Bring your British-related parts and pieces (and anything else
you have that your significant other wants you to clear out of the
garage)! If you would like to reserve a spot, please email
buckeyetriumph at gmail.com. Otherwise, it will be first come first
serve, so please show up early to get a spot.

Here is the info:

February 9th
10 to 3
Plain City Pastime Park Recreation Building
344 N Chillicothe St
Plain City, OH 43064

John

From tr6uo at aol.com  Thu Jan 17 12:02:14 2013
From: tr6uo at aol.com (Tr6uo)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:02:14 -0800
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <50F840F1.7070504@pobox.com>
References: <1358342837.78808.YahooMailClassic@web185002.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<50F840F1.7070504@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <7FFF8B92-4747-4F1D-BAD4-7DD270646C7E@aol.com>

I have to agree with Larry on this one. As I recall, the first attempts at
emissions control came in the form of PCV valves on '67 or '68 models sold in
California. I believe it was the most efficient way to detune the standard
spec for that limited market.

Steve Hollander
Sent from my iPad

On Jan 17, 2013, at 10:20 AM, Larry Young <cartravel at pobox.com> wrote:

> Sorry, there is no fable here. If you read a bit of history, you will
> find that the first real standards on tailpipe emission occurred in
> 1968.  Here are a couple references, which state:
>
> "The first legislated exhaust (tailpipe)
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaust_system> emission standards were
> promulgated by the State of California for 1966 model year for cars sold
> in that state, followed by the United States as a whole in model year
> 1968. The standards were progressively tightened year by year, as
> mandated by the EPA."
>
> At that time, the auto makers only tool for reducing emissions was by
> detuning.  Catalytic converts came about in 1975 and helped to reduce
> the amount of detuning required.  Electronic engine controls helped even
> more.  Those that mention muscle cars should notice that they began to
> decline about this same time and were then totally killed by the 1973
> oil embargo.  It's too bad Triumph didn't adopt electronic fuel
> injection once it was perfected rather than continuing to detune, then
> the TR6 and TR7 wouldn't have been such dogs.
>
> references:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_emissions_control
> http://www.autolife.umd.umich.edu/Environment/E_Overview/E_Overview4.htm
>
>
> On 1/16/2013 7:27 AM, John Cyganowski wrote:
>> In my humble opinion, the emmissions thing is a fable that was published a
>> long time ago and has become accepted fact.  First, in 1967 there was no
EPA.
>> EPA was begun in 1970 under President Nixon. Car emmisson standards (the
>> little that they had) came under the Department of Health Education and
>> Welfare (HEW). Oh for the days when government was not so bloated.
>>
>> I think the PI system needed altitude compensation in the US. This woulrd
have
>> cost more. But I don't think the PI system could not be tuned. That is
what
>> fuel injection is all about - delivering the right amount of fuel at the
right
>> time.
>>
>> The issue was sales.  McWilliam nixed anything he thought would be a
>> distraction to sales. The home market was small. The home market had
troubles
>> with the PI system, but the number of cars produced for that market was
small,
>> so the problems were managable. The North American Market by comparison
was
>> huge. McWilliams just did not want those issues. He was right.
>>
>> John Cyg.
>>
>> ________________________________________
>>
>> 6pack at autox.team.net
>>
>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/cartravel at pobox.com
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/tr6uo at aol.com

From mark at bradakis.com  Thu Jan 17 12:12:13 2013
From: mark at bradakis.com (Mark J Bradakis)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:12:13 -0700
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1D261D88-AF06-4CA3-A25C-22AC516DF6C4@comcast.net>
References: <3EC02700-AD32-40F2-A3B1-4435B2CFE349@comcast.net>
	<1358367354.66930.YahooMailClassic@web142703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<1358372076.74582.YahooMailNeo@web163505.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<1358447308.89445.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<1D261D88-AF06-4CA3-A25C-22AC516DF6C4@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <50F84D0D.9070504@bradakis.com>

Ashford Little wrote:
> Hmm, which brings up another question to the uninformed (me). How did 
> the PI system meter fuel? Or why was it the higher altitudes caused 
> issues? Obviously the air gets thinner, and it didn't compensate, so 
> what did the PI lack that the carbs had to compensate for altitude?
It was simple mechanical injection - the same dose of fuel regardless of 
barometric
pressure.  So as the air got thinner, with less and less oxygen, the air 
fuel ratio gets
screwed up.

The constant depression type carbs like SUs and Strombergs would not 
raise the
pistons as much in thinner air, which limited the amount of fuel getting 
mixed in,
so they dealt with altitude changes more readily than simple PI.

mjb.

From janah at att.net  Thu Jan 17 12:36:19 2013
From: janah at att.net (John Cyganowski)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:36:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
Message-ID: <1358451379.88197.YahooMailClassic@web185004.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

I did not say there were not any emissions regulations in 1968.  What I said
was that there was no EPA until 1970 and what federal regulations there were,
came under HEW. I did not think about California regulations, but they were
there and Cal. was a major market for Triumph.
 
I think the claim that Triumph NA passed on the PI system because they could
not get it to meet emmission standards is the "fable".  If you can do it with
carburators, it can certainly be done with PI.  Would it have cost more? 
Perhaps. I contend the real reason is that mechanical fuel injection was fussy
and the real issue was concern over endless service issues and complaints
leading to a bad reputation and deflated sales.
 
John Cyg

From cartravel at pobox.com  Thu Jan 17 13:12:29 2013
From: cartravel at pobox.com (Larry Young)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:12:29 -0600
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
In-Reply-To: <1358451379.88197.YahooMailClassic@web185004.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <1358451379.88197.YahooMailClassic@web185004.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <50F85B2D.7050601@pobox.com>

Yes, I understand what you said.  My point is that there were Federal 
standards imposed on exhaust emissions and they were achieved by 
detuning,  It may have been possible to achieve the standards by 
detuning a PI system, but they might have ended up with an 80 hp car.  I 
don't know the answer to that.  Granted the standards were nothing like 
they are today, but the technology wasn't there either.


On 1/17/2013 1:36 PM, John Cyganowski wrote:
> I did not say there were not any emissions regulations in 1968.  What I said
> was that there was no EPA until 1970 and what federal regulations there were,
> came under HEW. I did not think about California regulations, but they were
> there and Cal. was a major market for Triumph.
>   
> I think the claim that Triumph NA passed on the PI system because they could
> not get it to meet emmission standards is the "fable".  If you can do it with
> carburators, it can certainly be done with PI.  Would it have cost more?
> Perhaps. I contend the real reason is that mechanical fuel injection was fussy
> and the real issue was concern over endless service issues and complaints
> leading to a bad reputation and deflated sales.
>   
> John Cyg
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/cartravel at pobox.com

From emcguirk at optonline.net  Thu Jan 17 21:40:28 2013
From: emcguirk at optonline.net (Ed McGuirk)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 23:40:28 -0500
Subject: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
Message-ID: <50F8D23C.1020303@optonline.net>

If you look into the innards of the PI and the CV carb, you'll see that the PI only knows about engine vacuum while the CV carb only knows about the volume of air ingested.

The PI will give you the same amount of fuel per engine revolution at 10 inches of vacuum for 1000 RPM and also 10 inches of vacuum at 3000 RPM. If you look at how modern fuel injectors work, you will see that an engine wants very different amounts of fuel per engine revolution for those two situations due to better breathing (volumetric efficiency) at 3000 RPM.

Meanwhile the CV carburetor will try to give you the same amount of fuel for light load high RPM and heavy load low RPM. The engine wants different mixtures for these two situations but the differences are usually smaller.

In other words, the PI assumes a dead flat torque curve while the CV carburetor assumes that the engine has the same torque curve shape with the throttle closed and throttle open.

Variations in altitude will also be covered better on the CV carb by simply adjusting the needle while the PI control unit has to have all its concentric spring perches individually re-calibrated (a guess on my part).

Until better fuel injection came along that could meter fuel based on both vacuum and RPM (3d fuel map instead of 2d map), the CV carb just had better all-around drivability at the cost of worse ultimate power.

I would not be surprised if triple Strombergs could actually be better than the PI that came stock.

ed


Message: 2
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:38:35 -0500
From: Ashford Little<70tr6 at comcast.net>
To: Timothy Holbrook<tjh173 at yahoo.com>
Cc: 6Pack List<6pack at autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: [6pack] TR5 and TR250
Message-ID:<1D261D88-AF06-4CA3-A25C-22AC516DF6C4 at comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hmm, which brings up another question to the uninformed (me).  How did the PI
system meter fuel?  Or why was it the higher altitudes caused issues?
Obviously the air gets thinner, and it didn't compensate, so what did the PI
lack that the carbs had to compensate for altitude?

Ashford Little
70tr6 at comcast.net


------------------------------

From daybell7 at aol.com  Sun Jan 20 06:09:53 2013
From: daybell7 at aol.com (daybell7 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 08:09:53 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [6pack] Ignition Switch Removal
Message-ID: <8CFC52692241DF0-EE8-1626A@webmail-d095.sysops.aol.com>

Greetings 6-packers,

My 73' s ignition switch has finally reached the point where I think I should
replace it.  The key is so sloppy that I have to turn it a dozen times before
the starter will engage.  It won't start now when the starter does engage.

How do I remove the ignition switch?  I see the reference to the small screw
but can't find it.  I think the ignition switch can be removed separately form
the steering wheel locking mechanism.

Thanks for help in advance.

Steve Hughes
Gainesville, FL
73 TR6
72 B
68 BGT
59 Morris Minor

From tpdwinch at yahoo.com  Sun Jan 20 07:02:02 2013
From: tpdwinch at yahoo.com (Dale)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 06:02:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] Ignition Switch Removal
In-Reply-To: <8CFC52692241DF0-EE8-1626A@webmail-d095.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CFC52692241DF0-EE8-1626A@webmail-d095.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <1358690522.69899.YahooMailNeo@web125506.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

Steve
 
If the heads are still attched to the tamper proof bolts gently,
remove them. If not take a dremel and cut slots in them. With a rachet
screwdriver blade attachment then remove them or a square screwdriver blade
and a crescent wrench. This will give you the ignition switch and locking
mechanism. May need to rock the wheel while pulling down on the switch.
 
It
sounds like the electric part of the switch has failed as well. This is held
in place on the back of the switch with avery very tiny screw.
 
Good luck 
Dale


________________________________
From: "daybell7 at aol.com"
<daybell7 at aol.com>
To: 6pack at autox.team.net 
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013
8:09 AM
Subject: [6pack] Ignition Switch Removal

Greetings 6-packers,

My 73'
s ignition switch has finally reached the point where I think I should
replace
it.  The key is so sloppy that I have to turn it a dozen times before
the
starter will engage.  It won't start now when the starter does engage.

How do
I remove the ignition switch?  I see the reference to the small screw
but
can't find it.  I think the ignition switch can be removed separately form
the
steering wheel locking mechanism.

Thanks for help in advance.

Steve Hughes
Gainesville, FL
73 TR6
72 B
68 BGT
59 Morris Minor
________________________________________

6pack at autox.team.net

Donate:
http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums:
http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/tpdwinch at yahoo.com

From wmp at charter.net  Sun Jan 20 13:27:10 2013
From: wmp at charter.net (Bill Palmer)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 15:27:10 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Ignition Key and Steering Column
Message-ID: <CBDEB9D1-BFD6-4201-8775-B127C280638C@charter.net>

Steve,

When restoring my '73, I took the key assembly off the column,  Bought  
a new keyed switch and put it in my console.  What I call console is  
the panel which holds my radio.  If you look behind the console you  
will find two holes in the aluminum.  I drilled the foam and  
leatherette covering these holes.  Were a perfect fit for key and an  
electrical plug.  I never really liked reaching between my legs for  
the switch.

Locking steering wheels are just another place where problems can  
occur so mine no longer locks. KISS

Hope this helps

Bill

From brian at asmoothmove.biz  Sun Jan 20 13:51:11 2013
From: brian at asmoothmove.biz (Brian Alwin)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 14:51:11 -0600
Subject: [6pack] Ignition Key and Steering Column
Message-ID: <mailman.41.1358715336.1934.6pack@autox.team.net>

I have a 72 and did the same thing. I love it on the console. I made a wiring
pigtail so as not to destroy the original harness in case it needs to go back
to original.
Brian

From triosan at gmail.com  Sun Jan 20 21:37:53 2013
From: triosan at gmail.com (Chuck Arnold and/or Kathleen Kelley)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 20:37:53 -0800
Subject: [6pack] Tranny rebuilt problem looking for a solution
Message-ID: <CAMc4sNDFBRuCM7XDjfyFaQkGwULOa-ow5TUEoRWGDybcQyqicQ@mail.gmail.com>

spent the afternoon reassembly the tranny for my TR6.  All went OK till I
tried to put the countershaft back in.  The front thrust washer is hanging
down about a 32 of an inch and nothing I have tried can move it up that
little amount so the counter shaft can come through.  I presume the washer
has rotated a little such that the dimple is now not aligned with theslot
at the top.  anybody have any experience with solving this short of taking
it all apart again and reassembling?

From im_sloane at hotmail.com  Mon Jan 21 07:47:48 2013
From: im_sloane at hotmail.com (im sloane)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:47:48 +0000
Subject: [6pack] Ignition Key and Steering Column
In-Reply-To: <20130120205557.D25B1424C8@autox.team.net>
References: <20130120205557.D25B1424C8@autox.team.net>
Message-ID: <BLU171-W12022D41F13289292D1A0BF8E170@phx.gbl>

You could also drill an extra hole in your switch plinth or purchase a 5 hole
early plinth. My car is a 69 but a PO had put in a 4 hole plinth, car had no
heater valve control. When replacing the heater control, I figured out the
early cars had a 5 hole plinth. I just drilled a new hold in the center of the
4 hole plinth and it looks fine.  Key goes on the right.

Sloane :)
69-Six


>
> I have a 72 and did the same thing. I love it on the console. I made a
wiring
> pigtail so as not to destroy the original harness in case it needs to go
back
> to original.
> Brian
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net

From auprichard at uprichard.net  Mon Jan 21 08:55:02 2013
From: auprichard at uprichard.net (Andrew Uprichard)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:55:02 -0500
Subject: [6pack] [TR] Surrey top help needed
In-Reply-To: <8CFC57F7A5CBB97-1C2C-1BECE@webmail-m045.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CFC57F7A5CBB97-1C2C-1BECE@webmail-m045.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <02de01cdf7ef$b0298d50$107ca7f0$@uprichard.net>

Not an expert, but see below for what I know.  
Andrew Uprichard

-----Original Message-----
From: triumphs-bounces at autox.team.net
[mailto:triumphs-bounces at autox.team.net] On Behalf Of Steve Thornton
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 6:46 PM
To: triumphs at autox.team.net; 6pack at autox.team.net
Cc: bill.davis at wku.edu
Subject: [TR] Surrey top help needed

Hello List-



I purchased a surrey top for my TR250 this weekend, after a long search for
one. It came with the back section and a steel mid section.

My questions are-

1. What is the best way to store them when not in use?
The back section isn't really designed for on and off, since it requires
removing the interior panels to access the securing bolts and the door gap
trim is continuous across the top itself.  Can't speak for the mid-section
since mine is soft.  

2. Do you have to take the convertible top and frame off to install the
surrey top?
Yes - and you will have much more shoulder room.

3. Does anyone have a set of surrey top installation instructions?
Not that complicated. I have pics is you want to contact me off-line

4. Does anyone know of a source for the soft top midsection and the frame
that goes with it?
I got mine from Racetorations (disclaimer - my cousin is the owner)


Many thanks in advance.




Steven O. Thornton
Attorney at Law
1011 Lehman Avenue
Suite 102
Bowling Green, KY   42103


270-781-6630

** triumphs at autox.team.net **

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe/Manage:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/triumphs/auprichard at uprichard.net

From apackard68 at att.net  Mon Jan 21 09:45:37 2013
From: apackard68 at att.net (Andy Packard)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 08:45:37 -0800
Subject: [6pack] [TR] Surrey top help needed
In-Reply-To: <02de01cdf7ef$b0298d50$107ca7f0$@uprichard.net>
References: <8CFC57F7A5CBB97-1C2C-1BECE@webmail-m045.sysops.aol.com>
	<02de01cdf7ef$b0298d50$107ca7f0$@uprichard.net>
Message-ID: <B6FCBF50-6F55-44D5-A243-1CBB6F482985@att.net>

I bought my soft surrey and ladder frame from TRF. My mother in law made me a
long slender canvas bag to store the top and frame in the trunk. I don't have
a hard top section.

Mine is a TR250 too and I love the extra space on the back shelf, but I need
the windows up on the freeway to keep the wind from hitting the exact same
spot on the back on my head over and over.
Toughest part of the install are the studs at the corners and the nuts that go
on them. It is definitely a permanent install though sine the convertible top
is gone and the trim is one long continuous piece from A pillar to A pillar.

Andy Packard
Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 21, 2013, at 7:55 AM, "Andrew Uprichard" <auprichard at uprichard.net>
wrote:

> Not an expert, but see below for what I know.
> Andrew Uprichard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: triumphs-bounces at autox.team.net
> [mailto:triumphs-bounces at autox.team.net] On Behalf Of Steve Thornton
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 6:46 PM
> To: triumphs at autox.team.net; 6pack at autox.team.net
> Cc: bill.davis at wku.edu
> Subject: [TR] Surrey top help needed
>
> Hello List-
>
>
>
> I purchased a surrey top for my TR250 this weekend, after a long search for
> one. It came with the back section and a steel mid section.
>
> My questions are-
>
> 1. What is the best way to store them when not in use?
> The back section isn't really designed for on and off, since it requires
> removing the interior panels to access the securing bolts and the door gap
> trim is continuous across the top itself.  Can't speak for the mid-section
> since mine is soft.
>
> 2. Do you have to take the convertible top and frame off to install the
> surrey top?
> Yes - and you will have much more shoulder room.
>
> 3. Does anyone have a set of surrey top installation instructions?
> Not that complicated. I have pics is you want to contact me off-line
>
> 4. Does anyone know of a source for the soft top midsection and the frame
> that goes with it?
> I got mine from Racetorations (disclaimer - my cousin is the owner)
>
>
> Many thanks in advance.
>
>
>
>
> Steven O. Thornton
> Attorney at Law
> 1011 Lehman Avenue
> Suite 102
> Bowling Green, KY   42103
>
>
> 270-781-6630
>
> ** triumphs at autox.team.net **
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe/Manage:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/triumphs/auprichard at uprichard.net
>
> ________________________________________
>
> 6pack at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/apackard68 at att.net

From sutherlandha at aol.com  Mon Jan 21 14:39:26 2013
From: sutherlandha at aol.com (Hugh Sutherland)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:39:26 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [6pack] Any hard tops out there?
Message-ID: <8CFC636EB512041-1724-A9E0@webmail-d076.sysops.aol.com>

All-
I am on the hunt for a hard top for my 76 BRG TR6. Any leads would be
appreciated.

Thanks,


Hugh Sutherland
Alexandria VA

From colinthom at shaw.ca  Tue Jan 22 12:22:28 2013
From: colinthom at shaw.ca (Colin Thom)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:22:28 -0800
Subject: [6pack] Any hard tops out there?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.12.1358881203.20162.6pack@autox.team.net>
References: <mailman.12.1358881203.20162.6pack@autox.team.net>
Message-ID: <001601cdf8d5$d1737660$745a6320$@ca>

Hi Hugh,

I've got one but it's here in Vancouver, BC..that's a long way from
Virginia. Keep it up your sleeve in case you can't find one closer to home.
It's in reasonable shape but you'd probably want to replace the headliner if
you want it to be perfect. It's primer grey and is missing a chrome trim
piece on the right side if memory serves me. It's in the rafters of a
buddy's garage and it's been a loooong time since I looked at it but it's
here.

Colin '75

-----Original Message-----
From: 6pack-bounces at autox.team.net [mailto:6pack-bounces at autox.team.net] On
Behalf Of 6pack-request at autox.team.net
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:00 AM
To: 6pack at autox.team.net
Subject: 6pack Digest, Vol 5, Issue 14

Send 6pack mailing list submissions to
	6pack at autox.team.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/6pack
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	6pack-request at autox.team.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
	6pack-owner at autox.team.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of 6pack digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Any hard tops out there? (Hugh Sutherland)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:39:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Hugh Sutherland <sutherlandha at aol.com>
To: 6pack at autox.team.net
Subject: [6pack] Any hard tops out there?
Message-ID: <8CFC636EB512041-1724-A9E0 at webmail-d076.sysops.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

All-
I am on the hunt for a hard top for my 76 BRG TR6. Any leads would be
appreciated.

Thanks,


Hugh Sutherland
Alexandria VA


------------------------------

_______________________________________________
6pack mailing list
6pack at autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/6pack


End of 6pack Digest, Vol 5, Issue 14
************************************

From dctr6 at optonline.net  Mon Jan 28 09:46:26 2013
From: dctr6 at optonline.net (dennis culligan)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:46:26 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [6pack] Anything "British" happening in/near Indianapolis?
Message-ID: <13d111c.133500.13c820d7ace.Webtop.13@optonline.net>

List -
   Looks like I will be here in Indianapolis for at least a week or two. 
I know it's
winter but is there anything LBC-related happening within an hour or two 
of Indy?
Thanks.
Dennis Culligan, not in Highland, NY / 1976 TR6 CF57948U

From n197tr4 at cs.com  Mon Jan 28 10:08:43 2013
From: n197tr4 at cs.com (Joe Alexander)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:08:43 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [6pack] Anything "British" happening in/near Indianapolis?
In-Reply-To: <13d111c.133500.13c820d7ace.Webtop.13@optonline.net>
References: <13d111c.133500.13c820d7ace.Webtop.13@optonline.net>
Message-ID: <8CFCB9142B107E1-160C-320DB@webmail-d021.sysops.aol.com>

Dennis, If you were in Iowa, we'd keep you busy.




Joe Alexander
A. R. E.
645 1st Street
Jesup, Iowa 50648
319.464.4711  (cell)
n197tr4 at cs.com





-----Original Message-----
From: dennis culligan <dctr6 at optonline.net>
To: triumphs <triumphs at autox.team.net>; 6pack <6pack at autox.team.net>
Sent: Mon, Jan 28, 2013 10:53 am
Subject: [6pack] Anything "British" happening in/near Indianapolis?


List -
   Looks like I will be here in Indianapolis for at least a week or two.
I know it's
winter but is there anything LBC-related happening within an hour or two
of Indy?
Thanks.
Dennis Culligan, not in Highland, NY / 1976 TR6 CF57948U

________________________________________

6pack at autox.team.net

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/n197tr4 at cs.com

From jsvannorman at gmail.com  Mon Jan 28 12:46:35 2013
From: jsvannorman at gmail.com (John VanNorman)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:46:35 -0500
Subject: [6pack] Anything "British" happening in/near Indianapolis?
Message-ID: <CAB=Dx7WyhKc8kPya7_Er9CzUGz8wtNZ68nBy4LLs==O0QvG5sw@mail.gmail.com>

 Dennis,

At about two and a half hours away from Indianapolis, it is farther
away than you may be wanting, but on Feb. 9th Buckeye Triumphs is
having our third "Cabin Fever Swap Meet."  More info here:

http://columbus.craigslist.org/pts/3551814351.html

John V.

>
> List -
>    Looks like I will be here in Indianapolis for at least a week or two.
> I know it's
> winter but is there anything LBC-related happening within an hour or two
> of Indy?
> Thanks.
> Dennis Culligan, not in Highland, NY / 1976 TR6 CF57948U

From oliv7219 at bellsouth.net  Thu Jan 31 03:52:50 2013
From: oliv7219 at bellsouth.net (Butch Oliver)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 02:52:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [6pack] (no subject)
Message-ID: <1359629570.58215.YahooMailNeo@web184704.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

http://www.lautzert-oberdreis.de/images/yourpoint.php


================
Butch Oliver