[Fot] drag co-efficient and frontal area data for selected Triumphs

[Larry Young]

The TR3 test was for a small mouth.

All of these early road tests seem to have used a 3.7 rearend.  Based on 
the graphs in the articles, 3.7 OD was perfect for the Jabekke runs (max 
power at max speed).  In stock trim, it looks like a 4.1 rear would have 
been better.  In fact, I thought many/most of the early OD cars were 
sold with a 4.1 rear. With the 3.7, 4th OD was too high and 4th was too 
low.  A 4.1 in OD might have cracked 110mph. You'd think Triumph would 
have capitalized on this.

Larry Young

Terry Stetler wrote:
> I believe the difference can be attributed to the TR-2's smaller 
> radiator opening.
>  
> That gaping maw on the 3 is pretty draggy.  (I never should have sold 
> my 2).
>  
> Terry Stetler