<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">The TR6 rebuild requires special tools, and the cost of a rebuild was not far from the cost of replacing it.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Why replace with a Japanese part? Quality, cost, plus limited slip. We autocross this thing so that’s a valuable upgrade.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I agree in principle with your comment. I like the car to be “in keeping” with the original, at least period upgrades. I’m not a fan of, for example, modern engine swaps. You could, for example, say the same about wheels. Those original
wheels are poor quality, and refurbishing them is more expensive than replacing them. Same thing with the Nissan diff; much better quality and performance at a similar cost so that makes sense.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Triumphs <triumphs-bounces@autox.team.net> <b>On Behalf Of
</b>TeriAnn J. Wakeman<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, January 27, 2022 10:10 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> triumphs@autox.team.net<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [TR] [6pack] Rear end clunk<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 1/27/22 7:41 AM, dave northrup wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">We put a Nissan Q45 limited slip diff in our TR6. Extremely quiet and reliable. The old diff was howling so we had to do something!<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Had to do something? And you just couldn't rebuild it with new ring & pinion & bearings?????<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>In the late 80s my TR3's diff was screaming. The Ring & Pinion gears had worn to the point where the gears were sharply pointed. A rebuild with new gears left it quiet. A few years later British Frame & Engine had a sale on limited slips that fit the TR3,
so my 3 now has limited slip diff inside the TR3 axle housing. All without going to Japanese assembly swaps. I suspect your TR6's diff was quiet and reliable for decades before it wore out. If an assembly provides good decades long service before it wears
out, why not rebuild it to new spec instead of running out and replacing it with a non-Triumph assemblies?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p> TeriAnn<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>