TR7

[Leothebear]

Saw a Triumph TR7, today in the local Tesco car park. First one I've seen in ages. What a veritable pile of poo that car was. Today's one looked in a real hurry to decompose.

What a sad end to the line of TR models that went before it. I suppose it was like a metaphor for the state of the UK car industry at the time.
Felt quite depressed (for a short time).

[ReformedCharacter]

Saw a Triumph TR7, today in the local Tesco car park. First one I've seen in ages. What a veritable pile of poo that car was. Today's one looked in a real hurry to decompose.

What a sad end to the line of TR models that went before it. I suppose it was like a metaphor for the state of the UK car industry at the time.
Felt quite depressed (for a short time).

One of the motoring journalists at the time of its launch described it as technically akin to a 2 door Austin Cambridge (maybe it was a Morris Oxford but they were essentially the same badge engineered car anyway). Perhaps a reasonable replacement for the MGB - but not as attractive - and certainly not a proper TR. IIRC the power was limited by the need to meet US pollution requirements.

Development story here:

https://www.aronline.co.uk/cars/triumph/tr7-tr8/the-cars-triumph-tr7tr8/

RC

[88V8]

I had a TR6 for some years, sold it in 2017. Now that was a car.

The TR7 imo is a ghastly ugly rotbox. Design-wise, everything that was wrong with the 'wedge' era.

Thankfully, they are becoming very rare; rot, complex repairs, low value. There was also a V8 version known as the TR8 which did at least make the right noises.

The TR Register has been trying to embrace the TR7 as a low-cost entry car for yoof. Like most classic car clubs, the membership is ageing along with the cars. But to me, it is has been and always will be just plain ghastly.

V8

[Mike4]

Saw a Triumph TR7, today in the local Tesco car park. First one I've seen in ages. What a veritable pile of poo that car was. Today's one looked in a real hurry to decompose.

It can't have been in that much of a hurry given it must have been at least 40 years old.

[Lanark]

Saw a Triumph TR7, today in the local Tesco car park. First one I've seen in ages. What a veritable pile of poo that car was. Today's one looked in a real hurry to decompose.

It can't have been in that much of a hurry given it must have been at least 40 years old.

I'll wager that not much of it is 40 years old, a good car if you really enjoy welding.

[AleisterCrowley]

I liked the flip-up headlights....
There was a similar Fiat in the 80s - X1.9 ?

[Mike4]

I liked the flip-up headlights....
There was a similar Fiat in the 80s - X1.9 ?

I first noticed flip-up headlights on a car back in the early 60s, on the Lotus Elan.

[tjh290633]

I liked the flip-up headlights....
There was a similar Fiat in the 80s - X1.9 ?

I had one of those with a W suffix number. That would be about 1981, I think. I bought it in 1989, and swapped it in 1993 for a Toyota MR2 of the first incarnation. The Fiat left a lot to be desired, but the MR2 was a real goer.

TJH

[bluedonkey]

Confession time. I owned a TR7, S reg. I was a mug, Arthur Daley at the second hand car dealership must have seen me coming. It was always a pleasant surprise when it actually completed a long journey without breaking down. One time on the M4, the problem wasn't that the car wouldn't start, but that it wouldn't stop! Not the brakes, but a stuck throttle cable which kept the car at about 60 mph. Had to just turn off the ignition and coast into the services.

[9873210]

I liked the flip-up headlights....
There was a similar Fiat in the 80s - X1.9 ?

IIRC flip-up headlamps were due to US headlamp regulations.

Up until about 1984 they required use of one of four sealed beam lamps and prohibited any aerodynamic glass cover. Flip ups could at least achieve a good Cd during the day.

[88V8]

And here https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/234080164360?hash=item368043da08:g:7A4AAOSwBQ1g5Zfy is a TR8.

They look less worse in dark colours, the bumpers slightly disappear.

V8

[88V8]

By way of irrelevant eye candy, this was our TR6

[ReformedCharacter]

By way of irrelevant eye candy, this was our TR6

Lovely looking car. IIRC early models had a lot of problems with the Lucas fuel injection. Motorsport had one for a long-term test and it spent quite a lot of time out of action due to injection problems and other issues. A friend of mine had one and was kind enough to leave it with me to look after, (ie start it regularly to keep it working). A very fond memory.

RC

[richlist]

Yes great looking car, I especially like the wheels.
But you can't get away from the fact t that they are old technology and lacking in many of the modern day features.

[Lootman]

By way of irrelevant eye candy, this was our TR6

Lovely looking car. IIRC early models had a lot of problems with the Lucas fuel injection. Motorsport had one for a long-term test and it spent quite a lot of time out of action due to injection problems and other issues

I had a Triumph 2500 PI around that time. Probably was the same fuel injection system and it was definitely a bit flakey. And whilst I could generally tinker and coax SU carburettors at the time, the PI systems were beyond my maintenance skills, so eventually I replaced it with a 2500 S, which wasn't as much fun but was more reliable.

The Stag was another good looking but flawed Triumph model from that era.

[ReformedCharacter]

Yes great looking car, I especially like the wheels.
But you can't get away from the fact t that they are old technology and lacking in many of the modern day features.

Yes that's true, but the fact that they lack 'modern day features' is part of the appeal and history of the vehicles to many owners. I used to know someone who owned a '30s era chain driven Frazer Nash and I don't think he would have been persuaded to fit a differential, opening doors or park-assist even though he had the mechanical skills to do so. He also drove the car regularly although not day to day. He had a TR4A and a Mini Cooper (the original one) for that. The fact that the vehicles are 'original' mean a lot to such people and the wheels fitted to 88V8's TR6 - although I like them, personally - would detract to those who appreciate the wire-spoked wheels which were fitted when the car was manufactured.

RC

[richlist]

Yes I kind of understand that people like old car s, even I sometimes mutter 'wow' when I see a great looking one. There are plenty of older cars that look fabulous parked up but id feel a bit apprehensive travelling in one without....seatbelts ? air bags, ABS, roll bar and. all with drum brakes.

Someone gave me a ride in a pre war Triumph a while back......ummm......40/45 mph, no safety features of any kind, totally unsuitable for modern traffic conditions etc. I hated the ride but great looking car.

[Leothebear]

One of the motoring journalists at the time of its launch described it as technically akin to a 2 door Austin Cambridge (maybe it was a Morris Oxford but they were essentially the same badge engineered car anyway). Perhaps a reasonable replacement for the MGB - but not as attractive - and certainly not a proper TR. IIRC the power was limited by the need to meetUS pollution requirements.



It was due to US regs that the E-Type morphed into ugly from being beautiful. If you didn't know better, you'd think the US enjoyed derailing British world beaters. That does not include the TR7 of course.

[88V8]

Oddly enough, the TR7 outsold the TR6.
140,000 against 95,000. But then the TR6 was old fashioned and the TR7 was modern! Moderne = good.

The TR6 Lucas mechanical injection system never made the US pollution regs. US cars had twin Strombergs and 30% lower power. Nowadays the system is well supported and pretty bomb-proof.

TR6, TR7, safety devices... seat belts... and that's it.
No other superfluous gizmos.
That's part of the attraction with classic cars.
They just go, steer and stop.
Our three cars we run now... the newest 1990... not even power steering or electric windows. Everything the car does is decided by the driver and powered by his or her muscles.

I used to run a 34 Lanchester as daily driver. Preselect gearbox, rod brakes, no belts of course. I wouldn't go back to a prewar car now. As Richlist says, 40/45mph isn't much fun when lorries are barrelling along at 60.
Keep up at the back there!

V8

[Lootman]

The TR6 Lucas mechanical injection system never made the US pollution regs. US cars had twin Strombergs and 30% lower power. Nowadays the system is well supported and pretty bomb-proof.

Although there are US federal regulations about emissions and pollution, specifically the Clean Air Act enforced by the EPA, the rules for which cars can be sold are at the state level.

What happens is that the rules are driven by the state with the strictest requirements which, for as long as I can recall, has been California.

Other states have more lenient rules. But as a practical matter car manufacturers are not going to make 50 variants of the same car and so they are all made to California standards and, ipso facto, they meet the requirements of all states.

There is no equivalent of a MOT test in the US. The various levels of government in the US do not care if your brakes, steering or suspension are faulty. But what you always have to pass is a "smog test". It's a nice little earner for everyone involved.