Tom Fremont

I use BP7ESs on my Webered TR250s, one with CP cam and the other with 1312 steroidal cam. They get changed every 30K miles whether needed or not. BP6ES ran white. Tom

I have a Racetorations header ostensibly made by Phoenix and some of the #1 inlet tract of my CANNON Weber manifold had to be ground away to clear it. Same thing happened on the next installation I did, which now has a GOODPARTS 6-3-1 header as the Racetorations left the mid range flat on that engine. No interference with the GOODPARTS, and it really did the trick on the mid-range. Moreover, the main system had to be leaned out 1 main step and 7 air corrector steps to restore the top end performance. Tom

New one on me too . The Webers ought to fetch strong money; they're vintage Italians dating back to the '60s with brass throttle shafts. OTOH, they've got strange bolts on top so who knows what has befallen them... Tom

I've got a couple of those, the one with the CP cam has done 93K miles with it so far but it does stink compared to the stock engine with 10/50/50/10 valve timing. It's simple to lean out the idle until it won't run, and go back to where it just will and prove the point. As for the P.I., wonderful as it is I have long contended that TRIUMPH fitting triple DCOEs would have made them worth 2-3X what they fetch today. Here's a look at a CP cam on Webers idling: Tom

I would suggest the exhaust stink of the CP engine is due to the valve timing ( lots of overlap ) and would require an afterburner to eliminate. Compared to the U.S. market low duration cam engines they are indeed stinky, and the exhaust is visible in bright sunlight when idling. More extreme cams than the CP don't need bright light! Dog slow as they are, the U.S. market TR250/6 get much better fuel economy and don't stink - that's got to be worth something. Tom

I used a 1/8" slice of copper plumbing tubing soldered on the end. Tom

The heavy black vinyl flaps on mine are in fact perforated there. If synthetic, the fabric can be melted at the hole's edges... Tom

Mine have a ~ 2" vinyl strip with a bead at the forward edge underneath; I suspect that's what that flap imitates. First one came from TRF circa 1992 and the other from Revington which has never been installed; the latter is made from a lighter weight vinyl and is whiter. I always thought the TRF supplied one conforms to the original; comments awaited! Cheers, Tom

4A seats and inlet manifold, but those are arguably improvements! Lovely car indeed. Cheers, Tom

For the world's finest: http://www.prestigeautowood.com/triumph_gallery.htm I have them in both of my '250s, one selected by the PO and one by me. Nothing like them! See the razor thin gap around the glovebox door. The one in my driver looks just as it did when it was new 23 years ago. Tom

What is similar is having my card charged before shipment was made, unique in my experience and it was Racetorations. I will never again deal with a supplier on those terms. Tom

The CP cam will deliver lower fuel economy than the CR; my guess is ~ 4 MPG overall. Duration is the reason; the more of this the lower the MPG. Headwork and exhaust system can add several HP; with CP cam mine gained a second in the 1/4 mile over unmodified head with 295 degree duration cam. I've been enjoying TR nirvana with my CP cam on Webers since 2000. To my thinking the CR cam doesn't take advantage of the 6 throttles provided. Cheers, Tom

Wear can account for several degrees at the crank. I have mine installed 3 degrees advanced to offset this, expecting that it will eventually be 3 degrees retarded by the time it is done. I have found that the clearance in the cam sprocket holes allows for at least 6 degrees of adjustment. No, the sprocket doesn't move on the cam if properly tightened, and if it's not the bolts will shear off anyway. It never occurred to me that TRIUMPH may have factored wear into the original settings. Cheers, Tom

I have that cam in my concourse car's engine. 41/71/71/41 valve timing, collision type, i.e. more lift than headroom in the combustion chamber. It is fed by Weber 40DCOEs with 32mm chokes on mine, and it does rip compared to the CP cam I have in my driver. Never dyno'd it but reckon it has to be good for 170 BHP conservatively. Supposedly this cam was developed by Racetorations, who supplied me (2) defective ones - the third I got from Piper directly and it has 5K miles on it now. It needs special springs and wide spring seats to cope with the lift; don't venture forth without these. Designation known to Piper is 1312@105. 200BHP+ is claimed to be achievable with this but may entail 7000 rpm capability and 2.7 litre displacement. Mine is only 0.030" overbored and stays below 6000 rpm. The idle can be brought to heel too ( on Webers, at least ) : Cheers, Tom

Hi Angus, Fuel consumption with the CP / TR5 cam should be ~ 24 mpg Imperial overall and 30-32 mpg highway with the injection dialed in. I say that because that's what I get with the same cam on Weber DCOEs, O/D and factory final drive and tire diameter. 90,000 miles and counting with that setup. Cams govern the fuel consumption, duration being the determining factor in inverse proportion. It's pretty amazing how the milder factory cams in the TRs deliver fuel economy up to 40 mpg Imperial, even the U.S. market 6-pot ones with O/D, highway use anyway. I remember reading how a TR2 or 3 got over 70 mpg ( Imperial, I assume ) in contests back in the day. FWIW, my 2016 Cadillac 2.0 T gets about 28 mpg Imperial overall though it does weigh 3300 lbs and with 20 psi of boost delivers 272 HP and 295 lb-ft of torque. Tom