scousegit Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 Hi, I've owned YFM33L since April 1977, she was laid up in October of 1987 after several trips around the continent, slinging the PI and replacing with twin SU's via Cox and Buckles, new wings and so on. However, by late 1987 the tin worm problems had increased to such an extent that there was no option but to put her in garage and wait for better times. They arrived in September 2015 when, after a major heart attack earlier in the year, I decided that it was now or never so, I enrolled on a car restoration course at Liverpool City College. Later, I was able to change to a part time day course as well and, would you believe it, got a student loan as well! Now, I've decided to install triple Webbers. I can only see one potential problem at present and that is the wheel arch only has the short indentation in it, and as all (from what pictures I've seen), the other conversions appear to have the long version thus making the fitting of the Webber's a much easier proposition. My question is therefore is it possible to fit three Webbers in the short section or would it be advisable to remove the short section wheel arch and fit the extended version, should they be available of course? At present she is stripped down to a bear chassis and body so changing over would not present to much of a problem. All advice gratefully received. Jon Godsell. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
graeme Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 (edited) Hi Jon, Welcome to the Forum! The triple Webers will fit in the short cut out, however, I think it may restrict the type of airbox or filters you fit, if you intend to. Cheers Graeme Edited June 16, 2016 by graeme Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stuart Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 they do fit but like Graeme says you need to get the slightly thinner filters they are tight but its doable as you will find them fitted to quite a few 250`s as well. Stuart. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Hi Jon! Welcome to the Forum. I would now have to question the cost of putting triple DCOEs on a TR6? In my view, if you are going to spend that sort of money. I would consider the use of electronic fuel injection from someone like Emerald. DCOEs in my experience need a lot of re-tuning and are not designed for slow running. Yes they give the top end power, but so does EFI but EFI has the advantage smooth running from tick over to max revs and not to mention a lot less fuel used. Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tom Boyd Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Hi, Please see attached pictures of Webers fitted to a TR6 Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest ntc Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 How they should look with a proper manifold Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tom Boyd Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Explain a proper manifold please Neil Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest ntc Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Tom Look at the throttle bar mounts if you need to know more let me know Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tom Boyd Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 If that system works well for you that's great ???? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest ntc Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 It has for many miles Tom cheers you sync once and that is it done Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tom Boyd Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Same here mate. Looking forward to a beer with you at international Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest ntc Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Tom Tis about time we had a meet cheers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave McDonald Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 How they should look with a proper manifold Another one of your subjective comments Neil! See you next Monday at Lincs TR meet? Jon, No photos available but confirm several other comments that they do fit in wing with short indentation, although mine only have longish trumpets and no air filters. And yes they do impart significantly more power than Lucas PI. A fellow TR owner said to me several years ago "they'll pass anything except a filling station" but what the heck, the smile quotient is well worth it. Dave McD Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tom Fremont Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 I didn't know there were more than (2) manifolds out there ( CANNON and TWM ) - or did they saw off the throttle shaft mounts of a TWM? Short filters work fine with the older wheelarch. If you want more than 2-1/2" long there will be interference. I had my concours car's tweaked to provide a smidge more clearance yet look like it always did . Don't know about power, but fuel economy greater than or equal to LUCAS P.I. from what I've gleaned here. If not, their calibration isn't quite right ( often the idle jet, which governs cruising and light throttle below 3000 rpm ). Cheers, Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest ntc Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Another one of your subjective comments Neil! See you next Monday at Lincs TR meet? Jon, No photos available but confirm several other comments that they do fit in wing with short indentation, although mine only have longish trumpets and no air filters. And yes they do impart significantly more power than Lucas PI. A fellow TR owner said to me several years ago "they'll pass anything except a filling station" but what the heck, the smile quotient is well worth it. Dave McD Dave Then let the subject run and yes maybe Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jean Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Neil is right about the manifold with the correct throttle bar mounts, here a clearer picture of the TWM manifold.... spot the difference.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
scousegit Posted June 17, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Many thanks for all the advice and comments. I think I will continue with the fitting of the Webbers but it's still a long way off at present. I've had a look at the Emerald web site as suggested by Bruce but, quite apart from being a system I've never heard of. I suspect that's it's quite a complex system as well which, if it went down in some remote European location, would leave me stranded without the benefit of a paddle. That being the case I'll stick to something that's tried and tested. Jon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Jon, As its a long way off, you might also consider a supercharger, when Moss reintroduce the TR6 kit. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tom Fremont Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Hi Jon, You won't regret fitting the Webers if you get them sorted up front, and in the UK there are several experts who can do this for you. I did mine myself and have done over 113,000 trouble free miles on a very old set with brass throttle shafts. If you want to have a go calibrating DIY I'll be more than happy to suggest which bits to fit. If TRIUMPH had fitted these instead of the LUCAS P.I. the cars might be worth twice what they are today. Webers are hands down the most reliable and wear free component of the entire car. Besides which they are immune to altitude sickness . Cheers, Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TriumphV8 Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Webers are hands down the most reliable and wear free component of the entire car. Besides which they are immune to altitude sickness . I prepared a set on a Opel Corsa Cabrio, bought new in the early 80s. The engine got the Weber 40 DCOE and a 290 degree cam and was in use every sommer for more than 30 years and was never touched. I know this because my friend came up some years ago and told me that he managed to get everybody off the carbs and now we took the chance to see us again, talk a bit and have a look at the sync and idle setup of the carbs -not more necessary after 30 years in use- Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pinky Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Hi my handsome friends , I enclose pics of my triple webber set up, This engine has only completed 50 miles since the rebuild I need to put 500 miles on it so I can take it to the mainland to put it on a rolling road I finally got it running reasonable Pink Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave I O W Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Looks very nice Pink well done! Cheers Dave. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Hi Tom! Triumph did consider DCOE's along with Lucas PI for all 2.5L 6 cyl. TR's but BL JRT North America stopped that dead in its tracks because of cost, the car would exceed their target sales price and these systems were too complicated for their dealer network to service. Its not, as stated by many TR Gurus that the Lucas PI would not work in the North American Market! It was scuttled from day one! Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tom Fremont Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Hi Bruce, I think TRIUMPH did the right thing for the N. American market with the de-tuned TR250/6. These engines were pretty bullet proof and gave excellent service life to an adoring, if easily satisfied following. Due to the CP cam I don't believe anyone today, let alone then, could make it pass the emissions limits of the day with any type of fuel system. The CR cam was used successfully in the later emissions cars with Strombergs so I can believe the P.I. might have been capable with it ( 256 vs. 280 degrees of duration ). Given the Federal engines had to make do with 7.5:1 compression it wouldn't likely have given any more performance than the cheap Strombergs, so again TRIUMPH made their best move with what they had. As for the RoW market I don't know why triple DCOEs would cost more than the LUCAS P.I. with its metering unit and fuel distributor, etc. I reckon the politics of domestic supply won the day, to the detriment of the system reliability and simplicity. I'll bet the Honorary Chairman or his cohorts know... Cheers, Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted June 18, 2016 Report Share Posted June 18, 2016 Hi Tom! Following on from our threads, the 6cyl OHV engine was only meant to be a stop gap engine like the TR 250 model was. Triumph had a 2.3 / 2.6 OHC engine in development in the mid to late 60's and it was Federalised, I saw this engine on our test beds, as we had the contract to develop all the gaskets. But the BL Management decided that the Rover SD1 needed a straight 6 as well so it went to power that model and it never saw the light of day in the Triumph Models, as BL did not have capacity to produce enough engines for Rover and Triumph Models. This was the same problem that beset the Rover V8 engine being used in other BL Models. Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.