TR GOLD

[Alec Pringle]

Hi Peter,

 

Forum is all too good at viewing half empty glasses and finding all the ways in which something might go wrong . . . . . .

 

Forget dreaming up all the possible ways in which a worthwhile initiative might fail . . . . we can all do that, and thereby ensure that absolutely sweet fanny adams useful ever happens.

 

Just for a change, could we focus on keeping it simple, and working together to achieve even modest increments of product improvement and recognition thereof ?

 

There is no magic silver bullet solution, there never has been and never will be, and nor could we possibly monitor in real time every TR related item let alone every batch produced.

 

Standard Triumph never managed that, and compared to Ford's FoMoCo, for example, Stanpart was all too often left wanting . . . and then some.

 

What we can do is to single out the best products for commendation and to identify those items most in need of improvement, focusing firstly for example on those MoT critical items needed to keep our cars on the road.

 

Rome wasn't built in a day, but it's lasted well, and all the oak trees I've ever come up with kicked off as little acorns.

 

No doubt there were plenty of scoffers who hooted at the thought of Rome being created as a town, let alone growing to a city at the heart of an empire, and no doubt we still have some amongst us who aren't able to relate acorn to oak. But such is life.

 

It's a bloody good job that we didn't have a Forum back in the 70s . . . . . we just had the correspondence column of Motor Sport and a bunch of young blokes and ladies who simply got on with the job of creating the TR Register, rather than wasting brainpower on all the reasons why not . . . .

 

Cheers

 

Alec

[rhino_mac]

Alec, you have just saved me 20 minutes of typing. My sentiments exactly.

If I came up with all the reasons why we couldn't start a cosmetics business (one of the most regulated industries I can imagine), then we never would have.

 

Same principal applies here. Death by committee........

[Peter Cobbold]

Alec,

For me realism takes precedence over ambition. And I regard my posts as realistic, if a tad overstated in places (maybe 15000 not 150000)

 

Wasting brain power is not my thing, I conserve as much as I can.

You do the forum a disservice.

The fora in classic clubs have made it easier to run an old motor than it ever was, and safer.

If all we had was TRA and TRG we'd be up sh8t creek pdq.

The forum is by far TRR's most valuable resource for spotting poor parts, poor suppliers, and the good ones.

 

 

My pennant is nailed hard and fast to the PQI mast.

PQI is what we need: nimble feedback to kill off rubbish parts before they contaminate our TRs.

I would put TRR resources into PQI and get the rubbish parts sorted first. And then, if there's a need, explore how TRG might, or might not, work. And Rome collapsed, did it not?

 

Peter

Edited November 11, 2016 by Peter Cobbold

[Ragtag]

 

So why don't we kick off some sort of TRG exercise by identifying items which are above expectation ?

 

Forget the income stream or commercial aspect, simply regard the highlighting of 'above standard' and 'sub standard parts' alike as part and parcel of the benefits of membership of the TR Register. The club acts as an impartial and honest broker, with no commercial involvements or potential conflicts of interest, seeking simply to identify the minorities of exceptionally good and of downright inadequate products offered . . . .

 

Or is that all too simple ?

 

Cheers

 

Alec

 

Brilliant. That would get my vote but unless Paul has had a massive change of heart, that isn't what TRG is about.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Ragtag

[peejay4A]

My view: Give Paul a chance to flesh TRG out. Too many people seem to be taking delight in pulling the rug out from under him and it's getting tired.

[Peter Cobbold]

My view: Give Paul a chance to flesh TRG out. Too many people seem to be taking delight in pulling the rug out from under him and it's getting tired.

He threatens PQI. So I respond with careful arguments. And he replies with flim-flam and flannel.

Peter

[peejay4A]

Let's agree to differ Peter.

[Alec Pringle]

I don't for one moment think that Harv threatens PQI, that's just unfounded paranoia.

 

We all accept that the PQI idea is good in principle, making it work in practice isn't so simple, but it's a work in progress that has at least made a start.

 

The board are in favour of pursuing the TR Gold idea as a general principle, so it has stimulated much discussion . . . . . and will doubtless stimulate a good deal more discussion, and as an idea it will progress through several evolutions before it is knocked into a practicable shape.

 

Meanwhile, constructive practical observations rather than endless negative comment and fanciful fears wouldn't go amiss.

 

Cheers

 

Alec

[Guest ntc]

+1

Peter if you want to the sort **** out be my guest , put up or !!!! up, things take time.

[ianc]

Those at the AGM may recall that, Chris, a very tall chap from Wensum who fettles a number of TRs in his part of the world, stated that there were suspension and electrical parts which were of inferior quality, and I have heard this from Chris before.

However, as far as I am aware, Chris has not communicated such problems to PQI - and I suspect that there are other members who have found a problem and not notified PQI. And as long as not notifying remains the norm, we won't progress as Ian Brown and Roger need EVIDENCE.

 

Going back some 4 or 5 months, my understanding of TR Gold was that a supplier would be required to part with cash to the TRR (a 4-figure sum was mentioned), then would get 3 pages of advertising in TR Action so as to publicise DISCOUNTED Gold items to members. I cannot see how this would benefit the supplier's bank balance unless he raised his prices in advance of the announcement in order to underwrite the cost of the bounty and the discount(s) as I cannot imagine large numbers of owners buying stocks of items on the off-chance that something will fail or need to be replaced in the next decade.

 

Frankly, if I were Martin Jay (Distributor Doctor), I wouldn't be bothering with TR Gold for rotor arms, points and capacitors (condensers) as everyone know that his kit is at least as good as the original Lucas offerings. Likewise, would Neil Revington bother to get his TR4A/250/5 sidelamp assemblies qualified as TR Gold? I think not.

 

Someone asked about rotor arms from the green Lucas boxes. Before Martin produced his red arms, I had 2 failures of the new Lucas versions. The second failure occurred when my car was at Revington's, and Martin (still working there at the time) told me of the problem and how he proposed to overcome it - which he did when he left Revington produced his own rotor arms shortly afterwards.

 

Ian Cornish

[Peter Cobbold]

Those at the AGM may recall that, Chris, a very tall chap from Wensum who fettles a number of TRs in his part of the world, stated that there were suspension and electrical parts which were of inferior quality, and I have heard this from Chris before.

However, as far as I am aware, Chris has not communicated such problems to PQI - and I suspect that there are other members who have found a problem and not notified PQI. And as long as not notifying remains the norm, we won't progress as Ian Brown and Roger need EVIDENCE.

 

Going back some 4 or 5 months, my understanding of TR Gold was that a supplier would be required to part with cash to the TRR (a 4-figure sum was mentioned), then would get 3 pages of advertising in TR Action so as to publicise DISCOUNTED Gold items to members. I cannot see how this would benefit the supplier's bank balance unless he raised his prices in advance of the announcement in order to underwrite the cost of the bounty and the discount(s) as I cannot imagine large numbers of owners buying stocks of items on the off-chance that something will fail or need to be replaced in the next decade.

 

Frankly, if I were Martin Jay (Distributor Doctor), I wouldn't be bothering with TR Gold for rotor arms, points and capacitors (condensers) as everyone know that his kit is at least as good as the original Lucas offerings. Likewise, would Neil Revington bother to get his TR4A/250/5 sidelamp assemblies qualified as TR Gold? I think not.

 

Someone asked about rotor arms from the green Lucas boxes. Before Martin produced his red arms, I had 2 failures of the new Lucas versions. The second failure occurred when my car was at Revington's, and Martin (still working there at the time) told me of the problem and how he proposed to overcome it - which he did when he left Revington produced his own rotor arms shortly afterwards.

 

Ian Cornish

Ian,

PQI's exposure in TRR has been pretty low key to date. My suggestion would be to re-launch it with an article in TRA, a pro-forma pull-out in TRA, a dedicated PQI section in the forum, and more exposure on the main website.

In driving home the message to suppliers that quality matters the PQI web site could publish lists of suppliers rated according to their performance in PQI. Three lists: the default list has all suppliers on it each with no PQI query (at first), the second list is those who responded effectively to a PQI queries, and the third list is 'could do better' ).

I have not discussed this with Ian or Roger, so there may well be holes in it from their perspective. But PQI has the potential for rapidly weeding out poor/unsafe parts identified by our membership of 6000. If only TRR would push it out to members effectively.

 

Peter

[rhino_mac]

I agree that TR Gold as a money making scheme is a dead loss. If TR Gold were to work then Martins rotor arms should be just be assessed and approved without him needing to pay anything. This would then acknowledge/reward suppliers for making quality parts

[mike3739]

This thread has had over 10,700 views so it is of interest & 236 posts.

 

Martin's red rotor arms are without doubt the best available & relatively inexpensive & have been talked about many times on the forum but I wonder how many TR owners still use other rotor arms?

 

Not everybody listens to reason they just carry on regardless I have come TR6 owners who still carry on with black Lucas ones!!

 

I may well be wrong but feel sure that not everyone who has viewed this tread or posted on it has a red one so to speak & if they take no notice of such a small item what chance do you have?

 

Cheers

 

Mike.

[cvtrian]

First of all, many thanks to everyone who voted for the motion regarding the SDF finances at the AGM, at least some positive progress was made to correct years of misreporting and the 2016/17 accounts should be a true reflection of the clubs position.

 

I'm not sure if PQI or the SDF are allowed to communicate to the members as they were directly stopped from doing so by Paul Harvey. We need to let the new board have the opportunity to sort out their stance regarding this impasse, and being realistic, until the new board have a meeting, nothing formal will happen.

 

That isn't stopping Roger or myself investigating and reporting issues, as you will have read via Richard's post about sidelight assemblies (although Richard hadn't even raised a PQI issue in the first place, Roger still evaluated the situation and reported back to Richard), but you won't read anything in TR Action until the relationship has been reestablished. The 4 pot crank development is still progressing, and we have broken some new ground by using laser scanning to produce dimensional drawings to help optimise the manufacturing chain (not cheap)

 

I was at the NEC today and had a chance to talk to Chris Turner and John Clancy about TR7 parts, with a following wind we may be able to make some progress and at least improve our knowledge and information. I also called off at the Rimmers stand and spoke to my contact there, suggesting I will arrange to meet him in the new year when we have an idea of what is urgent. I/we will also be checking with the specialists and other suppliers before making any decisions as to what we can support and with whom.

 

For those of you who don't know, Chris Turner and John Clancy are key people with the TRDC, and they are supportive of sharing ideas and information, and working with us for the benefit of ALL TR7/8 owners, and keeping these cars on the road, seemed like a good idea to me anyway although I know some within the TRR may not think so.

 

Looking forward to resolution of the issues with the new main board, but we haven't dropped the baton just yet!

Ian

[Alec Pringle]

Hi Ian,

 

of course it's a good move to liaise with Chris and John and the Driver's Club - well done ! Those within the club who think otherwise might kindly be described as idiot ostriches living in the past . . . .

 

it's also going to be important in the future to liaise with the other Standard and Triumph clubs, and even with some of the BMC and other BL clubs too. The TR7 and 8 shared a modest number of components with the Morris range, as well as with SD1 Rovers, and the smaller Triumph saloons.

 

Similarly TR2 through to TR6 shared a considerable number of components with the large Standard and Triumph saloons - Renown, Vanguard, Ensign, Sportsman, Barb and Innsbruck ranges . . . . . . as well as the small cars, from the Mayflower and Standard 8 through to the Herald and later Ajax saloon ranges.

 

Let's not forget other marques that utilised TR components to a limited extent - Reliant Scimitar, for example, and assorted TVRs.

 

United we stand, etc etc . . . . .

 

Cheers

 

Alec

[brian -r]

Perhaps a joint approach with other clubs could be a way forward. There are numerous complaints in the classic car press regarding poor parts for many makes.

 

Maybe a United approach would help persuade suppliers to up their game a cross the board,once parts become an issue some owners may well get fed up and move on to other hobbies.

 

Poor quality and incompatibility to some extent damaged the DIY market some years back

 

Brian

[Paul Harvey]

It is a great show.

 

Seeing is believing.

[TR NIALL]

It is a great show.

Seeing is believing.

It is a great show.

Seeing is believing.

Enjoy the Party.

[cvtrian]

There are some terrific cars and displays at the NEC, The TRR alone are associated with several stands, nice to see most of them grouped together, eg TRR main stand, Doretti, competition cars, and the Italia stand.

The younger TRR members (youth group) had their own stand in the pavilion, it was as far away as you could get from the majority of the Triumph stuff, but looked great amongst all the other car clubs youth sections.

 

We arrived at 10.00 am when the doors opened, and left around 4.30pm to beat the traffic (no chance), and only saw a fraction of what was on display, no time for restoration workshops or the live stage at all - far too much to see and do for just one day.

 

A HUGE THANK YOU for the very many TRR staff, officers and members for giving up their own time to put on a great show.

 

Ian

[TorontoTim]

Wrong thread?

[cvtrian]

Wrong thread?

Hi Tim

just following TR NIAL enjoying the party........appreciate there is another thread about the NEC

Cheers

Ian