TR3A boot lid

[richard dooley]

I am trying to get my 3A boot lid for commission number c.27,500 back to the correct specification specifically the locks. The boot lid has top hat rather than tubular internal bracing. At the moment it has both corner budget locks and a central locking handle. It should not have the corner budget locks and the outer skin is easily rectified when removing the corner budget locks.

What I am trying to find out is what did Triumph do with the two internal budget lock mountings. I believe that they simply omitted the passenger side mounting but what did they do with the drivers side mounting which originally incorporated the rubber block for the boot lid stay? Did they just fit the original pattern mount ( minus the budget lock) or was there a different fitting used?

Any help would be much appreciated. Ideally, if possible with photographs.

[Rodbr]

If your car has commission number TS27500 it is 1958 car, as 1958 production covers the following TS25633 to TS41629 commission numbers.

 

Not sure what you are looking for but my car is 1959 some 40K more than yours so not sure how close it would be I can take photos it would help.

 

In my view it is part of the cars story and not that bad an idea to have all three. My TR2 has this and I will keep it. IMHO unless you are going class one Concours standard I would leave well alone and revel in the difference.

Br

Rod

Edited August 2, 2018 by Rodbr

[Lebro]

The rubber block is at the hinge end surely ?

 

Bob.

[Charlie D]

Bob,

 

Interesting you say that. Mine is at the other end.

 

I was going to start a thread on the very topic last week but did not get around to it.

 

To have the rubber block at the “Non hinge” end seems totally illogical, but there it is.

 

I guess it is some sort of design fault.

It means that all the weight of the lid is being forced on the hinge pin (If you see what I mean.).

 

The bonnet has the weight at the front of the “Lid” supported by the stay.

 

The boot has the weight of the “Lid” unsupported, just waving in the wind.

 

Just seems wrong to me.

 

 

Charlie.

[iain]

This is correct...if illogical!

[RobH]

Its not illogical. If the rod were hinged at the top it would have to be a third longer again in order to hold the lid as far open; and then you would have difficulty stowing the rod to close the lid as it would be longer than the lid itself.

[Lebro]

Humble pie time, just had a look & mine is attached to the RH lock after all

 

sorry to mislead.

 

Bob.

 

When I'm wrong I say I'm wrong (Dirty Dancing)

Edited August 3, 2018 by Lebro

[BlueTR3A-5EKT]

Its not illogical. If the rod were hinged at the top it would have to be a third longer again in order to hold the lid as far open; and then you would have difficulty stowing the rod to close the lid as it would be longer than the lid itself.

It is a brilliant design that does not encroach on the already small boot area. The return hook on the end catches into the groove bracket in the rain channel to both hold the boot lid up and stop it over opening if the wind catches the open lid.

 

Peter W

 

PS Yes - care should be taken when using the stay if the boot rack is fitted and loaded.

Edited August 3, 2018 by BlueTR3A-5EKT

[iain]

Ok I'll eat some humble pie too..it's not illogical .....its an engineering necessity

[Charlie D]

OK, point taken about the length of the stay, I hadn’t thought of that.

(Although the stay could have been stowed width-ways and have been made a longer length…)

 

I’ll agree that it is not illogical after all.

 

But it is also a good example of how a crowbar works if you wanted to use one to snap the RH boot hinge at the pin.

(The boot lid being the crowbar, and the point where the stay joins being the fulcrum.)

 

I wonder what the ratio of broken RH boot hinges to LH boot hinges is?

 

 

Charlie.