Jump to content

Fearsome competitor


Recommended Posts

Noting the preponderance of octagons in the top ten per the latest issue of TRaction competition reports, I wonder what gives?

When they were in production TRs enjoyed an image edge over MGBs - and today?

What are they doing to make such winners out of them?

 

Cheers,

Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites

its to do with engine size Tom, the MGB is under the 2 ltr capacity break and a TR at 2.2 ltrs  is over it.   Of course during period  road cars were seen in a different pecking order for sales.  The Sptifire  was a good alternative to the MG Midget/AH sprite, the MGB  and TR4 were pitted against each other.  GT6 v MGBGT  TR5 against MGC  with Jags E-type ruling the British Leyland roost.  And that in a nutshell is why we now drive Mazda MX5's  There were too many similar models chasing the same customers. The same goes for BL saloons too.  Rover 2000, v Triumph 2000  etc etc.   Throw in the mix of top heavy management with  directors for all the different BL marques then it was always going to end badly. 

hoges. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tom Fremont said:

Noting the preponderance of octagons in the top ten per the latest issue of TRaction competition reports, I wonder what gives?

When they were in production TRs enjoyed an image edge over MGBs - and today?

What are they doing to make such winners out of them?

 

Cheers,

Tom

Tom,

I take it that you are referring to TRAction 308, Sept 2018, page 58/59 reporting results of the Equipe GTS 30 min race and 3 hr relay?

These races were both run the same weekend at an MGCC meeting hence the preponderance of MGs. The paddock would be full of them. Lots of drivers compete in one series/championship and then enter such as the Equipe races as a second event while they are there. 

That and the fact that there were always more MGs built than Triumphs and also TRs are more expensive to build as a competition car, so less attractive to drivers on a limited budget. 

Dave McD

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tom,   i'm afraid Jellison is also right with his answer above.  The TR is a heavy car in comparison to the MGB .  The TR has to lug its girder chassis around  or to put it another way, it has the added weight of a heavy steel body on its chassis which does nothing for aerodynamics, acceleration or braking.   Now if Triumph had continued its experiment with fiberglass bodies as per the TRS of 1960/61 and made use of a full fiberglass bodyshell for the TR4 then things might be different.   I commissioned my own all alloy body for one of my TR4's  and that has reduced its weight considerably. but it would still find it hard to out corner an MGB  on the track and that is usually where a race is either won or lost. 

 

hoges. 

front ofs.JPG

Edited by Paul Hogan
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Paul Hogan said:

Hi Tom,   i'm afraid Jellison is also right with his answer above.  The TR is a heavy car in comparison to the MGB .  The TR has to lug its girder chassis around  or to put it another way, it has the added weight of a heavy steel body on its chassis which does nothing for aerodynamics, acceleration or braking.   Now if Triumph had continued its experiment with fiberglass bodies as per the TRS of 1960/61 and made use of a full fiberglass bodyshell for the TR4 then things might be different.   I commissioned my own all alloy body for one of my TR4's  and that has reduced its weight considerably. but it would still find it hard to out corner an MGB  on the track and that is usually where a race is either won or lost. 

 

hoges. 

front ofs.JPG

Why are the front wing vents down so low Paul? I take it the vents at the "B" post are for rear brake/diff cooling?

Stuart.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, stuart said:

Why are the front wing vents down so low Paul? I take it the vents at the "B" post are for rear brake/diff cooling?

Stuart.

Hi Stuart,  Yes the rear vents are for brake cooling but the front vents are to Michelotti's original design. and taken from his drawings.  The idea behind the car was to build a complete lightweight TR which Triumph could have built for competition.  It takes some styling cues from the TRS  cars with twin boot handles and a larger oil cooler box. I've also added a vent into the surrey top roof.  

rear.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can buy a new MGB monocoque shell from BMH and have a race car built for the up to two litre class for less money than building a TR which needs  a 2.2 litre engine to offset the weight and puts it in a class with Healey 3000s. In practise I am told a good TR4 will run away from a good MGB in a straight line but the B is faster round corners..Equipe GTS seems an excellent successful formula .Paul I really like the alloy body .Who made the panels?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This Weekend I've outperformed all MGs, with starting from very back of the grid and finished 5th overall.

43877924_10217424706870649_2948501546989

So it is a rumor that MGs are faster then TR's.

They are fast, but beatable.

Edited by MadMarx
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the UK we have a series called Equipe GTS where the cars run to FIA spec. [ with historic tyres ]   In this the TR  &  the MGB are very close and usually depends on the circuit as to which one comes out on top.

Very competitive and a high standard of drivers.

ROY

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please familiarise yourself with our Terms and Conditions. By using this site, you agree to the following: Terms of Use.