Driving style

[Mark666]

Hi hope members can help after selling my TR4 my dream car but was ripped off by a TR member north Wales but hey ho I've test drove two TR6s and they drive worse or only as good as the TR 4 ie really bumpy and vague steering is this a trait of triumphs or are they the wrong cars to buy I'm not new to classics I've got a 1970 lotus elan for 8 years so are all TR6s like this 

[DaveB66]

Mark

The simple answer to your question is no, but it will never handle as well as your elan.

I have a TR6 and TR4 and the 6 is an all round smoother drive, which is why we use it for touring and the 4 for rallying. I suggest you go to your local TR Register meet and talk to the TR6 owners there, and perhaps get out in one or two. 

Dave

[John McCormack]

My PI TR6 with all new suspension bushes and rebuilt steering rack drives and handles superbly. But not as good as an Elan.

[matttnz]

There's a reason why the Elan was the inspiration for the MX5... Not many (any?) cars will be a fair comparison in handling, they're a different best.  But I wouldn't have thought that the TR6 should be significantly different from a TR4A apart from more nose heavy/understeer.  Perhaps you're driving the wrong cars/over-tyred/misaligned?

I like my 6.  The steering after getting after a modern car with it's electronic numbness is great and feels quite different to my 74 Alfa. Not different good or bad, just... different.  Lazy, torqe-y engine means relaxed driving but still for me, nimble around town.  Completely agree w the bumpiness, feels like a tent ontop of a tin can at times, the monocoque cars feel more "together"

For me, it's the design.  The Michellotti 4/5 is lovely but I prefer the 6 and something about it and it's interior works for me better than the Elan too (although that's a v pretty beastie to be sure).  There will be "better" handling cars available in any semi-modern used car yard, but I bet you won't be smiling in them the same way...

[Andy Moltu]

1 hour ago, matttnz said:

There's a reason why the Elan was the inspiration for the MX5...

 

I think they copied/were inspired by was its look.

Beyond that I heard that Mazda saw an opening left behind by the demise of the small, cheap British sports car.

The rest was always going to be easier to improve on than copy because of the monocoque design.

Apparently Mazda spent a deal of cash to make the exhaust sound like a British sports car.

[matttnz]

1 minute ago, Andy Moltu said:

I think they copied/were inspired by was its look.

I thought handling was part of it.  Probably the basic British car ethos with the Elan as the prototypical version

[TRTOM2498PI]

12 hours ago, Mark666 said:

Hi hope members can help after selling my TR4 my dream car but was ripped off by a TR member north Wales but hey ho I've test drove two TR6s and they drive worse or only as good as the TR 4 ie really bumpy and vague steering is this a trait of triumphs or are they the wrong cars to buy I'm not new to classics I've got a 1970 lotus elan for 8 years so are all TR6s like this 

A well sorted TR6, should drive & behave very well, despite what people say or contemporary road tests suggest. This is thanks to better springs, dampers, bushes, & so on you can now buy. There are so many variables as to why one may handle poorly:

1. Not assembled correctly.

2. Incorrect choice of dampers and springs.

3. Worn bushes & trunnions.

4. Worn steering rack.

5. Worn steering column bushes.

6. Old tyres.

4. Wheel alignment out.

 

 

With all of the above addressed, it will steering where you point it, & handling will be transformed beyond belief.

A TR6 is a much smoother drive & more compliant on UK roads, thanks to its IRS suspension compared to a live axle 4.

 

Cheers.

[Bfg]

From my perspective (as a former designer)..

The TR6, was cheap to buy and cost effective to repair (..for lower insurance premiums).  It was also Triumph's response to US demands for British sports cars to be more competitive with their home-bred muscle cars ..which really didn't have a good reputation for twisty road handling, and which - if sorted out to cope with that sort of road - were then uncomfortable. 

The TR chassis, even the IRS version, was designed along the principles of a cart.. whereby the chassis is designed to twist n' flex. To a large extent, that worked adequately well for the lighter, less powerful models, narrow wheelbase cars, but the slightly heavier six-cyl engine, and additional weight in trim & luggage capacity, and then very much more torque reaction through the drive train (150bhp / 160 ft.lb) and stylishly wide wheels.. all called for unduly stiff (less squat) springs which were difficult for the lever-damper to smooth out.

The TR4A-6's  IRS was a derivative of the Triumph 2000's IRS. But that car of course had a monocoque saloon body-shell, with bolt-on sub frames ..and it had room for long-travel suspension dampers. The Triumph 2000 Mk1's engine was quite tame at 90bhp / 115 ft.lb.  As such the car's suspension worked very well, especially regarding comfort and minimal noise ..by the standards of the day. 

Conversely, the Elan was developed through experience in sprint, hill climbs, and tightly cornered race-track circuits ..where its lightweight construction was designed also to be stiff ..and the suspension would have a fair amount of travel, with appropriate spring rates for the cars specifically lightweight mechanicals (105bhp / 108 ft.lb) which were much more easily controlled by its dampers.  In short, it was designed to handle in order for it to be competitive in racing, and that suspension also happened to work pretty well for comfort.

Following on the mindset ; that the TR6 is the muscle-car in the TR range, it follows that many owners (although not all by any means) have opted for the widest offset & biggest tyres they can fit, also bolt-on a few tuning-goodies ..to add a bit more umph, and then anti-roll bars, red polybushes, solid aluminium steering-rack mounts ..all to tart-up the specs as much as anything else.  However, I suspect very few have been professionally set up for comfortable, smooth and controlled road use, not least because these cars were mostly used for local-blasts fun ..and for many years now have been a second or third car to everyday transport needs.  

Having said that . . . .  I perceive that TR6's are seeing a change in use, whereby more and more are used for cross-country jaunts to shows, rally events, and for touring.  Many current owners, it seems, are moving away from those muscle-car aspirations in search of classic-car Grand-touring characteristics - whereby the smoothness & ample torque of the big-six, is being transmitted through more sensible proportioned tyres and more forgiving suspension settings.

I believe the TR5 and TR6 can be set-up to make excellent (motorway and trans-continental) GT cars, but you may have to look for one so set up, or reconfigure a coarser example yourself to achieve the same.

..just my opinion of course !!

Pete   

 

 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Bfg

[Tim D.]

Pete, your summary is great. 

I have had an elan and the lightness, rigidity of the chassis and long suspension travel makes for really nimble characteristics. 

In comparison the TR is more solid and agricultural. But it is nonetheless fun to drive and we have had great times in the alps and also on runs like the round Britain. 

It does seem to hold the road and I have never been worried about it sliding off the road. If I could change one thing it would be to add power steering. I have had a 2500 TC saloon and now have a stag and it revolutionises these cars. However is suspect it would just mean I put more turns on the wheel and get understeer.. at least with heavy steering it is more effort to get to the understeer. 

Tim

[CK's TR6]

Does an Elan handle better than a TC Europa? I drove a Twink for 9 years, across the USA and back, east to west and south to north, and was my daily driver. Stock except for the exhaust header. My 6 has poly bushes, lowering springs, front and rear roll bars, 16' wheels, autocross tires, Konis in front, World rebuilt levers in back, Toyo fourpots in front, Wilwood  discs in back, dual master cylinders from Goodparts, HD front axles and GP bearing spacers up front. It corners better than the twink, brakes better, has a ton more room, and isn't as stiff riding as the twink. BUT, it isn't as light on it's feet as the twink.  The twink was telepathic, the 6 is not. The 6 is much much more practical and is why I sold the twink and kept the 6 when I needed the money.

[Tim D.]

Mused on this over night. Think the key difference can be summarised as.  And elan you drive with your finger tips, a TR6 you drive with your biceps. 

Tim

[CP26309]

A new friend came for his ride in my TR6 (witch has standard 165 tyres, and rear lever shocks) and remarked how smooth and comfortably it rode over bumps and speed humps, unlike his Turbo Porsche which has a really hard bumpy ride due to it's low profile tyres, and his Morgan 4/4 too which has a solid back axle! Awful rides!  

[Tim D.]

3 hours ago, CP26309 said:

A new friend came for his ride in my TR6 (witch has standard 165 tyres, and rear lever shocks) and remarked how smooth and comfortably it rode over bumps and speed humps, unlike his Turbo Porsche which has a really hard bumpy ride due to it's low profile tyres, and his Morgan 4/4 too which has a solid back axle! Awful rides!  

Interesting. Took a friend to silverstone at the weekend in the TR6. He has a Morgan 4/4 and he thought that the TR was much better on bumpy roads. Not really a surprise as it is live axle rear and sliding pillar front. 

Tim