skodajag Posted January 5 Report Share Posted January 5 I’m interested to know whether TR2 owners stick with the low port head or replace it with one of the later high port ones. I realise the later heads, along with the larger carbs, have the advantage of giving bit more power, and back in the day we tended to retrofit them to TR2's. But those first low port heads gave a remarkable fuel economy, which, in retrospect, might be regarded as a very real practical advantage of originality? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lebro Posted January 5 Report Share Posted January 5 (edited) To be honest, the high port head can be just as economical as the low port - it's all down to how you drive it ! My high port '3 has given 42MPG on long runs Bob Edited January 5 by Lebro Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BlueTR3A-5EKT Posted January 5 Report Share Posted January 5 I think it is also a fact that smaller carbs are fitted that contribute significantly to the better fuel economy if the car is not driven very hard. Not a scientific test I know but back in 1975 I fitted the low port head and H4 carbs from my TR2 engine to my TR3A This replaced a high port head with H6 carbs. The reason was to help solve the smoking from the engine, probably Valve guides I thought. The instant change from around 200 miles to a tank of fuel to 300 miles to the tank full was a remarkable town driving commuting success. I had recovered the economy that my TR2 delivered and was now experiencing it on my TR3A. The smoking engine improved slightly but new pistons and liners were the solution. I did not notice any deficiency in the car’s performance with the smaller carbs and low port head. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ianc Posted January 5 Report Share Posted January 5 The TR2 with bog standard set-up not only delivers excellent economy, but has amazing torque at low revs. My old TR2 would ascend from Wandsworth up the rise to Wimbledon Common in overdrive top, pulling a ridiculous 1250 rpm on its 3.7 axle. And it would cruise the M1 on its very worn engine at a then-legal 100 mph. Engine made a terrible rattling noise on start-up and oil pressure was pathetic, but it kept going! ian Cornish Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John McCormack Posted January 7 Report Share Posted January 7 I have the fortunate experience to have all three head/carbie combinations in my three sidescreens. My daily driver TR2 has a high port and head and 1 3/4" SUs. The concours TR2 a low port head and 1 1/2" SUs. The TR3 its original low port head with 1 3/4" SUs. The concours TR2 performs as well as the other two. It provides excellent torque and for general around town and freeway driving gives nothing away to the other two. Economy is better too. The concours TR2 is for sale. I never intended to nor can I justify having three sidescreen TRs. I struggle to keep the maintenance up to them plus a TR6 let alone use them as much as I should. 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.