TR8's, barf or bouguet?

I shouldn't have watched all thise youtube vids on TR8's the other night. As I keep toying with the dea of giving up my completely reliable loveable '91 MX5 with about 95k on it for some ridiculous hideous time and money sponge to go with the other sponge('60 MGA) I was looking at TR8's. Yes, somewhat homely, but so is/was the Daimler Dart SP250 which also has a great engine. There still seem to be deals out there on decent 8's(I'd love to find one of the early conversion coupes). What's the consensus out there on driveability and reliability on these? The original roadtest reports on these were all quite favourable. Could it be trusted as an occassioanl summer roadtrip sports car?

If I could ever get close enough to one without retching, I'd let you know how they drive, but I haven't been successful yet.

The worse thing about the TR cheese wedges was the engine. It had no interest in running for any length of time and the design was up there with the Vega in terms of poor engineering. The car itself was quite pleasant to drive and feels eons more modern than the MGB. I would think that the V8 would make a great cruiser. The engine itself is well established as a reliable mill.

If you really want a cheese wedge, get an MR2

Go for a ride in one and talk to an owner of one. You'll buy one after that. Ride quality on long trips and daily commutes is very comfortable. You can keep them somewhat docile and comfy or you can raise the performance level to extreme. TR8s are fantastic modern cars compared to a MG. This is advice coming from someone who has owned a dozen or so of both. Coupes are very hard to find. Only around 400 were made, and I've wrecked 2 of those on the race track. I guess you could say the covertibles are rare as well. Only 2400 or so of those were made. If you want a seriously modified TR8, my advice is to either buy one all ready built or start with a TR7 shell and build it the way you want. Starting with a nice TR8 driver and swapping everything out gets pricey.

Tr8todd has about 6 of these and I must admit they are fine cars. I don't want one right now as I need a rear seat but if I could get away with it they are a fine choice. An upgrade on the carb is a must it seems as Todd doesn't have one that still sports the stock carbs.

I drove a TR-7 for about a year or so. I loved the way it handled. After adding a little power, it was a ton of fun. With a lot more kick, it should be even more fun!

NOHOME wrote: The worse thing about the TR cheese wedges was the engine. It had no interest in running for any length of time and the design was up there with the Vega in terms of poor engineering. The car itself was quite pleasant to drive and feels eons more modern than the MGB. I would think that the V8 would make a great cruiser. The engine itself is well established as a reliable mill.

Not sure if you are thinking of the Triumph 3.0 V8 but these had the very nice and reliable 3.5 Rover V8 the rights to build came from the Good Ole USA

aussiesmg wrote:

NOHOME wrote: The worse thing about the TR cheese wedges was the engine. It had no interest in running for any length of time and the design was up there with the Vega in terms of poor engineering. The car itself was quite pleasant to drive and feels eons more modern than the MGB. I would think that the V8 would make a great cruiser. The engine itself is well established as a reliable mill.

Not sure if you are thinking of the Triumph 3.0 V8 but these had the very nice and reliable 3.5 Rover V8 the rights to build came from the Good Ole USA

Yep. Used to be known as the BOP (Buick Olds Pontiac) 215 V8. I think they simultaneously sold the rights to Jeep and British Leyland...

NOHOME wrote: The worse thing about the TR cheese wedges was the engine. It had no interest in running for any length of time and the design was up there with the Vega in terms of poor engineering. The car itself was quite pleasant to drive and feels eons more modern than the MGB. I would think that the V8 would make a great cruiser. The engine itself is well established as a reliable mill.

Make up your mind. Is it a good engine or bad?

I had a Vega and don't think any engine has been as bad as that one.

If you want to save some money, buy a TR7 and put in one of the V6 conversions.

It's a good engine in that it's light, been around long enough to have parts or enough range rovers and discos to donate theirs. It's cubic $$$ more than a SBF or SBC to get a bunch of power out of it. As a cruiser - sure. If you want a wedge with a bunch of power - TR7 w/LSx

In reply to 60mga:

Bouguet? Wha?

I test drove a couple of TR8's when they were new, and have spent some time in one since, and I love them. They are far, far better cars than any previous Triumph in my opinion in terms of build quality and driveability.

From what I understand, changing the carbs out to a Holley is a good move in power and reliability, but the engine is basically as sound as an American V8 of the period, and is actually a little better developed than when GM used it. I owned an '80 TR7 and they far more reliable and TONS better drivers!

Also, very comfortable cars for touring and extended trips, great seats!

I'm a TR8 owner. I've owned a lot ot classics in the past but consider my TR8 a keeper. Only 2800 were made so they are eventually going to be worth a lot more than they are now. I love driving it. Compared to my old Sunbeam Tiger its night and day. The TR8 is almost like a modern car even though its 30 yrs old.

The V8 engine is superb. Replace the Strombergs with a Holley and add headers and you've got a preformer. The engine was a GM Oldsmobile/Buick design and was GM's first aluminium block and their smallest ever V8 at 3.5 litres (215 cu inches)

The TR8 proved itself on the race track - faster than the Detroit iron in Trans Am and the Porsches in IMSA, as well as SCCA C-prod and then GT-1 championships.

The TR8 (and later TR7's) get a bad rap because of the original TR7's made in the Speke plant near Liverpool. The factory was a hotbed of radical unionism in the 70's and some cars were even sabatoged on the line. Once production was moved to Coventry then the TR7's and TR8's were decent cars. Unfortunately by then it was too late as British Leyland was in financial trouble. If they had made TR7's with V8's from the start in Coventry and never had the Liverpool plant, we'd probably still have Triumphs today.

They did have the super cool TR7 Sprint which used the 16 valve 2 litre Dolomite engine, but unfortunately a handful were produced. BL management never really knew what they were doing by going initially with the 8 valve engine in the TR7 rather than the Dolomite or V8's.

If I were considering a TR8, I'd make sure to read this article from Classic Motorsports.

I don't have any direct experience, but I've never met a TR8 owner that didn't gush about how much they love theirs.

racerdave600 wrote: They are far, far better cars than any previous Triumph in my opinion in terms of build quality and driveability.

Hmmmm. Faint praise indeed.

I always liked the looks of the 7/8 "the shape of things to come" indeed.

If they had put the 16v in the 7 and the v8 in the eight from the beginning.. it would be a different world

Tom Heath wrote: , but I've never met a TR8 owner that didn't gush about how much they love theirs.

Same with us Miata and RX7 owners.

there you go! you need to Build a TRX7

Streetwiseguy wrote:

racerdave600 wrote: They are far, far better cars than any previous Triumph in my opinion in terms of build quality and driveability.

Hmmmm. Faint praise indeed.

And I've owned various TR's over the years...of course it's just my opinion.

In reply to mad_machine:

"there you go! you need to Build a TRX7 "

Actually know a guy who did that. Was a good combo.

TR8 owner, IMO, speaketh the truth. When I got my hands on one, a fuel injected CA version, it was a TON of fun to drive, lots of trips from LA to San Diego. It was a "wow" this is what they should have built moment.

The only downfall, at the time, was the shock valving: too soft, esp up front. But the engine pulled, you could light'em up easily in first to second shifts, put the top down, and it was a GREAT ride.

Buying one today, use the same guidelines for any used car: lowest mileage, best care, lack of rust, etc...and remember it's a 30 year old car... Somehow get behind the wheel of a good example, and make up your mind. BTW, they are probably at the bottom of the depreciation curve. I can easily see low mileage examples start to appreciate at a steady, smooth rate.

aussiesmg wrote:

NOHOME wrote: The worse thing about the TR cheese wedges was the engine. It had no interest in running for any length of time and the design was up there with the Vega in terms of poor engineering. The car itself was quite pleasant to drive and feels eons more modern than the MGB. I would think that the V8 would make a great cruiser. The engine itself is well established as a reliable mill.

Not sure if you are thinking of the Triumph 3.0 V8 but these had the very nice and reliable 3.5 Rover V8 the rights to build came from the Good Ole USA

I speak poorly of the four banger that came in the TR7. Awful piece of poorly designed crap. I believe the brits actually tried to make a V8 out of joining two of them only succeeding in making something twice as bad.

The rover 3.5 is a great engine with a well established track record.

The TR chassis also accepts the 3.9 buick engine quite nicely. Another stellar performer that can be made to create rude amounts of horsepower.

If I had to drive a Brit car across the continent, a TR* would be an acceptable choice.

I think they're great looking cars, especially with a big, thick rollbar fitted. I can't believe people diss them for their styling. I've never owned or driven one so I can't comment on the non-styling-related bits though.

With only 2800 of them built, I'm surprised so many are always for sale.