MG-Cars.info

Welcome to our Site for MG, Triumph and Austin-Healey Car Information.

Parts

TR parts and Triumph parts, TR bits, Triumph Car Spares and accessories are available for TR2, TR3, TR3A, TR4, TR4A, TR5, TR6, TR7, TR8, Spitfire and Stag and other TR models are available from British car spares and parts company LBCarCo.

Triumph TR6 - New motors Vs old motors lasting longer?

I'm in need of an engine rebuild. I was thinking how most cars of our vintage are worn out a 100k miles and new cars last for as high as 200k and still keep going. Is it because of engineering, closer tolerences or newer oils?
skikir

It could just as easily be how the car's driven. If you wind it up to redline all the time it's going to wear out sooner.
Brent B

Brent,
Isn't that why you have a red line??
db
Doug Baker

skikir, I think it's like you say, engineering, better oil, tighter tolerances etc. But, according to the Popular Mechanics mags I used to read when I was a kid we are supposed to be flying by now (in our flying cars). So even with 200k engines we really haven't come that far. Maybe they should save the Triumph badge for the first commercially viable driveway flyer...I think that would drop alotta jaws.

digressingly, Chris
c.a.e. emenhiser

I did 80,350 miles on my 1958 TR3A between buying it new in 1958 till 1972. By then, the engine had poor compression, blew blue smoke and had lost a lot of power. From 1987 to 1900, I did a total body off restoration including re-building the engine. I've driven 94,000 miles since then with this engine. I wind it up often to 5000 RPM and it still has excellent performance. I can only assume it's because of better oils.

http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/trebor/don3a_big.JPG (Photo taken when I drove to VTR in Colorado in 2001)
Don Elliott

An interesting question. I sold my 1969 MGB with 78,000 miles on it. When it was sold the engine had poor compression and blew smoke, and burned lots of oil, just like Don's TR3A. Then when I think of how I treated the MGB compared to my TR6, I certainly mistreated it. I wonder along with better oils today, if the metalurgy in the replaced engine components is better than what was in the engine originally. In my case (TR6) I replaced piston rings and main as well as con rod bearings. Better metalurgy here??
Some food for thought and for someone to challenge.

Pete Russell
Pete Russell

It was in 1987 that I wanted a set of 1991cc pistons, rings and wet liners for my engine rebuild. This is what it had originally and I wanted to keep it all as original as I could. I bought them from Peter Hepworth, the piston and ring manufacturer in Yorkshire, England. He said he thought he still had one set somewhere on a shelf in his basement. A day later, I phoned him back and he had found them. It was the last set he had as everyone else with the 4 cylinder engines was increasing the capacity to that of the TR4 with 2137cc.

So I have to assume that these might have been made well before 1987. Thay may have been made 10 years before that. I don't know if you could call that recent metallurgy. That's why I assume it's the oil.
Don Elliott

This thread was discussed between 23/10/2006 and 24/10/2006

Triumph TR6 index