DITTO!

I loved my TR7. I put almost 90,000 miles on it but the gear box was not very robust and I could put a head gasket on it in the dark in less than two hours..

TR7s in North America were four cylinder 2.0 engines. First with 175CDSEs and later Bosch style FI. TR8s were 3.5 Rover V8s. The first ones( 1978?) had carbs and later got a similar Bosch style FI system. TR8s usually got a four barrel carb manifold and either a Holley or Edelbrock (Carter/Weber) carb.

Yes just traded one type of issues for another: Strombergs are complete equals.

@Sean m : You sound like a typical American Sean.

'Cross Drive'? I believe you are referring to Pozidriv. Phillips screwdrivers *will* work, but will eventually strip out since there is less contact area in the screw head when using a philips tool. During each of my 3 trips to the UK I have always gone into a Halford's and bought some Pozidriv screwdrivers so I have a good supply for my Triumph(s) and my Rover. Philips have never been used there, and a philips will *not* work in a Pozidriv.

I don't think fuel injection was an option for the American market due to tight emission regulations.

@@MyJon64 You're correct. For emissions reasons, the Lucas PI was never offered in North America for either the TR250 or TR6.

I put a 2.5 TR-6 engine in my GT-6 around 1980. I could never leave well enough alone so I adapted a Chevy Monza overdriven 5 speed T-50 transmission, Chevy clutch and flywheel, Chevy starter. Then I welded up my own exhaust manifold and mounted the same Rajay turbocharger they used on 240-Z Datsuns. I adapted a Pontiac vacuum advance/pressure retard unit to the distributor. This thing ran like a scalded ape. It sucked through a 2 inch SU carb and I had water/alcohol injection come on at 8psi boost. Max boost 13psi. The pressure switch that controlled the water/alcohol pump came off a Bell Huey helicopter. In 3rd gear going up our local freeway on ramp, the rear tires would break loose at 3500 rpm. The way it came on was like a 2 stroke engine. It worked great. It accelerated just as fast as a 930 Turbo Carrera. As I recall, it blew 11 different differential units. Just accelerate, never bang the clutch and every few weeks the differential would go bang. I had a Jag IRS rear end ocut down but never did. The crank and rods in the engine are very strong. What happened was that stock piston ring lands would collapse and when the pistons were removed, broken rings and chunks fell out in pieces. I replaced 3 sets of stock pistons and wanted to have custom forged units made. That was an expensive proposition so I parked the car for years with broken rings, smoking like hell when started. I sold it. Those connecting rods with the oddball split big ends and the standard bearings held up very well. There were no cylinder head problems and head gaskets survived. I'll bet modern FI ,ignition and cam really would wake the engine up well. The transmission and clutch would be marginal, though.

@@kimmer6 That always was a fools mission not to swap the diff, ALL the Triumph diffs were terrible; even a hot 2000 Vitesse would snap the stub axles like carrots, a 240Z diff would be the ticket, because the GT6 was a sweet little car.

@@racketman2u After buying a Ferrari 308GTS, I lost all interest in things Triumph. I still have a Spitfire in the garage that has not been driven since 2006. I have no plans to dig it out anytime soon.

Yup, I cringed when he leaned over the fender. Belt buckles are killer on paint.

gee you guys should get together and do some car resto videos, its clear you could do sooooo much better

@R Mack Man is just getting started dude, doesn't have that many videos yet. Clearly passionate and knowledgeable, the editing takes practice.

@R Mack what's clear is that some are cup half full, and some are cup.. err just love to bitch and criticise others.... a little support goes a lonnnnng way

@R Mack didn't hurt me one bit princess, but it become tiresome when armchair heros do nothing but critisize those who try to do something good with their lives. maybe get out of mommies basement and try being constructive instead of destructive for once .. have a nice day :)

I had this thought in my subconscious and glad you were able to bring it to the surface. I agree the background music is really quite irritating. Great video otherwise as always.

I agree, very irritating

+1

Looks more British than another brand of British carb??

Do not run ethanol in your car, you are just asking for a lot of problems.

@@ThisWeekWithCars the problem isn't me wanting to run fuel without ethanol, it's finding stations that have ethanol free fuel. In PA most of the stations are usually at minimum 10% ethanol content and some are at 15%.

On the contrary, SUs are constantly going out of tune due to their moving parts, triple Webers produce more power, stay in tune, and have so much better throttle response it's like night and day. The only tricky part is the original jetting and emulsion tube selection, because few speed shops know how to do it.

My car came with 4 of the 40DCNF downdraft Webbers, the last year before they put in fuel injection. I never had a bit of trouble with them. I never used the choke. 2 pumps with the gas pedal and the engine fired right up.

This TR6 is owned by a friend but usually I film my own cars. I collect the cars for fun and not with the intention to sell them. Although I do sell a car occasionally if I find I don’t like it or I realize I never drive it.

@@ThisWeekWithCars Thanks Steve. I saw a number of M.G.B. GT's in the background when viewing the 4.0 litre Disco... Your a glutton for punishment! All good stuff.

I remember the strombergs being a pain in the arse to tune and then so many P.I.'s being converted to S.U.'s for lack of bullshit! Fingers crossed the Laycock de Normanville doesn't shit out! :-)

@@ThisWeekWithCars I've just come across your videos. I happen to like old British cars. My all time favourite is the Jaguar series 3 E type V12. Have you worked on these fitting the SU's to the V12? That TR 6 looks mint. Thx for the video.

@@__DA___ The P.I.'s always seemed to have sooty exhaust pipes, were they usually set up a bit rich for performance rather than leaner for fuel economy? Perhaps the conversion to S.U.s actually gave better economy?

Yep, I ran several TR6s over the years and ever had a moments trouble with Strombergs. If I wanted to rplace them though, I'd have used Webers.

C'mon Leon, you know that the 'government' here F'ed 'em up with their bloody sealed jets and temp. compensators. At least they never inflicted those damn Waxstats on us, eh?

True but the SU doesn't so that's one less thing to misbehave!

I agree But SU Carb Better Quality Carb, Easier to Adjust Fuel Mixture, Don't have to Deal with Tears in Rubber Diaphragms Plus Looks more British with Skinner Union Carbs, Hell Rolls Royce was using SUs up till switch to Bosch Fuel Injection SU carbs look real nice Buff them out

This is not a german or italian car.

I agree that Dellorto DHLAs were even better than Weber DCOEs, sad that they are no longer made.

My opinion of Zenith-Strombergs, and I have been a mechanic for over 35 years and have been working on ZS and SU's for many of those years, is that ZS carbs are VERY good. Most folks bad mouthing them either have no idea what they are talking about or don't have proper knowledge for repairing them. They can wear out just like any other carb, and the flexible pieces can dry rot, etc. the same as any other carb. When repaired and tuned properly, ZS carbs are rock solid.

No hungrymon, they most definitely are not.

I believe he does at around the 12:30 mark in the video

In the USA in '68 they were forced to fit solid plugs under the jets, rendering them unadjustable and thus untunable. You could adjust the idle mixture in a limited range, but for performance modifications they were pretty useless.

@@mescko They were blocked off on the bottom to keep the average Joe from messing with them but they are adjustable through the top with a special tool. I just put a pair of Jag CD's on another experimental aircraft engine for a customer & I supply the tool so they can fine adjust.

@@nzsaltflatsracer8054 They are adjustable but the range is pretty limited. And the biased needle design eventually wears an oblong hole in the jet then it will never tune properly. Early adjustable jet CD's are okay, but the SU will never need diaphragms replaced either. I guess I just view then as a lesser product. They were designed deliberately as a constant depression carburetor that got around all of the SU patents, and I think it shows.

@@mescko One of my earlier twin CD conversions has over 600 hrs on it now with no wear on the needle or jet & I open them up every time I do the Annual inspection for the owner. Selecting the correct needle for the application is important to get the jetting correct across the whole range & then a small adjustment might be needed depending on the DA of that day. I expected the CD with it's spring loaded needle to wear more than the SU but have seen no difference between them but the CD compensates for altitude changes in aircraft better than the SU.

Just turn it a little richer, problem solved

agree, my TR6 went really well with the stock EFI system, which was dead reliable . The fuel pump, OTOH was a disaster.

They scratch the fenders.

why? just why? the SUs give less power, have much worse throttle response, and never stay in tune!

I've heard worse, and really didn't notice it until your comment. At least there wasn't that generic dad heavy metal or fake Mumford and Sons in the background. That's the worst.

Mechanically the SU carb is a much simpler, more reliable affair than the Zenith Stromberg. Great choice!

They always scratch the cars up, I use a film instead if I need to.

Yes K&N's are controversial. I'm a fan due to the much better breathing and I've never had an engine wear out prematurely due to poor filtration or had an issue with `snotty' MAF sensors. The increase in performance was most marked on an old naturally aspirated 1769 cc Citroen Diesel Visa 17RD I owned back in the day (not a very admired car admittedly but 55 UK MPG seemingly however you drove it).

If it helps, think of SU as the company that provided carburettors for the Rolls-Royce Merlin engine.

The Stromberg was engineered by Standard-Triumph for the express purpose of getting around the patents on the SU carburettor. Hence the diaphragm.

Not in the States sadly.

Not in the UK after some time. The Lucas system was problematic.

@@984francis oh I didnt know. From what I understood, it was a basic mechanical system that I wasn't aware that had issues?

@@julianneale6128 Neither the TR250 (US name for the TR5) nor the 6 had Lucas PI fitted here. Being fully mechanical, there was absolutely no way it was ever going to be able to be tuned to pass US emission regulations. It was not a fun time then for sports car owners here, power-wise.

Bob Adams we cool as that would be, it kind of ruins the car, those British straight 6’s sound great

Sacrilege Bob! Wash your mouth out with soap asap please.

I have dyno'd enough TR6s including this one to know the Strombergs are not working as good as the SUs. The Strombergs even if working correctly won't be for long, the US spec emissions carbs are terrible things.

@@ThisWeekWithCars I am not disputing that it is a better carb. Just that the implication is this would be a good investment. I just think you would server your viewers better by explaining why. What is my return on investment? For instance people would no doubt consider $1200 bucks for a 5hp gain a good Investment. I would not. However, if I am getting a 25hp gain I may take another look. Yes, every car is different but some range of what improvement is to be expected would be beneficial. Your video is appreciated. I am just pointing out that in the future you might be able to improve in a way that is helpful to those of us viewing.