Esprit

link to said article on xtr please

http://www.petrolheads.co.nz/content/view/340/63/

And also the shame about the TR7 is that they were sereverly underpowered. Your run of the mill Tr2 will see one off. A genuine TR8 is another story not just a tr7 with a rover v8 in it. If i could go for a jag id have to choose a XK120 FHC Tripple SU DOHC . My dad owns a TR3A if anyone wants pics

Well it very much depends... the later TR7s (late '79 onwards) were identical to the TR8 in every way aside from no aircon, no PAS and a RHD option (aside from a VERY limited number, <10, all TR8s were for the american market) and the lack of the US-spec rubber bumpers. They were also quite sprightly... and while certainly no rocketship they could see off all earlier TRs bar the TR5 and TR6 in a straight line, and were certainly much better handlers through the bends. The early TR7s (with the 4-speed and marina rear axle) generally fared much worse.

Good article, well written. Thats the main thing that pisses me off with NZPC these days, most of the cars they feature are good (maybe not everyone heres cup of tea) but generally the articles are pretty poorly written.

Thanks... the problem with NZPC is that their articles are often no more than a "spec list"... just saying what's been done. More often than not the writers don't even get to drive the cars... and there's only so much you can say unless you can describe what the car feels like from behind the wheel.

I'm only a hobbyist writer... it's something I enjoy doing, but it's something I've been asked if I'd like to do in a more professional capacity, something I'm looking into (although I doubt it'll become much of a day-job just yet).

My favourite article would have to be the one I wrote on a track-test of the Westfield XTR2 late last year, viewable here:

http://www.petrolheads.co.nz/content/view/340/63/

It's a bit clumsy in length as it was originally meant to be two articles (one on the car, one on the actual track-test) but was combined into one by my editor. It's certainly the style I prefer to write in and I like to think that it's a cut above what most NZ motoring magazines offer (due to the brief/editing more than the calibre of our resident motoring journos, which are generally pretty good). Am looking to maybe do a UK OE at some point in the not-too-distant future and might try to pick up some freelance work while I'm there if I can.... fingers crossed

^and fair enough, indeed the tr4 was a nice looking car, but some design cues from the tr4 can be found in the tr6. They resemble cars from the same family(for lack of a better word). but when you go to the tr7 i didnt follow on from (design wise) anything that the tr4-tr6 had built up (design wise again).

This much is true... they did make a clean break with the rest of the TR line that's for sure. But in the end, the TR6 handled like a late '50s sports car because that's all it was under the skin really... the TR7 was a leap forward under the skin. Like I said... the styling is definitely polarising and the execution was an almighty cock-up thanks to the wonderful BL management (or lack thereof) but I still like it because it's dynamically a very good car to drive and has looks that make it stand out from the crowd, even today... even if those looks are........ controversial (to put it nicely).

But done right (and you don't need to change much, just suspension and wheels can go a long long way) TR7s can look very cool:

(ignore the wedding guff)

E-type? A marvel of design?

I think I'll disagree.

It's a strange one, the E-type. To me, the proportions are a mess.

Well looks are always a subjective thing... but, on balance and general consensus, the E-type was (and is) received by vast majority of the motoring public as a very good looking car.

I've talked to many a British car buff that said they're a horror to drive as well, your article paints a very pretty picture of them. Though it is obviously more a love letter than it is an objective review as such.

The E-type to me is a direct attempt at using the success of the D-type in gaining road car sales. And if you're buying something in that regard, give me an Aston Martin DB4 or DB4 GT Zagato please.

As for E-types being a horror to drive, I'd disagree. Having driven some that certainly drive like a horror, I can see where the opinion might come from. The ones used in forming the article though (I actually used two, my father's and another Series 1) they both drove superbly, and given that they were both meticulously restored examples, built to "as new" specs with minor period modifications they're simply awesome when you consider that they came from the early sixties. As such, my write up was certainly not a "love letter", it was an objective view considering that the cars the article was based on were definite "good-uns"

As for the DB4/DB4GT Zagato.... YES PLEASE, but you'll note that I also say in the article "To find something that offers anything like a similar experience you’d have to look towards cars that are prohibitively rare." in which category you'd have to class the DB4/DB4GTZ in. Compared to the E-Type, the Astons are certainly more rare and undeniably more valuable.

Furthermore, a well-sorted TR7 is one of the best leaking and most prone to breakdown cars you'll come across... ever

Mine was a daily driver from 1999 until 2003 and never broke down once. It never used oil and leaked a lot less than my comparatively-aged/mileaged Jappa does now

^^lol, I just dont see how triumph can go from an awesome (IMO) looking car like the tr6

To a car that looks like this in the tr7

It's the "IMO" that makes the difference. In my opinion I don't see how they could have gone from the (IMO) BEAUTIFUL Michelotti-styled TR4/4A/5/250 to the horridly bland Karman-styled TR6. The TR7 was a product of its time, and much like 1970s classics of all types aren't thought of as attractively as their '60s counterparts these days, it's more a function of fasion rather than objective good-looks.

Triumph cocked up with the TR7 is they tried to pre-empt the US market with it. Hence the car was (initially) non-convertible, rode far too high on its suspension and got heavy American rubber-bumpers. I think the shape can look incredible if given the appropriate treatment, much like many of the 1970s stuff from any country can when you begin to modify 'em.

How is that you can have such a marvel of automotive design such as the E type jag...but also own a tr7?

They're both very cool in their own ways. The TR7 was an awesome concept, executed badly. Sure the looks aren't to everyone's taste but I fell in love with them as a 6 year old (one used to live near me) and I've liked them ever since. To me the TR7 epitomises the British motor industry as it has been since the heyday in the '60s.... so much of what could have and should have been, but falling short for ridiculous reasons.

Furthermore, a well-sorted TR7 is one of the better handling and fun-to-drive cars you'll come across... ever

Nice writing man! Enjoyed it.

Thanks Appreciate it

This used to be a commonish issue at Jag club days.

Enthusiatic grace with pace drive to venue, inboard discs get hot, eager driver parks on slope and applys handbrake without due gusto, durring the cucumber snadwiches the discs cool and friction is lost, nice Jag rolls into another nice Jag, people in tweed jackets and cheescutters have fistycuffs, story ends.

I can confirm that in this case, the only malfunction was one involving the brain in the bloke who was supposed to have employed the handbrake

you have/had an E type as well? this i did not know.

Not mine, my Father's. Spent 7 years building it with him.... ironic that it was destroyed in about 7 seconds

It's currently being rebuilt, and will be better than it ever was once it's been painstakingly reassembled.

could you explain this incident please?

Handbrake malfunction, concours-condition E-Type S1 3.8 Roadster rolled down a hill through a fence, down a 20m bank and through another fence.

Does that mean yours is fixed now?

Sadly, no.... still bent... should be fixed in time for summer motoring Although not holding my breath! Photos were taken before "the incident"

Hey all,

Far be it from me to promote another website but given that you're all oldschool fanatics in here and I happen to have written an article on one of the world's most iconic classics, I thought y'all might like to have a read. My writing style might not be to everyone's tastes, but I'm just a hobbyist writer, so money-back guarantees don't apply

Enjoy!

CLICKY

At the moment my petrol bill is about $40 a week for running the wagon. The Exige is in bits so that's costing nothing to run (but is eating a lot of money still). Generally the Exige only gets driven on occasions when I want to though so I don't rely on it for transport.

Am starting to only drive places when I NEED to though... and make an effort to combine trips for things, as in I'll plan to not make a trip out on weekends unless I've got 2-3 things teed up to do at once.

Got trouble with rust on your pommy beast???

Hahahaha of course they do! Its british

Unless your car's made almost entirely of plastic and aluminium

Gauges.... all you need is some STACK action:

If it can't run a standard plate without overheating it shouldn't be on the road in NZ. Don't sell it as a road car if it can't meet basic legality requirements in NZ (or import it into NZ for road use).

Callum

The car was never intended to be a road-legal model. It was originally designed as a race car and a very limited number were SVA-approved for road use. The SVA scheme doesn't include the requirement for a front licence plate (or at least didn't when the car went through the approval process). As for being approved in NZ, the fitment of licence plates or lack thereof is not a compliance issue, it's strictly a policing issue and the police are the only authority that really has a say about them (working on LTNZ's behalf).

In the end, I'm happy to receive the odd fine if I must. It's not like you receive demerits for it, and like I said if you make a convincing case and aren't causing trouble otherwise then you should be able to stand a good chance of getting off.

Except posh old cunts in Euros tend to be above the law in such situations, as opposed to some young Asian dude in a mint old Jap car.

Well I got snapped for my 60% scale stick-on one on the front of the Lotus that uses up (literally) the only space the car has available.... didn't manage to get off it although next time I probably can because I have contacts now that can help me (doing some work with the NZ Licence plate people).

Basically I'd have been better off not running a front plate at all and just carrying a mangled, front plate in the cabin with me that looks like it fell off and skated along the road. Cops generally won't hassle you if you look like you have a plausible excuse.

Given that Lotus themselves advise against mounting a full sized plate for the S1 'zige because of "severe risk of overheating and fire" isn't excuse enough for the shitty LTNZ.

And I'm guessing they'd look at other years than just the year your particular vehicle was produced?

I think so... I mean if they produced 50,000 a year then in the last year produced 19,000 I think they'd probably turn you down unless you could demonstrate the model was SIGNIFICANTLY different from the models produced in the other years. It's not spelled out explicitly so I guess that's open to trial and interpretation at the moment.

+1 for 200 rx7/gtr/evo etc. nothing fuck all good came out of the uk that ill eva be able to afford after 1990

In the end it'll all just go into a ballot and if you're one of the lucky names chosen for that year then you're good to go.

Other caveat Orion's not mentioned is that if you import under the "specialist car" scheme you're not allowed to sell the car for FOUR YEARS after you bring it in.... so you've got to make sure it's a car you want to bring in for long-term personal use.

In the end I'd rather see it used to bring in some rare cars (from Japan OR Europe/US) that we don't already have here. Don't want to see most of the 200 slots used bringing in AE86s for example) of which we've already got a reasonable amount of (and ironically wouldn't be any cheaper to buy out of Japan anyway due to its cult status over there).

Also remember that the chassis type gets judged as a whole so the 20,000 applies to the family of cars rather than a specific variant (To use Orion's cars as an example you have to consider ALL Skylines rather than just the FJ20ET RS Turbo model etc.)

Quoted for truth. POR15 peels of new steel like a banana skin

Thing with POR15 is you need to use their kit. Some Marineclean and some MetalPrep will make it work wonders.

I did the rocker cover and oil cap (mild steel pressings) on the TR7 in that about 7 years ago. After soaking in oil, suffering knocks and general wear and tear it looks every bit as shiny and unmarked as it did the day I painted it.

POR15 will do the trick nicely.

You could also powdercoat, which would be easier and possibly cheaper, but the finish won't be as durable as a properly-applied POR15 finish.

its not that hard to tell

people forget that just when you think your clever...someone who dose it for a living comes along

I get that when driving... just when I think I'm pretty handy behind the wheel, someone shows me up BIG time and makes me look like a soccermom (/dad?). Even more amusing when they're female

PM'd

i only paint/restore cars for a living .. what would i know

im just not as techincal cause most of what i have learnt is via experience not textbooks..

I work as an Engineer and a Metallurgist. 5 years at varsity and ten years in the trade.... it's kinda "what I do"

I was under the impression that only metals with iron in them could rust.. The others just corrode/oxydise.

Is this correct?

This is correct.... but "rust" is just a name we give to Iron oxide. Most metals corrode in just the same manner as Steel/Iron does. Lead oxidises, copper oxidises, aluminium oxidises, zinc oxidises etc..

In the end, the deal with galvanic corrosion is more one related to area. If you use alloy (higher in the galvanic series) rivets to hold together a couple of sheets of stainless steel (lower in the galvanic series) and expose it to saltwater (or road-spray), it'll corrode like buggery because all of the surface area of the less-reactive stainless is concentrated into corroding the small aluminium rivet. If you use a stainless bolt to hold a couple of sheets of Aluminium together, the same thing happens but the small bolt's influence on the large alloy plates is minor and the Aluminium will corrode at such a slow rate as not to be noticeable.

All of this is way off topic of course, I was just rebutting the statement that softer metals galvanically corrode in preference to harder ones. If this was the case, all of the (soft) copper wiring that's earthed to your car's steel chassis would corrode away to nothing long before bubbles of rust started to show on the chassis.

shit this has gotten confusing all i asked for was what kind of mild steel to use.

Basically as I said... the lower carbon you can get, the better. Unless you're looking at using it for any more heavily structural applications