Tell me about British Leyland

[tr7v8]

cardigankid said:

If you are launching a sports car you give it looks and power. The outgoing Triumph 2.5 PI engine was one of the great engines of all.

The future was going to be about exclusivity, posing, brand and luxury - Ferrari Mondial, Porsche 928, all woefully underpowered when launched, caught up later but it was too late, people were already bored with them. TR7 likewise. An underpowered 'pretend mid-engined' car.

Never sure the 2.5 PI was a great engine, great boat anchor more likely, Massively over bored from the original, wore out thrust bearings & cranks. Very unreliable, it was probably the nail in the coffin for Triumph as Police cars. I knew various Police officers in period who got fed up with push starting (if they'd start) after sitting for a while. I worked on lots of them, they are massively heavy, very low power for the weight & bulk. Look at competitive engines in period 2L Pinto (flawed but around the same power), Fiat Lampredi Twin cam, Alfa Nord, even the aged B series in twin carb version wasn't far behind.
As for the TR7 it was underpowered in period, comparisons in Autocar/Car & Driver/Motor etc. were with the Porsche 924/Capri 2 or 3L/MGB etc.
It was designed for the USA market where 105BHP was suitable. It sold in numbers that vastly exceeded previous TR models. Given its limited build period it outsold a lot of BL cars in period. It would have carried on being sold but the dollar hardened against the pound which made it a none starter.

[anonymous-user]

Back in the day the whole structure of car manufacturing was different.

• Car makers wanted to sell cars as cheaply as possible. It was fashion and new models that sold cars, not rust-proofing and reliability.
• OEM component suppliers had to offer lowest possible price to get contracts, with little focus on long term reliability.
• OEM component suppliers would supply OEM to the manufacturer at break-even prices, so no profit...
• until the parts needed replacing and the component supplier could sell the same thing again at a much higher price.
• There could even be two different prices for selling the same component to the car manufacturer, a low price for the assembly line and a higher price for the aftermarket.
• Components for the assembly line are typically packed and shipped completely differently, for instance in an open container from which the assembly worker can pick an unwrapped part ready to fit. Aftermarket stuff will be in a nice, labelled box or bag to sit on the shelf.
• Component manufacturers, such as Lucas, made virtually all of their profit in the aftermarket.

Which is why brake cylinders, clutch cylinders, clutches, brakes, water-pumps and exhausts etc all used to need replacing every 2 or 3 years.

The notoriously poor reliability of British and other European cars derived almost entirely from the these practices. Fortunately, Johnny Japanese eventually turned up and changed the game by supplying cars that didn't break down.

[aeropilot]

tr7v8 said:

Never sure the 2.5 PI was a great engine, great boat anchor more likely, Massively over bored from the original, wore out thrust bearings & cranks. Very unreliable, it was probably the nail in the coffin for Triumph as Police cars.

I think you'll find that Triumph never made another car suitable for Police use after the 2500 anyway, so I doubt that had much to do with it.
The later Rover 2600 SDI was much more loathed as a Police car than the 2.5PI or 2500TC ever were, among the area car drivers I knew back in that era.

[anonymous-user]

tr7v8 said:

As for the TR7 it was underpowered in period, comparisons in Autocar/Car & Driver/Motor etc. were with the Porsche 924/Capri 2 or 3L/MGB etc.

It certainly wasn't high powered but it was a massively better car than the stuff that went before. Easiest comparison is MGB, already long in the tooth before the first TR7 came off the production line at Speke (Liverpool). The panic over US crash regulations led to massively heavy bumpers and also fixed roof on a car originally intended to be convertible. Shocking product quality from Speke just added to the damage. By the time they'd got the car "right" customers had lost interest. Between them, Stag (engine) and TR7 (fixed roof, styling and build quality) killed the Triumph brand which was never seen on a sports car again. In fact, leaving aside the Honda based Triumph Acclaim, the brand was never seen again full stop.

Anyone tempted towards a TR7 (there are very few left) would IMO be well advised to buy a convertible, built after production was moved from Speke to the Midlands.

Some years ago I drove a well preserved TR8 out in California. Nice car. I don't think there was ever any TR8 production for retail in UK spec. Much like the later DeLorean.

[saaby93]

aeropilot said:

tr7v8 said:

Never sure the 2.5 PI was a great engine, great boat anchor more likely, Massively over bored from the original, wore out thrust bearings & cranks. Very unreliable, it was probably the nail in the coffin for Triumph as Police cars.

I think you'll find that Triumph never made another car suitable for Police use after the 2500 anyway, so I doubt that had much to do with it.
The later Rover 2600 SDI was much more loathed as a Police car than the 2.5PI or 2500TC ever were, among the area car drivers I knew back in that era.

though the 2.5PI was well respected by the Police
Maybe there were some good ones and some bad ones.

[aeropilot]

saaby93 said:

hough the 2.5PI was well respected by the Police

It was among the Met.Police drivers through the 70's (the later 2500TC versions used after production of the PI ended lacked a little bit of grunt in comparison, and this is why these were only used in the central London divisions)

[saaby93]

aeropilot said:

saaby93 said:

hough the 2.5PI was well respected by the Police

It was among the Met.Police drivers through the 70's (the later 2500TC versions used after production of the PI ended lacked a little bit of grunt in comparison, and this is why these were only used in the central London divisions)

some history here
https://www.aronline.co.uk/cars/triumph/2000-2500/...

[cardigankid]

tr7v8 said:

cardigankid said:

If you are launching a sports car you give it looks and power. The outgoing Triumph 2.5 PI engine was one of the great engines of all.

The future was going to be about exclusivity, posing, brand and luxury - Ferrari Mondial, Porsche 928, all woefully underpowered when launched, caught up later but it was too late, people were already bored with them. TR7 likewise. An underpowered 'pretend mid-engined' car.

Never sure the 2.5 PI was a great engine, great boat anchor more likely, Massively over bored from the original, wore out thrust bearings & cranks. Very unreliable, it was probably the nail in the coffin for Triumph as Police cars. I knew various Police officers in period who got fed up with push starting (if they'd start) after sitting for a while. I worked on lots of them, they are massively heavy, very low power for the weight & bulk. Look at competitive engines in period 2L Pinto (flawed but around the same power), Fiat Lampredi Twin cam, Alfa Nord, even the aged B series in twin carb version wasn't far behind.
As for the TR7 it was underpowered in period, comparisons in Autocar/Car & Driver/Motor etc. were with the Porsche 924/Capri 2 or 3L/MGB etc.
It was designed for the USA market where 105BHP was suitable. It sold in numbers that vastly exceeded previous TR models. Given its limited build period it outsold a lot of BL cars in period. It would have carried on being sold but the dollar hardened against the pound which made it a none starter.

I knew a lot of people who had 2.5PI saloons or TR6's and never seemed to have the problems you describe. In fairness, they were relatively new, and I have the feeling that leaded petrol was less likely to vaporise in the fuel lines. If you drove a well sorted TR5 PI or TR6, it was a fantastic thing, the engine sounded fabulous, and had loads of torque and response. I had forgotten the 924 and the Capri, but again, they were IMHO for people who wanted to pretend they had a sports car. A nice TR7 looks a much better thing today, funnily enough, than it did then.

[imagineifyeswill]

I dont think you could call the 2.5PI low powered. The police up here in the North of Scotland had one as a traffic car, apparently during there testing and calibration of speed measuring equipment they managed to get it up to a true 132mph. My mate had an estate version, knock it out of overdrive and floor the throttle and it would still lift the nose at 100mph.

[Mr Tidy]

I don't remember seeing any Triumph 2.5 police cars in the Met - they were all P6/P6B Rover V8s.

I bought a 1973 3500S in 1979 and it certainly had some performance in the context of the time. Shame it wallowed about so much and it was just as rust-prone as the Fiat it replaced!

[aeropilot]

Mr Tidy said:

I don't remember seeing any Triumph 2.5 police cars in the Met - they were all P6/P6B Rover V8s.

No they weren't.

Pretty much all of the inner London Divisions (A, C, D & E Divs at least and possibly F, B, G & M Divs as well - but memory isn't so good which of those did or didn't) had 2.5PI's and then 2500TC's from the early 70's up to around 1981/2.

DPG used to use them as well in the same period.

Edited by aeropilot on Thursday 5th November 20:41

[Yertis]

tr7v8 said:

Never sure the 2.5 PI was a great engine, great boat anchor more likely, Massively over bored from the original, wore out thrust bearings & cranks. Very unreliable, etc

Where do you get this “overbored” bit?

[Mr Tidy]

aeropilot said:

Mr Tidy said:

I don't remember seeing any Triumph 2.5 police cars in the Met - they were all P6/P6B Rover V8s.

No they weren't.

Pretty much all of the inner London Divisions (A, C, D & E Divs at least and possibly F, B, G & M Divs as well - but memory isn't so good which of those did or didn't) had 2.5PI's and then 2500TC's from the early 70's up to around 1981/2.

DPG used to use them as well in the same period.

Edited by aeropilot on Thursday 5th November 20:41

Maybe I was too well-behaved then (although that seems unlikely)!

[StuntmanMike]

cardigankid said:

tr7v8 said:

cardigankid said:

If you are launching a sports car you give it looks and power. The outgoing Triumph 2.5 PI engine was one of the great engines of all.

The future was going to be about exclusivity, posing, brand and luxury - Ferrari Mondial, Porsche 928, all woefully underpowered when launched, caught up later but it was too late, people were already bored with them. TR7 likewise. An underpowered 'pretend mid-engined' car.

Never sure the 2.5 PI was a great engine, great boat anchor more likely, Massively over bored from the original, wore out thrust bearings & cranks. Very unreliable, it was probably the nail in the coffin for Triumph as Police cars. I knew various Police officers in period who got fed up with push starting (if they'd start) after sitting for a while. I worked on lots of them, they are massively heavy, very low power for the weight & bulk. Look at competitive engines in period 2L Pinto (flawed but around the same power), Fiat Lampredi Twin cam, Alfa Nord, even the aged B series in twin carb version wasn't far behind.
As for the TR7 it was underpowered in period, comparisons in Autocar/Car & Driver/Motor etc. were with the Porsche 924/Capri 2 or 3L/MGB etc.
It was designed for the USA market where 105BHP was suitable. It sold in numbers that vastly exceeded previous TR models. Given its limited build period it outsold a lot of BL cars in period. It would have carried on being sold but the dollar hardened against the pound which made it a none starter.

I knew a lot of people who had 2.5PI saloons or TR6's and never seemed to have the problems you describe. In fairness, they were relatively new, and I have the feeling that leaded petrol was less likely to vaporise in the fuel lines. If you drove a well sorted TR5 PI or TR6, it was a fantastic thing, the engine sounded fabulous, and had loads of torque and response. I had forgotten the 924 and the Capri, but again, they were IMHO for people who wanted to pretend they had a sports car. A nice TR7 looks a much better thing today, funnily enough, than it did then.

Never really saw any 2500’s about. I loved the idea of them though.

A friends dad had a couple of 2000’s and I loved the look and sound of them.

[alabbasi]

cardigankid said:

The future was going to be about exclusivity, posing, brand and luxury - Ferrari Mondial, Porsche 928, all woefully underpowered when launched, caught up later but it was too late,

I'm not sure that I'd call these two cars woefully underpowered. I believe that the 928 made about 240hp in 1978 and 300hp by 1980. That's huge power for the time. That's not be confused with the gross HP ratings on earlier cars from the 60's where 300+hp was common. That's a completely different HP rating where they measure the engine without any accessories.

The big climb in horse power came in the 90's when variable valve timing became common and more recently in the last decade with turbo charging and direct injection. Before 1990? 300HP was a big deal.

[Yertis]

We had turbo-charging a long time ago, I’d say the 80s was the turbo decade, it became commonplace in ‘90s with the TDi.

[aeropilot]

alabbasi said:

Before 1990? 300HP was a big deal.

I'd agree with 300hp being a big deal prior to 1990.

That's why chipped Sierra Cossie's running 300-330hp were such a 'big thing' back in the 1988-90 era.....

There weren't many 'accessible and affordable' production showroom cars over 300hp prior to 1990.

25 years later, that became mundane 'hot hatch' hp territory......

[LuS1fer]

aeropilot said:

alabbasi said:

Before 1990? 300HP was a big deal.

I'd agree with 300hp being a big deal prior to 1990.

That's why chipped Sierra Cossie's running 300-330hp were such a 'big thing' back in the 1988-90 era.....

There weren't many 'accessible and affordable' production showroom cars over 300hp prior to 1990.

25 years later, that became mundane 'hot hatch' hp territory......

Yep, take the Corvette. 235hp in 1985, 250 up to 1992 when the new LT1 had 300 and then around 350 with the LS1 in 1998. Even the very expensive "King of the Hill" ZR1 only had 385 in 1990.

[aeropilot]

StuntmanMike said:

Never really saw any 2500’s about. I loved the idea of them though.

A friends dad had a couple of 2000’s and I loved the look and sound of them.

My Dad loved them......so I've done lots of miles at the wheel of them back in early 80's. He would have preferred to have had a P6 Rover 3500, but he had to have an estate for work reasons.

He had owned a K-reg 2000TC Estate from about 1977 to around 1981/2, then sold it and replaced it with a 2500S Estate which he then owned until 1986.

[mph]

mph said:

HP isn't everything

In the late 80's (if my memory is holding up) I remember the lap times set by Mark Hales Sierra Cosworth production racer being beaten by a 1930's Morgan three-wheeler.